nutbean

Winning flags is all that really matters. Why not take it up another whole level? Bailey shouldn't talk about winning contests, winning quarters or winning games. Just talk about winning flags. "We're aiming to win 0 flags this year"

"Alright boys, gather round. Now I think you are getting ahead of yourselves - if I've told you once I've told you a hundred times - lets just take it one premiership at a time"

He's straight out saying he is undisciplined. there's a number of little things about him that make me wonder how interested he really is. When you campare him to someone like Scully there is a fair difference in application/dedication/desire it would seem

Wow - you are taking a giant leap - "he is undisciplined" - he is not saying anything of the sort - he twice says Jack needs to CONTINUE. Continueing to do something means you are already doing it. Unless of course after the word continue he puts in brackets ( wink wink nudge nudge)

I want Fev to get all the help he needs and recover but "football is the no 1 on his road to recovery" doesn't address the question of duty of care.

Whilst there is argueably a duty of care from the club(s) that employed Fev to help him recover what about the duty of care to the other 43 players on the list. Listen to the Ox and his regrets on the influence he had on other players around him with his gambling problem.

Players train 5 days a week and a great part of their work AND social life revolves their team-mates.

Yes - I want to see a healthy Fev, addiction free. Being part of a football club is not a right - it is an earned privilege through onfield performance and behaviours on and off the field. No - I do not think any club (including Casey) should take him into their enviroment as there are other players besides Fev to consider.

That's my main concern, I watched him like a hawk last week and that's what I saw too

Enter Brendan Goddard into the discussion - drafted 2002 first pick - first season was 2003 whilst completing VCE. Huge question marks surrounded him until he had a breakout season in 2006 ! There were calls early on in the piece by less than patient fans to trade him. Has basically been a superstar in 2009/2010 only.

Was he worth perservering with until his 4th season before he started to produce ?

All the criticism that has been levelled at JW was levelled at Goddard as well. Not hard enough at the contest, not producing.

How shattered would you be if Watts turned out like Goddard ?

I fall squarely in the "he's 19 years old - I need to be patient" camp.

If you must, compare him to James Frawley then, he got an AA cap in his 4th year of football, how far is Watts from that?

Good comparison - James Frawley was causing massive concern to some on this very site until mid way through his 3rd season when he started to show something.

Jack Watt's is one year younger in terms of when he started as compared to Frawley (Frawley 18 Watts 17) and Watt's first season was a non event with no preseason and school commitments.

So yes - Frawley is a very good comparison to make - you should be comparing Watts now to season two Frawley ( go back and read posts about season two Frawley !)

I think we can do without past players, saying things like this, pre season, to the Media.

It not good for the club.

I think it is a piece of fluff however you are right about the timing and I would think if they asked a smarter man the question - "with malthouse coming out of contract do you think Melbourne should look at him at seasons end" wouldn't you just answer "why on earth are you asking that ? There is so much hype about having assembled the best young list in the comp. The club has removed its debt and is moving forward both on and off the field. Dean Bailey showed last year that he is moving this team forward and I expect him to be coaching a finals team this year".

Now, what he thinks privately is a different matter and come round 20 people may be saying we should be talking to Malthouse ( not me !) but for now why would you be feeding papers such speculative nonsense before a ball has even been bounced ?

I am a big Robbo fan but he was going for the speccy on this one without thinking.

Check out Mike Sheahan back-pedalling as hard as he can on the Herald-Sun website with Jon Anderson. A poster on here said they heard him say unequivocally at a golf tournament in front of a large group of people that Scully had already signed with GWS and that it was a done deal. I don't doubt that Mike did say this, I just think that maybe Mike was claiming to have knowledge when it was really only a journalist's whisper. He probably believed it himself but it just goes to show that during a time of such speculation that things reported as FACT 'aint necessarily so'.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/i-havent-spoken-to-gws-melbourne-star-tom-scully/story-e6frf9jf-1226015805893

I said elsewhere that I dips me lid to MS - in the footage he didnt deny what he said - and now he has changed his opinion based on what TS said. How many other journo's will say they got it wrong ?

eddie Mcguire just said hello

I am much like Eddie - I have three chins (damn it)

I just watched on the HS website a clip of Sheahan and Anderson talking about the presser and Sheahan was straight down the middle - he said up until 24 hours I believed that TS had committed to GWS and after the presser he believes from what he heard that he will stay.

