Slartibartfast

Omitted.

Why walk out when it's getting into shape. That's strange indeed.

Do we need one "elite" mid or do we need 2 or 3 A/B graders? It's also more "doable". We have Viney, Toumpas and perhaps another early pick mid this year but we are desperate for depth. It's definitely a good line of thinking. Much will depend on Clark's recovery.

Jackson was saying this about a month ago and Craig is backing it up. Craig and Jackson are highly impressive, publicly at least, and it looks like we've got men running the show rather than boys. They look "in charge" in a way Schwab and Neeld didn't. Like Watts, I want to see this lot of players succeed and hope they stay together as much as practical. Under a good FD they have the making of a good team.

I was once. Then I got sick of being disappointed and took a more sceptical approach. I do think you've got Hogan right and you went very early on that. Dang, there I go again!

This is where you are completely wrong Jack. I don't think anyone here takes any pleasure about our situation and Redleg with his honest posting and love of the club has highlighted the anguish it has caused just about everyone who is a MFC supporter. There is not the slightest hint of joy or satisfaction in being right and in fact I would loved to have been wrong. You could learn a lot from Redleg and leave behind your faceless men and innuendo and recognize you were wrong. Your philosophers quote is wrong in this instance. Some could see this event very clearly long ago, you and many others couldn't. There is no joy in this, just a frustration that something that was reasonably clear was dismissed by so many.

I want to know what Ben thinks.

Titan the complexity is in the Boards inability to follow through with a consistent plan, understand the ramifications of changing it and then just blaming the players. It's starts with the Board and flows all the way through the coach to the players. It's not just the recruiters and some simple thinkers think.

NO! He has a contract instigated by Schwab but rumour has it he's gone as well. Although I think that was Caro and we all know how far off the mark she's been. As I say, nothings happened.

Board says to Bailey > develop a list that suits your game plan. Board sacks Bailey. Board selects coach who has a completely different philosophy and gameplan. Players selected under Bailey philosophy struggle. Team performance is worst in AFL history. I'm not "pinning" it on the Board. I'm saying they are a significant part of the reason we are where we are. Firstly they selected a coach who appears not to be able to coach. Secondly they appointed a coach who needed to trash much of what was done over 4 years to suit his man on man contested/stoppage football. Well, perhaps I am pinning it on the Board. I said long ago that they didn't understand the concept of governance and they wanted to get involved in operations. There were two Board members and the CEO on the coaching selection panel along with a media commentator. They had significant say about the coach because they thought they understood footy. They didn't and they got it wrong. The coach is ultimately responsible and they selected the coach. But strangely this is not to trash the Board, they've done that themselves, I'm defending the players. IMO they are so much better than they are showing at the moment. If a new coach can harness their skills, rebuild their confidence and institutes a game plan they can implement will could improve quickly. Welcome back Hazy, did the faceless men get you? I must say I find it astounding that you were banned but those involved in the now closed "McLardy is out of touch" thread still enlighten us with their wisdom. Nothing happened in your absence. CEO gone, President gone, begging deposition to AFL for money to pay out contracts and help restructure dysfunctional administration and football department, club in projected debt situation, Kennet for Pres push is on, MFC Board instigate Board enquiry regarding Board non performance to be carried out by Board member (yes, it's true), on field performance at an all time low, and McLardy Board take responsibility for everything but vast majority still remain - but nothing of significance. The good news is it's all the recruiters fault so we're ok. Are you standing for a vacant Board position?

I just love the way people like to look for the one dimensional answer. It's the recruiters now who led to a flawed playing list. While it's clear we made some very poor decisions it's so much more than that. This footy club employed Bailey (initially by Gardner and extended by Stynes/McLardy) who had a football philosophy of playing fast, open, Geelong like footy. He was told to back youth, build from the ground up. develop and plan a side based around his football philosophy. With one of the youngest lists in the AFL he was sacked whilst having won 7.5 games in 17 games and having a chance at a crack at the 8 with some very winnable games in the remaining 5. He did this whilst the Board and CEO oversaw drench warfare within the club and within the football department. He showed that the core group of young players had talent. However on the back of the Geelong loss we ditched 4 years of coaching philosophy and drafting in favour of Garry's conversation with Mick and Mick's choice of our new coach. Surprise Surprise it's one of Mick's assistants who has a football philosophy of man on man, slow ball movement, around the boundary stoppage footy. The philosophy is completely different to the direction the club had, under it's Board, CEO and Coach, been developing for 4 years. It's no surprise that we've gone backwards but what is a surprise is that we've gone backwards so far. Neeld is explaining our situation along the lines of experience and age but really it's because this club blinked and then whilst changing coach didn't do its homework without one person on the coaching selection sub committee who had coached a game of AFL footy. Not one. It just beggars belief. My point. I don't think it's possible to judge the players under this coach. He's clearly asking them to play a gameplan they are ill equipped to play and he has drained the confidence and spirit from them. The list needs to be evaluated by the incoming coach before any judgements are made. For all the players are copping it at the moment there are many players there who would have been taken early by other clubs and would, in all likelihood, be much more successful in a different environment. We need to give them that chance. Oh, and Redleg, Prendergast was initially employed by Harris and then had his contract extended by Schwab (as was Bailey and Connolly).

