Slartibartfast

I'd ban you for this negative crapp and the continual abuse and bullying of Watts. And it's nothing personal against you. It just fascinates and disappoints me that MFC supporters can't get behind him and feel the need to continually belittle and denigrate him. It's mean spirited and totally contrary to being a supporter. Reality is probably that he's neither as bad as many make out or as good as some suggest. But he's got personal characteristics that leave many here for dead and he diserves so much better than what this forum regularly dishes up. Fact is he is on our list. He will get a game if the coaches think he deserves one. He may flourish in a better team or he may lose his place. I don't know what will happen but I hope he succeeds. but what I do know is this site should have the balls to put an end to the continual abuse and bullying of this player. Everybody's had their say, let's see what happens.

Neither are "coaches and the players". The fish rots from the head and anyway, Joe was hardly your "hands off" president.

Yeh, right. Tell that to Jackson.

Why isn't Stretch included in this conversation?

Apologies for not replying earlier Red, I thought I had but it appears it is lost in the ether somewhere or merely a figment of my imagination. I think that's a very good and fair summary. It's a pity that many see things as being so black and white and can't give credit where it is due. When critiquing Joe it is just mean spirited not to recognise his contribution in both money and commitment. He struck me as being a man of extremes which probably doesn't suit a membership based organisation but he played a meaningful part in our history which not many can claim. Thanks for for your response Red.

Redleg what do you think Joe's motives were when he got involved in the merger? Do you think it was his love of the MFC or was it something else? I don't really agree. When Joe declared the salary cap breaches rumour had it that the AFL didn't want the situation made public. Rightly or wrongly they wanted the situation swept under the carpet. I'm not sure if the rumour is true but the information I have came from a reliable and senior source. The game had been tarnished by the breaches and they had been dealt with and the issue was "dead" at the time Joe declared us in breach. The AFL were of course forced to act. Joe supporters will naturally believe that "honesty is the best policy" but others believe that the declaration had everything to do with improving Joe's corporate image. Joe has always led a colourful business career and his declaration of our guilt seems strangely out of character with how he conducted his other businesses. I think a better comparison for the salary cap breaches is the tanking enquiry. In both cases the competition was worse off for the exposure and the AFL had no interest in pursuing either situation publicly. The issues were largely dealt with and any further management would have been in house. The drug situation at Essendon is in a completely different class as it put peoples lives at risk and needed to be dealt with firmly and publicly.

Agree with all of this. The player I've seen that is most like Flower is James Hird (sad that I have to compare Robbie to the narcissist). Murphy is a good comparison for "grace" but he's in a much different (lower) league to Robbie. On Buckley. I hated him initially. Arrogant, self-centred, flashy and soft. At least that's what I thought. Then I went to a corporate box one night when Collingwood were playing and I was discussing Buckley with a Pie supporter. He had a different view. In the end he said "I'll tell you what. Lets sit together and we'll count the number of times Buckley wins his own ball". Easy meat I thought. Half way through the second quarter we stopped counting and I conceded and I've admired Buckley since. I particularly like him as a coach. He calls it like it is, he's the most interesting of a mostly generic group and he's shown Roos up on 360 time and time again which is no mean effort because Roos is good. I thought he was the best special comments man on TV and when he and Matthews discussed footy I thought they gave an insight you don't get now. I know it's the done thing to hate Collingwood and it's almost unacceptable to like a Collingwood identity. But I think Buckley will be an outstanding coach and is a highly intelligent person who is willing to share his insights. I'm a big fan.

It's a pity the AFL didn't put up a highlight package of Jurrah playing to compliment the story. You'd think it would have taken all of 5 minutes to put together and it would remind people of his extraordinary skills. Jurrah faced the biggest adjustment of any footballer to play the game at AFL level. When he arrived in Melbourne he didn't know how to get money out of an ATM, he didn't know how to buy food at the supermarket, he didn't know how to drive in the city and he didn't know what was involved in representing an AFL club. He landed on Mars. Melbourne organized Ian Flack to basically be Jurrah's keeper but when Neeld came along with his tough boy stance it wasn't long before a unique talent withered on the vine. Jurrah isn't suited to AFL footy. He comes from a different culture, almost a different world. Just as I couldn't adjust to his world I don't think he can really adjust to ours and that has been shown by the issues he's faced since he left. As much as I loved watching him I wonder if footy didn't ruin his life and I think it probably would again. I'd be astounded if he ever played AFL footy again.

