Inner Demon

You disagree that despite losing all pre-season games and being humiliated in Rnd 1 in front of 45K that it is encouraging there are more members signed up than at the same point last year???? It's discouraging that something that by all rights should be going backwards is in fact improving??? Well I'll be....

To still be ahead of the 2009 numbers despite the horrifying start to the year is very encouraging.

Healey & Newton.

What kind of reaction did you get when you exercised your rights and stood up for your principles down at training and told all the senior players that they were disgraceful, unprofessional and need to show some heart??

I'll spare you the passion and just use the word - development. That said, I'd see little difference between playing Martin or Spencer. Both get a game for the same reason or don't get a game for the same reason. Almost identical in terms of where they're at with their football.

Why would Hughes get a game?? He's probably 3rd last on our list of fit players in the running for a senior game. He's done absolutely nothing to warrant senior selection. Not one thing.

I liked the bit where Garry Lyon goes from being categorically disinterested in coaching in the AFL to being an assistant coach for some reason.

Interesting (I thought) to see a few of the TOG stats from Saturday particularly from a couple of the senior players who in the estimation of all 'went missing' on the day. Rivers 75% Davey 76% Bruce 78% These three didn't have their best outings (to say the least) and unsurprising given they were literally missing from the ground for about a quarter of the game. We knew these guys were coming off somewhat interrupted pre-seasons so it's not surprising as such, but still interesting. In other news, Jordie McKenzie only played 67% of the game in racking up his phenomenal tackle count and 15 touches (7 contested). Hopefully he steps up to a little more game time, we could use his hardness and attack on the ball.

I didn't suggest at any point that any salary details or player ratings be disclosed. Things such as our paying 100% of the cap in front-ended contracts as well as the length of players' contracts are generally widely published in the press, and indeed advertised by the Club. I was suggesting perhaps a bit of non-player specific detail just offering an overview of the strategy with cap space and contract cycles would be interesting insight that wouldn't give up any competitive advantage.

Bit light on for me this week. That matrix is fairly self-explanatory, didn't need 15 minutes to describe it. I would've liked to have seen some content on the strategy of paying 100% of the cap this year with front ended contracts as well as some examination of the 'out of contract' cycle to display how we're structuring the contracts so that we don't see all our guns out of contract in the one year and all our lesser players out of contract the following year. That kind of info could've been explored without impinging on any confidentiality. Things like getting Trengove & Tapscott on a different contract cycle to Scully & Gysberts is very clever and is an interesting topic to discuss with supporters who may not be aware of this level of forward planning.

Whose hamstrings don't take 3-4?? That's standard.

You're right. The Club think it's awesome that we got spanked by 10 goals and they think the supporters were rapt. This continuing rubbish that people think those who actually work full time in football don't understand football fans is really annoying.

Absolute champ. One of our Top 5 players every year for his whole career. What's more he had the chance to jump off what he could easily have dismissed as a sinking ship to chase a combination of better money and/or success but he stuck with us showing a level of loyalty he frankly didn't owe us. If Junior hasn't got another year in him after this I really hope the boys vote him as our next captain. He would be a worthy MFC captain.

The rookie list has been great to us in previous years, will be good to us this year, and will be good to us in years to come. Amazingly enough, we won't be the only clubs who unearth good role players, and even some above average players this way. Conversely, every single club has blokes who won't make it on their rookie lists and this will apply to us too. You clearly have absolutely no concept of how list management truly works, but rather than try to give you some insight as I am but a mere rank & file supporter myself, I will recommend that you watch Cam Schwab's Whiteboard Wednesday tomorrow as he will be discussing List Management. Hopefully a brief tutorial from a professional will give you some perspective of the realities.