It doesn't hide the fact that having had more advantages (draft picks and $5m + from FH) than a lot of other clubs (North, Dogs, Saints, PA) that we have been humiliated by our own failings which is why we don't get good draws and sponsorship. It's our fault that we are where we are and we were given every opportunity to be somewhere much much better. Entitled to help? I don't think so. Will receive it because of the embarrassment we are to the AFL? Yes. If we receive draft help in whatever manner it will be because we are failures and there is no entitlement, pride, joy or solace in that. Redleg the draw is "rigged" to maximize profits to the AFL and thank heavens for that. If it wasn't we'd be on life support with little likelihood of recovery. Hopefully one day we can add to the AFL's reputation rather than tarnishing it.

Redleg I've not read the Kennett thread so I don't know your stance but I just don't think Don should be telling him, on my behalf, that he's not wanted. He should merely have said he (Kennett) didn't have his support but was welcome to offer himself to the membership and leave it to us. His backing of his mate Geoff (Freeman) doesn't sit well with me either, but so be it. As for the Gardner Board all you say is right but they acted with dignity and I hope Don does the same. I just think it's an insult to say they are having a review and a Board member will carry it out. I think one of the major reasons they failed is their lack of understanding of governance and independence and the decision to get Trotter to evaluate them shows they've learned nothing. Redleg I don't think I know a better MFC supporter than you, hang in.

If JK is to succeed it will be with the members support because judging by Don's comments he won't stand aside for Jeff. If he is to succeed he will have to tell us his policies. I don't necessarily support him but I don't want Don making the decision for me.

Redleg I know your past involvement and you understand better than me the scrutiny that goes on and I respect your support of Boards (in general). You've stated you either walk away or get beaten in an election but the Gardner Board did neither, they agreed to a dignified change over saving the club the energy, money and angst of a fight. This Board are failures and rather than have a silly internal review should, with the AFL's help, find a suitable replacement. FWIW Trotter, regardless of effort and intent, cannot independently evaluate a Board he has been part of. Ask Julia how you think she's gone! IMO Don should not be denigrating Kennett's offer and he should let the members decide. In all probability Kennett would be strongly rejected anyway but it's not Don's decision. The answer is I don't want Don choosing the next Chairman/Board but he's strongly behind his mate Geoff Freeman who is a brother insurance broker and salesman and to be honest I've little trust in that recommendation. I wasn't having a go at you and my reference to "curry support with you" was really directed at this community although I recognize it could and should have been better expressed. Heavens this situation has us on edge doesn't it. No offence meant and apology offered if it was taken.

Then he should resign as the results under his guidance have been a complete failure. If we were a public company we'd be broke. Can you name them? They reduced debt by calling on members and then presided over a $500,000 AFL fine and a payout to the CEO who they reappointed 6 months earlier. And our on field performance under their guidance is just terrible. Redleg do you think they have done a good job? On any evaluation they are a failure and should recognize that and organize a competent Board in their place. They are being burned by the supporters and media because we put our trust in them, gave them our money and it's all for nothing. They have got us to such a terrible position nobody will take over. Not only that they are doing some window dressing by having a review of their performance by themselves. That may curry support from you but not from me. I don't want a review, it's a waste of time. Look at the financial bottom line and the second last line on the ladder, that will tell you. The fact that the review is by one of their own is an insult to the membership. Might as well get Wayne Swan to review the Labor Party performance. This Board has sucked money and hope out of the members. It's sad. I don't question their motive or their commitment. I question their results and have for sometime. I've been pointing out here for so long that they lack independence and process but got abused from pillar to post. And tell me this. How can Don McLardy sit on a Board that decides Neeld's future? Don selected him along with Jalland. They should stand aside and excuse themselves from any discussion on the coach's future. Sadly they won't because to be honest, they just don't get it.

Can someone explain to me how sacking Neeld now and replacing him with a current employee (and not replacing that employee) adds to the costs of the club? If sacking Neeld provides hope and therefore extra attendance then there IS a financial incentive to replace him. IMO Jackson is waiting to make one off significant changes to the FD and Neeld will go in that change. It's a good plan as it makes the statement that whilst he was a significant part of the problem he was not the whole problem. I note also that there are calls for significant changes to the Board.