Not really. Dazzle judged him without seeing him and then said "I've seen enough" to the question of how many games he'd seen him play. I can't judge Whitten as I think for me he is the same as Flower is to Dazzle. I just didn't see him play. In Ted's day there was not the media coverage and for much of his time he played in a poor team who got little if any coverage. And as a kid I didn't go to Western Oval. I accept Whitten was a legend, not just a superstar. Sadly I missed him. It's sad you missed Flower Dazzle but what is sadder is you dismissed a player of your own club having never seen him, or if you did see him you saw him well past his best. Time to move on.

No answer Dazzle? I'm going to assume that you're a young guy who probably wasn't born when he played.

Fantastic stuff Pro! Flower would have stood rightfully on the stage with any player to play in the modern era. As well as his brilliance he was versatile. Perhaps it was in a game against WA above but in the last quarter and with the game in the balance Victoria had no key position forwards and Flower was moved to CHF where he was opposed to Ross Glendinning. He won the match for the Vics taking Glendinning apart. He was a superstar and anyone who doesn't think it didn't see his career. I saw much of it. I started going to the footy every week where possible from about 1970 onward and reckon I saw him play on 200 or more occasions. He is clearly the best player I've seen in red and blue and the only players who come anywhere near having his level of skill and match day influence were a pre knee David Schwarz and the fruit cake who was Allen Jakovich. As good as players like Neitz, Lyon and Stynes were they didn't hold a candle to Flower.

Joe was never one to back away from a battle and it looks like he's going as far as he can with this one. A fascinating character in Melbourne's history. He took the opportunity to lead the fight against the merger in 1996 when approached by Brian Dixon. Whilst the official result voted in favour of the merger many argue there were such anomalies in the count we (Joe) would have challenged it in court had the Hawks not rejected the proposal and saved our bacon. I remember after the vote feeling that Joe had the opportunity to galvanize our club which he did for a time. He appointed Neale Daniher and we had some fantastic times under his leadership but by 2001 with many influential (and normal) supporters and members of his own Board dissatisfied with his leadership it all hit the fan. Joe threatened a spill of the Board mid season but thankfully that was averted and he lost the subsequent election battle with Szondy, who I backed, and who was to turn out to be the worst Chairman in recent times. Joe put a lot of money into the club but sadly his style was confrontational and controversial with his many battles with the AFL doing little to help our cause. He decided to expose our salary cap rorts (overseen by guess who - Cam Schwab) when the AFL had no interest in them causing many to question his motives. He exposed them by getting his own lawyers to audit our payments but the auditors report, as I understand it, was never tabled with the Board and his Board were unaware that he was going to have a news conference exposing the breaches. I think I'm right in saying all this but perhaps either Redleg or WJ would like to comment as I think at the time they were quite close to Joe. Of course it's all water under the bridge but as Whispering Jack has said on so many occasions - if you ignore the lessons of history you are prone to repeat them. I still believe that our greatest failing has been having Chairmen who did not necessarily have MFC as their primary motive for holding the position. Joe arguably led the rest of the field in this respect but he was a larger than life character who certainly made life interesting and promoted our club. Anyway thankfully after many years the AFL has taken control and we have a fantastic CEO and a Board who know their role and I think we can be as confident in our future now as at any time since the AFL was formed.

You didn't answer my question. I'll change it. About how many games did you see him play? Were you born before 1987 when he played his last game. Did you see him play in the late 70's and early 80's when he was at his peak. They are simple question Dazzle, I'm not trying to catch you out.

How many times did you see him play?

I never rated him.

His hounding off this site by the selfish minority is a loss to all of us. We all have difference interests and focuses when it comes to training reports and Saty provide a unique perspective. It personally doesn't interest me what drills the players are doing but I don't berate posters for posting that information. He was a pain in the bum at times but there isn't a poster on this site who isn't now and again. A sad loss. I hope I can catch up with him on Friday and find out what's happening. I'll be sure to keep it to myself to avoid upsetting some.

Others rate him much more highly than me. I rate him as a solid accumulator. That does not mean I do not rate solid accumulators. I hope you're right about Trengove.