It would be the height of inappropriateness and unprofessionalism for a member of the club admin staff to in any way criticise the onfield performance of one of the players. How is it anything like a marketing rep or accountant's place to tell 200 AFL game player Cameron Bruce that he made poor decisions or had bad disposal in Saturday's game?????? To return briefly to your corporate analogy, if we were to assume you were in, say marketing, for a moment and you had someone from the finance department come into your office and tear into you about their feelings on your latest promotional campaign you'd have a complaint in with their manager before you drew your next breath. This comes back to this weird belief that the coaching staff don't see exactly what you all see on the weekend and more. They're not keeping one eye on the game on Saturday arvo while enjoying a beer and chat with their mates before heading off to the pub. They rewatch every game in painstaking detail, including individual player tracking, in order to give each player their own individual, specialised feedback on Monday during review. If you think it helps for them to have "Oi Cam, you were bloody soft on the weekend mate, get some ticker!" passed onto them by someone in admin you're exactly the kind of person I'm hoping to get through to with what I'm posting about here.

You think Joel can't get a game for a top club???? He played 22 for a semi-finalist last year... Chris Johnson couldn't get a run for a wooden spooner. Pretty ordinary argument.

So you think the receptionist/marketing rep who reads your letter gets on the phone to Cam Bruce and says, "Brucey, you'd better listen to this mate, turns out the supporters were a little nonplussed with the 10 goal caning we got on the weekend. Better sharpen up mate". Or do you somehow hold the admin staff to account for Cam putting his mates in hospital with every handball?? My point is that I understand this is therapeutic for supporters and I have no problem with it happening for just this reason. I'm sure the club understands this. Furthermore, member feedback is critical for things that the club may not be aware of like difficulties with your membership, or player behaviour or any number of things. But I think you'll find they are already fully aware that the weekend's performance was disgraceful and members are furious, shattered, etc.

This is as brainless as people bleating about letting Alwyn Davey 'slip through our fingers'. As if there's some kind father/son-type brother/brother rule. Very annoying.

No, I don't work within the Club but having dealt with many people who have over a number of years I know that they hurt when things are bad. I've never suggested anyone doesn't have the right to send in a letter, I just thought it was worth pointing out that sentiments along the lines of, "The Club needs to know that it's supporters are hurting or find this unacceptable" are somewhat unnecessary and I infer from them that there is a misguided belief out there that the people who live and breathe our club day in, day out don't feel it too or don't realise what we go through as supporters. They most certainly do.

Consider the posted excerpt above your response too. Chances are the same thing will arrive in your inbox eventually.

You're comparing losing a game of football to unpunished corporate crime?? Give me a break. You are wrong in your unfounded opinions on how the admin staff respond to bad things happening at any level of the football club. People who work in football are making less money than what they might make outside of football in the same position be it accountant, marketing, sales, whatever. They most certainly are emotionally attached to the fortunes of the football team because, at the very least, it directly impacts upon how Club stakeholders will behave towards them. Furthermore, this is a Club, not just a company. You may not care whether other areas of your company's business perform well if it doesn't affect your employment but that is not how it works in a football club. Everyone is in it together equally in enjoying the good times and being put under pressure by the bad times.

As long as you understand that letters like this which aren't actually addressing a specific problem which is actionable by the admin staff are more or less just masturbation then knock yourself out, write away. But if you expect Jim Stynes or Dean Bailey to have to pore through however many pages of rubbish and write you letters of response then you're just kidding yourself. As an aside, if you think there is anybody in the MFC organisation in any capacity who doesn't understand all too well how unacceptable Saturday was then you're delusional. Try to realise that all of us on this forum, whilst passionate, have other things to occupy our time during the week. The people at the footy Club are living this Club not only on weekends, but all day during each week too.

Better than bank interest. I'm looking forward to seeing what line they offer. I don't recall a line above 10 goals but it wouldn't be unrealistic here.

At least Tapscott, Gawn & Jurrah all qualify for the Long Term Injury list which would allow us at least one more spot to promote Newton to the senior list alongside McKenzie & Spencer.

Which Newton are you referring to?? Do we have another one other than Michael???? There's no way you're talking about Michael "First haemophiliac to play AFL" Newton as being capable of a contested mark.