The Chazz

Chlorine is very strong and does a great job keeping the water colour under control. The water temp on the other hand...!

I always find it amazing how you can sit at a swim up bar all day, drink dozens of Bintangs, yet you don't need to get out of the pool to take a pee.

Swooper's only role at the MFC would be to address the playing group after training one night, and attend the Ballarat Supporters Group functions. Regardless of what level he is coaching at, how much he loves the game, and how much of a close eye he keeps on current trends, the fact is that he is 70+ years old, has not coached an AFL standard game plan for nearly decades, and to be quite honest, I struggle to see how he would get the respect from the players given the length of time out of the game and no doubt his outdated (in comparison to Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood, etc) training methods. We want a coach that will sell hope, this aint the bloke. The only hope I'd have would be that he actually sees the next 3 years, period, and hopefully a number more after that, just none of them contracted to the MFC.

They do against the other power clubs. Take a look at their crowds against crap clubs. Sure, they still get more to a GWS game than what we do, but they have a crap load more members and supporters than us.

Are you really qualifying the BFL as "being involved in the game"? Do yourself a favour and go and watch a BFL game. It's a terrible standard with minimal comparisons to the way they play in the VFL let alone the big league. I appreciate everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but the Northey suggestion is a [censored] joke.

Isn't this what Jackson is, and is doing?

It's a bit of a catch 22 hey Saty? We expect the palyers to put in 100% effort, but then have to be reminded about our duty of being a supporter. Actually, I think this statement will be more accurate. The difference between the players and most of us supporters is that we turn up when we can, the players turn up when they want.

The AFL coaches breeding farm known as the Ballarat Football League. Northey as our next coach? FMD.

I don't understand why people think that getting a big name coach will just instantly attract bigger crowds. Carlton have got the biggest named coach in the AFL and their crowd figures aren't showing signs of significant increases. In some games they have actually gone down from last year, and we're only 9 games in to the season. I'm also concerned about this expectation of player buy-in. A majority of the playing group give me no confidence that this will happen - they've had 18 months to buy-in to what Neeld was wanting them to do, which most on here would agree sounded a lot better than what was previously happening. But no, our soft in the head, weak pack of bastards that pull on the red and blue each week do what they want and it costs others their jobs.

Interesting observation WYL. Since Neeld has been there, which players has he brought in to the Club actually played last Sunday? I think I can count 4, out of how many? I have no doubt that he is used to a system where 1st year players aren't expected to slot straight in to the 1's, and have ample time to develop in the VFL (see Taggart and Tynan). BUt, as I said, it's an interesting observation.

Moloney was on AFL 360 the other night. To be honest, WTF was he doing on there in the first place? It seemed like a McLean/OTC style fix up, but Moloney was too stupid to realise what he was saying. Basically, he felt Neeld didn't have faith in him, and in return, Moloney didn't have faith in Neeld. Then, I think he even admitted that for a part of the year he didn't act how he should've (can't remember his exact wording, but basically he cracked them). Now, for a start, Neeld was an ex-midfield coach at a strong club. He would've put endless amounts of time analysing opposition midfields, so for Neeld to come in and not "have faith" in Moloney tells me how much other clubs rated him. This is probably further supported by the fact that 1 solitary team wanted him when he decided to leave, and from all reports, it wasn't until late in the FA period that he received an offer. I have to admit though, I'm staggered to think that any player hasn't bought in to Neeld's ideas. WTF not? Reality check players - this bloke was hired as your coach, your boss. In the real world, you do what your boss tells you to do. Instead of p!ssing and moaning about what is wrong, why not look at what's right. I don't know of one AFL coach that would've been hired with no intention of winning a flag, so why not just do what he says? Also NSC, you made reference to the 3 newbies that have been brought in to the midfield. I think a couple of these players indicate what sort of p!ss weal attitude some of our other players have got. I refer to Matt Jones and Dean Terlich - arguably in our Top 5 for the year. These blokes are first year players, who have had no option other than buy in to Neeld's plans. They are rewarded for their commitment by playing decent footy. Why is it that we have 2 x first year players who were taken at cricket score picks, that are in all honesty playing well above where they should, yet there are players who were there before Neeld arrived that have gone backwards? Tells me more about those players than the newbies. Give me a team full of Matt Jones and Dean Terlich every day. Not the best footballers going around but they give 100% and importantly, you know they have no hidden agenda.