I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make here. Are you suggesting that I'm belittling the "solid accumulators"? If you are you're wrong. Solid accumulators are useful in any team and if they use the ball well will keep their spot in the first 22 of most teams. The point I'm trying to make, and I think most will understand it even if they don't agree, is that in my opinion he isn't as good as many here are making out. I think his output in his first couple of years stands out because our team was so bad we held on to nice pieces of play and saw them as better than they were. I've recognized that my recollections my be wrong and certainly I'm not suggesting my evaluation of him as a player is not moot. Now if he happens to be as nice an accumulator as the AA players you've mentioned, one a Brownlow Medalist and the other the captain of a premiership team I'll be more than happy but if this is your definition of a "solid accumulator" then I'd suggest your judgement as a whole needs some review. You will not find any comment from me that is anything but complementary about Jack. I hold him in the highest regard but I try not to let my personal view of a player as a person cloud my judgement of the player as a player. I'm not always successful. My view is that if Jack returns to full fitness he will be a useful addition to our team. I don't see him as having the power and explosiveness of Viney or Jones. I don't see him having the impact on contests as AVB nor do I see him having the skill or kicking skills of Vince. He's a balanced all rounder able to do a lot of things well but I don't see him as a game changer because I don't see him having the size or power to influence the game the way others do. So disagree with my view by all means but don't misrepresent my view by silly comparisons of "solid accumulators" with two of the better midfielders to play our game this century or the use or failed sarcasm. Put in a reasoned argument if you've got one. For the record I'd be thrilled if Trenners became a critical part of our team but I just don't see it happening.

Hope you're right.

I had dinner with an assistant coach from another club who said exactly the same thing. Under Bailey he was a pure mid, hunt the footy and create play. Under Neeld he played high half forward which is a position that didn't suit him. He said he wasn't fast enough to play any sort of outside role and was a pure inside mid. I'm a huge fan of Trengove as a person but was never as keen as some on his footy as it seemed to me that he was a tall in a small body. His major highlights were contested marks and whilst he got the ball a bit he didn't seem to be all that damaging to me. Perhaps time has dulled my memory but he strikes me as being a solid accumulator. I also disagree with your view that Trengove had a better first couple of years than Brayshaw. Perhaps in possessions he did but Brayshaw to me has as much footy smarts as any first year player I've seen. He knows where players are, he invariably takes the best options and he works so hard off the ball. 15 Brayshaw possessions are as good as 25 from most others. I must confess to being a little underwhelmed by Brayshaw initially but as the season went on he just showed so much and was so clever. I think Brayshaw will be elite whereas if Trengove gets back he will be an accumulator who ends up with 25 possies a game that you don't much notice.

The book appears to be sold out from what I can see. Does anyone know if it still available and if so where? If not does anyone know if there will be a further printing. Sorry to start a new thread but previous ones have been closed.

Thanks Red, I didn't know you saw it that way. Interesting take!

I’ve been giving this topic some thought and whilst I don’t consider myself an expert I do have some experience. There are clearly some clubs which will prove very successful in 2016. My personal favourite it the recently introduced Great Big Bertha from Callaway. It has the Next Gen R MOTO Technology which provides a thinner club face leading to higher ball speeds on both centre and off centre hits. Most helpful for me. It comes with the choice of 19 different shafts and an adjustable perimeter weight which has both a draw and fade bias. Loft can be varied by adjusting the hosle and the grip can be tailored to suit your hand which is something BBO will appreciate. I’ve used this club and it’s just fantastic. Easy to swing and provided me with a little extra length and greater consistency. A popular rival is the new M1 which no doubt you’ve seen Jason Day use recently with the distinctive black and white club head. Whilst I understand this club can perform very well it’s too fancy for me and I think it will only appeal to the bogan golfer. Others to consider are the ever popular Ping G30 and the Titleist 915D2 and 915D3. One of these is bound to suit and you should trial them all. I like order in my club selection so having decided on Callaway’s Great Big Bertha driver I needed to match that up with a set of Callaway Irons. There are many option here. Personally I prefer the forged irons and so was really attracted to the Apex CF16’s. They are the first Callaway Irons with Cup Face technology that’s redefined ball speed and coupled with precision engineering the club face gives you consistent ball speeds across the face of the club. You can choose between the normal and the pro version of this iron and I went for the most forgiving being the normal. Again there is a choice of shafts to match this beautifully constructed club. I found on shot tracker I was getting excellent launch angles and slightly lower spin rates which increased the distance of my shots with each iron. And I ask you, who doesn’t want a little bit of extra length? My dispersion on these club was excellent with all my balls tightly clustered and my MOI figures were just terrific. All in all a club to really look out for in 2016 and a real gamer if ever I’ve seen one. There are lots of other clubs out there but I really think Callaway is in for a big year. Sliders could be Cobra, Wilson Staff and Srixon. Beyond that, Titleist and Ping will be top performers again with TaylorMade a dark horse. I’d be interested in others views, with so much out there it’s hard to cover the whole field.

http://www.breakfastwithbails.com/ I haven't read the book but I knew and worked with the man. He was a different cat and one with great insight and an agile mind. Very good for under the Christmas tree and will, I assume, support his family.

That's why we have a discussion forum!