Hardnut

The decision of the MFC Board not to dismiss MN at this stage is intriguing and could have a number of meanings. It could be that the Board has given MN one more week to coach against his previous club and then announce his resignation as coach of MFC after another bad loss, which would be a typical gentlemans' club reaction. It could be that the Board intend him to continue, thus ignoring the groundswell of opinion, which would also be typical of a gentlemans' club reaction (and a disaster IMO). It would also confirm many people's view that the MFC Board is lacking the ability to take tough decisions and that this is the top-down problem for the lack of a winning culture at MFC. It could be that the Board is buying a few more weeks to obtain a suitable replacement, but with each week they risk losing more players at the end of the season. One thing that is clear is that the question of MN's sacking is not media driven - supporters have apparently been far more critical of MN than the media who took some time to realise MN's flaws and who also are reluctant to turn on coaches until it is clear they are gone - the 'self-preservation' culture - there would be some media who would be surprised by today's decision and will now be trying to cover their backs, until the next time! It is also clear that players are not the cause of MN's current position - he has brought in players he wanted and the results have not improved. He has also lost players that he should have been able to develop if he was a genuine senior coach. Where to from here? My guess is that after the Queen's Birthday game, there will be some action. The situation will only deteriorate if the Board do not act soon.

GC are doing very well developing players and with good coaching - don't 'wish' Buddy on them - they are better off without him!

And the goal umpire was adamant it was a goal! Who is doing which job?

The score review system is interesting! Geelong tonight - goal umpire says goal - review inconclusive - goal stands. Adelaide earlier - goal umpire says goal - review inconclusive - goal disallowed. "You cannot be serious!'

My understanding of 'skills' is that the term applies to the players' ability in kicking, handballing, choosing the correct option and reading the play. 'Fitness' is similar - continuous sprint ability is essential, endurance is expected of any player. The ability to follow a game plan is a separate issue - skills and fitness go with the player to any club whereas game plan has to be learned for the specific club.

It is two times appropriate CBF - one for MFC and one for the country - in fact, it could be said that it is way past time for both!

I believe it is Senator (NT) Bob Collins CBF - brings back a lot of political memories.

The 'Dogs' win tonight showed what a coach can do - and it was yet another Geelong style coach. He was first employed when MN was employed and he took over a list which was inferior in potential to the one at MFC. Sure the 'Dogs' have a long way to go , but tonight they showed something I would love to see happen at MFC - they took the game on in an exciting, attacking fashion and it was worth watching. I know to some extent its an early call, but now we have Sanderson, McCartney and Hinkley, all looking good for the future - and then we have MN!

Sorry Old Dee, but I don't care how many years we play finals - I only care about flags - there's first and nothing, I think Kevin Sheedy said.I would not have swapped the list we had before MN for the Pies' list - we had, and may still be able to rescue, a good young list. You could also look at it from another point of view - the Pies return on investment is actually very poor, by any measure (memberships v supporters, flags v finals, money spent v return...) I understand what you are saying, but keep in mind we should be aiming for a winning club culture (and that's definitely not the Pies record).

You may well have a good summation of the situation there, RN.

Yes, it's an interesting point - teaching and learning - a good teacher ensures that the pupils are learning which is the fundamental aim and the teacher's responsibility.

Collingwood have been ordinary for over 50 years - both of their flags in that time came about through drawn finals - and to think MFC selected MN!

I would suggest that the training at MFC doesn't focus on the real needs - skills, skills, skills combined with sprint work - the academics can come later.

I agree with your comment on the Swans spread WYL, but the hand and foot skills of both teams are very average cf Geelong.

I agree with a lot of the comments re tonight's game and MFC's game, but two points for consideration: 1 tonight is ugly football lacking in skill, which a team like Geelong will rip apart in finals (ignore last week, these things happen) 2 why are the Pies allowed to get away with blocking the player on the mark (perhaps the 5 metre zone should apply here as well)

OK, I can accept DemonWA's explanation, but someone needs to counsel SAT about his comments, because they are not helpful to MFC's current predicament and they take away from Demonlanders' genuine concerns for the Club - I would like to think that we are all passionate supporters of MFC regardless of our differences of opinion at times.

How do we land a Roos or Choco, and keep players, if we don't know MN is gone beforehand?

You may be correct 'rpfc', but how many players will we lose as 'collateral damage'!

Good one TSFKA - I'll forgive your clip this time - well done.

Just remember fellow Demonlanders, Sat only joined in Dec 2012 - since then 803 thoroughly forgettable posts, regardless of your opinion on MN, the Board, etc., etc. Demonlanders in my experience have thick skins, tolerate other people's viewpoints very well and are united by true support for MFC, unlike Sat apparently - one wonders about his real aim and origins.

Interesting, but no real meaning - the top 10 at each club are of differing abilities - the comparison can not be made.

+1 Macca

'You can not be serious!' (Apologies to John McEnroe.)

The truth behind 186 would indeed be interesting to hear - but that issue is now history and only time will tell. At the end of 2011 it was not only the media who thought MFC was a good group for a coach to take over - otherwise why would any applicants have shown any interest, if there were any other applicants? It appears that Garry Lyon has a lot to answer for and he is now apparently trying to avoid any flak.

MN now thinks 5 years - I suspect he will be saying 6 years if he is still around in a couple of weeks time!