Bailey? A tough guy coach?

How anyone thinks Roos is a realistic future coach is beyond me. Don't get me wrong, I'd like him to coach (he's not my number 1 choice though), but I can't see him putting his ego on the line to take on the "hardest job in football". For me, Eade is a realsitc target, followed by Mark Williams. Would be satisfied with either two, Eade probably has his nose in front, especially under a strong CEO and Head of Football Department (or whatever they are called). Eade coached best when his role was limited to just that, coaching, so it would be needed to be made quite clear about his role.

Soxy, I couldn't give a toss how many posts I have made and how many you have made, I don't waste my time looking at that stuff. Moloney leaving was one of the best things for this Club going forward. It showed that when a player dictates to the club how they are going to do things, and sulk if the club doesn't allow it, that sometimes you're better off pulling your head in, working your ass off and start doing what you are paid to do. The fact that only Brisbane wanted him should've been a big wake up call for the likes of Sylvia and Watts. You can't put on a public display of unprofessionalism, like what Moloney did last year, and expect the power clubs will want it. FWIW, I would make our midfield look poor at the moment, but that's just Beamer hey, star against poor sides. Good for him. The players that are in danger of not being AFL standard don't have very good role models or mentors to help get that extra few % out of that might jkust make them AFL standard. I think you fix that first, then you worry about who can and can't play footy.

Love the bit about going after who "we want". Reckon it's great, and I'd like to think PJ would have his list (if this is the avenue he goes down). On the other hand, I don't agree with your last sentence. The open opinion of Dawes' is very interesting, and I think it's quite easy to read between the lines. He has come from a recent premiership winning club, so he knows what it takes to have a winning culture. If what he is seeing from certain players is not what he has experienced with successful teams, then I'm all for those players pi$$ing off. If he believes what Neeld is putting in place is what should be expected from professional units, then attracting a FA may not be as difficult as we would first think. It's a matter of selling them what the Melbourne of "old" was like, and what the Melbourne of "new" will look like, it could ease the concerns that some of the FAs may have about coming to us.

Reasons?

Big fan of Pagan. Was calling (on here) for him to be considered for the gig before Neeld got the nod. Ruthless, but has he been out of the game too long? I'd prefer he was invovled at some level (similar to Eade). Was coaching Northern Knights in 2009, not sure if he is still there. If he is, he's absolutely worth talking to. For the fwits who are looking at his time at Carlton as some indication of his ability, you are confirming you limited knowledge and understanding of football.

WTF? I am not concerned about the players who appear to be incapable of making an AFL career. Every team has them, but I admire their work ethic and their "want" to get better, even if they are fighting a losing battle. It's the ones that are capable that need addressing. The line of "I want to play finals before the end of my career so I will look elsewhere", that doesn't sit with me. You think you're good enough to get a game with Geelong or Hawthorn? Why don't you start by playing to the best of your ability with the MFC first. The Moloney saga last year was satisfying for me. Great example of a player who thinks they can do what they want because they are a "good" player, have a person (Neeld) challenge them, they sulk, think they can get a walk up start in a better/higher/successful team, make it known well before the end of the season about their intentions, then all of a sudden when push comes to shove, only 1 team wants tehm, and it's a team that is not much better off than us! It gave me great pleasure to see that unfold for a player who tried to hold my club to ransom. Out of "the" 3, only Frawley will get snapped up by a top team, but not all in the Top 8 will take him on because of his professionalism.

This is what annoys the hell out of me LS. For decades we have had the players dictate what happens at the club, and as soon as someone comes in and tries to change that mentality, they don't "buy in" and it's the coach that cops it. I'm not saying the coach should stay, but the players shouldn't escape charges. They are as responsible for the state of the MFC as the coach, president and board are, but are the ones that avoid any level of accountability being placed on them.