You mean you haven't filled the role of Chief bottle washer yet! I like your list Redleg but I just wonder how much is realistic. Let's hope.

Well it's true, we both wanted a coach, a CEO and a Chairman. But you supported the incumbents and I wanted change. Do you want Schwab back and McLardy and Neeld to stay? Or do we now agree on the need for change? Anyway, water under the bridge. Let's hope for a good result today and Monday.

Glad you've caught on, I told you this months ago.

I did some counting on Saturday. In 2010 and 2011 when Bailey was trying to win he had 3 losses over 60 points. That is slightly under 10% of games played. In 2012 and 2013 Neeld has had 13 losses over 60 points in 32 games. That's about 40% of games. 7 of those games have been this year 70%. FM. I think MFC supporters have forgotten what it's like to go to the footy expecting to win or be competitive. That's how bad it's gotten. All this has happened on Neeld's watch. He's the coach and he's responsible. He is the problem.

Deanox I see what I see. I am angry because we've again failed to take our chance but I'm not without hope. IMO the players aren't as bad as the FD are making them look. A new coach, some hope, one or two imports and we're ok. But we need to attract a Board and CEO who regularly make good decisions. This Board and our previous CEO made terrible decisions regularly. I don't think we'll improve until that changes and thankfully we are now so low that the AFL has stepped in to save us from ourselves. That's very good and cause for optimism, in the longer term, for me at least.

Blease was a PP in 2008 ND. That allowed us the first two in 2009. Yes, the handouts go to several clubs but we receive the third highest amount and of course we will be a significant recipient when the new compensation arrangements that are being discussed are finalized. The terrible fixture we got this year which has seen us with only our first home game against a Melbourne based team this weekend is evidence of the regard the AFL hold us. I absolutely agree that the compensation we receive from the AFL is justified but that doesn't change the fact that it's been squandered. How much has the termination of Schwab, Neeld (to come) and bringing the AFL into disrepute cost? IMO with reasonable management all of that could have been avoided. And lets not talk about the opportunity cost of our performances under this FD. The mind boggles.

Well the good news is that the generosity of the members and FH who helped in the past seems to continue and their goodwill not diminished. My only comment on that front is many have said they would contribute again given the assurances of good financial management. That, of course, is what we were promised last time. Whilst my intention was to gauge the mood of those who so generously gave in the past WJ has extended the scope of the discussion. His claims of achievement whilst modest are also misguided IMO. Our relationship with the AFL must be at an all time low. Despite the receipt of several priority draft picks, generous hand outs and better stadium deals, all provided by the AFL we find ourselves the runt of the competition and a concern to all. Even Eddie want to help us with an additional salary cap. The AFL have been forced to put in an administrator to fix us because we were unable to do that ourselves. Not only that but we've been found guilty of bringing the AFL into disrepute and everyone other than a few believed we tanked. We also threatened to take the AFL to court and probably caused them significant legal costs. Add to that we, in their eyes at least, were not fully open about our dealings with Danks and I'm sure we'd be the first club they'd send a Christmas card to. We don't have a relationship with the AFL at the moment beyond doing what they say. Our relationship with Casey is awful. They hate us because we pull our good players at finals time and we hate them because they don't do anything we ask - Fevola is a terrific example. Add to the fact we've got a 20 years agreement with a club that habitually doesn't pay its bills and looks to us for financial assistance and you can imagine what a jolly time the two Boards have when they get together. And whilst the intention was to establish a presence in the area and expand our membership there is no evidence of that happening. That leaves the MCC. The relationship may be better but as Jack Little would say "all I can say is WOW". In retrospect the premise of my comment about wiping out debt is probably wrong anyway as we appear headed to significant seven figure losses over the next couple of years. Perhaps the single achievement of this Board is a better relationship with the MCC. And then of course there are the "faceless men", those evil doers who have undermined the club. Of course what is never stated is they need oxygen to undermine the club and this Board has provided so much. The reality is the faceless men seem to have been right all along and their efforts to replace Schwab well based. As Jackson said, the club was dysfunctional with up to four people from the FD reporting to Schwab. Even more damning was his comment that "it's not a hard fix, it's just not a quick fix". It's hard to imagine a more damning comment. The bottom line is our product is football. It's the Boards job to govern a Club that can produce good football and see us financially secure. On both counts this Board is a complete failure with arguably no redeeming attributes.

Sorry but that is just not right. Read Caro's article. Neeld would probably never have got a senior coaching role if he hadn't fallen in at Melbourne. We missed Hinkley, Sanderson and Lyon who would all have looked very seriously at the job. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/deecision-on-the-run-20120521-1z1di.html In part Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/deecision-on-the-run-20120521-1z1di.html#ixzz2UjyzqlWH