Slartibartfast

Petty not sighted after half time.

Laurie on ball as far as I can tell. Hasn’t done much. DSmith has been very impressive. Clean, involved, tackles hard and makes good decisions. Bowey struggled to get into it but has a beautiful foot. BBrown running laps. Won’t play next week.

Pouring with rain here.

But they play matches just not for points. I don't see the issue. Practice matches might actually be better because they will have more flexibility. I'd understand if there were no matches but there are. We played an intra club with the Casey boys last week. All the players would have a good hit out. We play Willy this week. It's no different from a VFL match for points. It's a non issue as long as there are matches. The real issue is byes during the season. That's rubbish.

What's the issue? We still get a game which is all we really want. That it doesn't count for VFL points doesn't really matter does it?

Gawn Viney Pickett Hunt Langdon Salem Apologies to half a dozen.

Eden Zanker very stiff.

Imagine every club not wanting him when he was on the market.

No, the mods should censor “Jordan”.

I'm a Trident Member and couldn't get a seat using my barcode but got GA seats. Did anyone else who is a Trident member have the same issue?

I still can't get through. Says no entitlements for my barcode. I'm a trident member.

ticketmaster but I can't get on

I'm the same

In the votes given in The Age neither May or Lever received votes. Unbelievable.

You're a fish flapping in the shallows Steve. You said he wasn't AFL standard. He is. You were wrong. It's time for you to move on and stop flogging a dead horse.

I would like to suggest to the moderators that the word “spud” is banned. For some reason it seems so disrespectful.

On you Stevie. You were canning him back in 2017 and he's still on an AFL list. You got it wrong. Nobody was saying he's the second coming of David Dench, just a fair role player. 81 games and perhaps more to come. Back when you were canning him he'd only played a handful. You got it wrong bud. MFC delisted him because we had better backs and another AFL club picked him up. He's AFL standard, AFL clubs have said so. Why don't you have a go with Oliver. Start saying he finished now and in about 10 years you can beat your chest and say you were the first to see it.

Chandler.

I was basically supportive of the Board until I learned the lengths they went to to stop a fair election. Their approach to others offering their candidacy was plainly hostile which is not the way it should be and seeds distrust from members. I think they treat us, the members, with disrespect. They are not open about the new facility nor do I trust them with our finances. If they are getting nowhere on the facility they will just turn around in 12 months and say "that idea fell through but we've got another one on the go". And frankly I don't think they've done much during their tenure other than ride on the success of Peter Jackson. But a Board spill with a partition would be a disaster IMO. I agree with BDA. In the end I'd just like some honesty from this lot. Asking us to vote for candidates based on a 150 work muzzling is an utter disgrace. It goes to the honesty and quality of this Board. Surely it's time for Bartlett to step down and give someone else a go. He's clearly lost the confidence of many members.

Did anyone see the question and answer section. What was said (if anything) about the muzzling of Peter Lawrence?

This is actually rot. I know you don't like Saty Dazzle but he does have contacts inside the club. He volunteers on membership drives, he mans the tents outside the ground handing out scarfs he used to attend the majority of training sessions and talk to all manner of staff, he know some of the players and he knows Neville Jetta very well. I've been at a Casey game where Neville sort him out and happily chatted to him for the last half of the game. You need to put your dislike for him aside and stop saying stupid things. This, and comment like it being a disgrace Brad Green should be a candidate for the Board just make you look silly (btw Dazzle, you never did respond to my query asking you to substantiate what was a very offensive comment) . Your footy views are good, stick to what you know best.

Is it correct that all clubs are training in "lock out"? If so, is that a State Government requirement or the AFL? I for one am missing not going to training but I might make the effort on Monday. Thanks for making the effort PF and D, great commitment.

Apologies. They were in the other Election thread.

My thoughts on Peter are posted earlier in this thread. But these are my personal views. What happened in the election is just wrong, that's the issue.

Okay, here is what you need to know about the MFC Directors Election recently held. The constitution of the Club gives the Board absolute discretion to determine how elections are run. Board rules were established quite some time ago allowing electioneering so long as materials were cleared by the company secretary. This would allow candidates to state their positions on issues to the membership giving the membership knowledge of candidates and their policies and an ability to make an informed choice. However once Peter Lawrence announced he would run for election the Board issued new rules declaring that there would be no electioneering and that candidates would be limited to 150 words outlining their qualifications and policy positions. Any person who broke these rules would be disqualified from being a Director of the Club. Subsequently in January all members received an email from Glen Bartlett, well in excess of 150 words, outlining his and the Club view on who should be elected. Peter Lawrence was excluded. When I contacted Peter Lawrence (who was the only candidate to supply an email and telephone number in his 150 word bio) to confirm he was the Peter Lawrence I once worked with I received the following reply: “It is me. Hope you’re well. Candidates are precluded from talking about the election- the only communication we can have with members is what is contained in the 150 word election statement. Regards Peter” This situation raises many issues, not least why members were precluded from communicating with Directors, who represent us, to canvas their qualifications and policy positions. This was not a fair and open election but one manipulated by the current Board to achieve their desired outcome. I don’t know any of the current Board members other than one dinner with Brad Green who I voted for and think is an outstanding candidate. What I know is the Board has denied the members the opportunity to fairly evaluate candidates and have orchestrated a situation where only their chosen candidates had a realistic chance of success. These actions by our Board do not sit with the principles of democracy and I for one now have reason to distrust them. What are they hiding? If any Board member reads this and wants to discuss it with me PM me with your mobile number and I’ll provide my identity and give you an opportunity to respond. This behavior by the Board is utterly disgraceful and bitterly disappointing.