CS told me he was, I asked him the question and he answered. Just saying. (Why would CS tell me? Why would he lie to me? Why would Clarkson lie? I have NFI!).

Could be putting them on the line here, but am I the only one not too concerned about our drafting/trading of Gillies? If I recall, Chip wasn't a favourite amongst punters early in his career, but we had to play him because of our limited options. Gillies has come from a team with a very strong backline, has only played 14 games, is the same height/weight as Chip but about 2 seasons worth of games behind where Chip was at the same stage (for the reasons I indicated earlier). Sure, Geelong could've held on to him and played him instead of picking up Rivers, but the biggest difference would be that the appeal of a ready made replacement for Scarlett (Rivers), given where Geelong are at currently, would've been far more appeaing that expecting a 14-gamer try and hold down one of the key defensive posts. Just my opinion. Not saying he's going to be a star, but I'm far from putting this pick up down as a major fail at this stage. PS. Be gentle!

PJ, it could be argued that part of the reason that Davey wants to be there is because he knows the chances of him getting a contract elsewhere would be next to zero.

That's BS, Dr. If those 3 players want to play finals bad enough, they can make it happen in the red & blue. They have top training facilities, they have a handy FD, they have handy "support" players around them, and most importantly, they have the ability to move this club forward. If they want to take the easy way out and go to a team where they don't have the responsibility of leading a club to finals footy, then they can fcuk off. I will refuse to let players hold the club to ransom unless they have runs on the board. In any job, if your top performing employee is criticial about the runnings of the company they work for, then you listen. You don't sit back and listen to the lazy pricks who prefer to sit back and sulk rather than doing something about it. Until your words are actions, I dismiss anything you say. In that, if Nathan Jones wanted to leave, I'd be very concerned.

If it's true, that the 3 players, Sylvia, Frawley and Watts, are considering their options so that they can play finals and possibly win a premiership, can I ask them this... If you're not happy with the onfield performance of this team, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. The 3 of you have enough talent and all should be leaders of this club, you have enough ability to work together and turn games around, it's time you stood up. This sh!t about wanting to play finals so you have to go elsewhere, why's that? So you can go to another Club, possibly make their best 22 knowing there are blokes in the team that are willing to work their arse off meaning you don't have to? Blaming the coach is utter bullsh!t - I'm sure he would look a bloody lot different if the 3 of you worked hard and got the best out of yourself. If it's true, it's pi$$ weak from the 3 players. If it's not, I'll happily withdraw my rant. Thank you.

One of our main problems was that the rebuild that Bailey was required to undertake basically gave us one chance to get it right before the expansion sides raped the draft. Over the 2008 and 2009 drafts, we literally had the choice of the 3 best kids in the country (Pick 1 in 2008 and Pick 1 & 2 in 2009). One of them is not with us, one is reportedly requesting a trade at the end of the year, and one is that far out of form that I personally don't know if he will ever be able to reach the heights that his junior years promised. Given that we manufactured our own version of a comprimised draft throughout 2008 & 2009, we have clearly failed (I know I'm not breaking any news here!). When you consider we had 3 picks in the top 20 in 2008 (Watts, Blease & Strauss), and 4 in the top 20 in 2009 ($cully, Trengove, Gysberts and Tapscott), those 7 players should be pushing that 50-70 game stage. They should be cemented in out best 18. Fact is, we lost 1 because he was a greedy chap (there is a different 4 letter work beginning with "c" that I was going to use), 1 because he was NFG, 2 have had freak injuries that hindered their development for at least 12 months (and it could be argued that they lost "it" when that happened), and the other 3 have generally never completed a full preseason. Where our comprimised draft hurt us the most was that we had to have everything go right for at least 5 of those 7 draftees - history (and the present) will show that it has not happened, and as a result, we've needed spec picks (30+) to step up and develop in to something that few have done before them in recent years (even at other teams).