Whilst it is annoying that journo's fly with what the hear ( and it appears that Sheahan has been fed misinformation) At least I can give him a tick for his approach - "I heard one thing from my sources - and now after hearing from the horses mouth I have changed my mind on what will happen".

Sheahan is no different to any other journo's - paid to sell papers - and like all of us are subject to receiving truths, half truths and outright fabrications.It would be fantastic if journo's only published fact but that is just not reality and we, the readers, sometimes have trouble discerning their facts from their fiction.

What will be interesting to see if Eddie takes the Sheahan approach - Eddie is not known from being turned on any position he stands on.

Reading between the lines Melbourne would have to come up with a very disappointing offer for him not to re sign

Very astute and therefore I think the presser was handled quite well - better than I expected.

It has move the thinking away from " reading between the lines, Melbourne will have to come up with a massive offer to compete with GWS for him to re sign"

No one has discussed the fact that if he is out of contract at the end of the year what is stopping Club Eddie from pouncing on him with all their cash.

Because as I have repeatedly said that if we lose any player to any club that has the SAME cap as we have then we are guilty of not doing our homework - Where every club has the same cap then it is gloves off and may the best man win. GWS has a truckload more money to spend than the establishment clubs.

( as an aside - if he ends up out of contract he cant go to any club he wants ( apart from GWS). The only way any player could end up at another club of their choice is by being traded or having first pick in the drafts.

Dunny Brush Denham has a thing for the Dees.....we could win a GF and he would still say we are shizen

Up to my 3rd SMS to get Greg Denham to correct his mistake on air.

I'm a crusader - lol

On reflection, he said far more than I thought he would.

I have said previously that talk is cheap and nothing quite has the same smell as ink on a contract.

His management has explained on at least three occasions I can think of on why he is delaying until later in the season and it is interesting that Pendles has done exactly the same and basically said exactly the same as Tom said in the presser - I just read the headline in HS which says "Pie for Life". I wonder of the HS will say "Demon for Life" as Tom said he wants to be a one club player.

So Tom expressed his love for the club and the players, has been transparent, nothing signed or even offered with/by GWS, wants to be a one club player, Moeny isnt everyting and expects to continue on past this year with MFC.

What else is there to say except to the MFC - do as you have been doing - negotiate quietly and professionally and ensure TS remains at the club

First impressions - well handled TS and my ulcer is settling

I know its a small thing but geez I wish journo's would check what they are saying before opening their mouths.

Denham said on KB's program that Dean Bailey admitted making a mistake on letting James McDonald go.

No - he made two things clear - he made a mistake on the way it is was communicated but the decision to let him go was right.

Get it right, you hacks !

To quote the famous words of Al Pacino from the Godfather

"Every time I try to get out, they keep pulling me back in"

Cut out the high moral ground bull please.

Hmmphh.

I have not offered nor will I offer an opinion as to whether TS is staying or going - I have no insight and zero idea. No moral high ground here at all.

I will offer an opinion on negotiating. I am happy to debate this with anyone due to my past and present experience in this very field. ( resume available on request).

As much as football is emotional it is run like a business. Demand and supply. Players worth and bargaining position vs clubs perceived players worth and clubs bargaining position.

Rule one and the most important rule - understand the playing field of the negotiations before commencing. Without disrespect to Juice or Bartram - you could plonk a contract down in front of them now and say sign or go - you would handle Scully/Davey/Green/Sylvia differently - where demand is likely to be considerably higher. You then go the polar extreme and look at Chris Judd leaving WCE. He completely held the whip hand in his negotiations as expected. Understand the playing field and act accordingly.

Rule two - discard and disregard distractions and periphery issues (rumour, innuendo, speculation) that have little to no effect on the final outcome (unless you let them be).

Rule three - look at individual aspects of the negotiation and see if they are fair and reasonable. With reference to rule two - to delay a contract negotiation until the later part of the contract is not unreasonable.

Why don't people seem to realise this?

It's only a distraction for insecure supporters.

I promised myself and few others not to post on this subject again but I am a tragic.

Comes, goes, stays, plays, up, down - makes not one iota of difference to the team and the coaches unless it is allowed to be ( aka Thompson/Ablett).

I keep drawing the comparison between the Scully and Sylvia - what is the difference between them ? both unsigned ? both needed and valued ? both possible targets ? The difference is the media hype and rumour ( be it correct or incorrect)surrounding one of them - Why would we have the club treat the negotiations of the two any differently ? To appease nervous supporters ? To stop media hype and speculation ?

The club (should) runs the negotiations as a mature professional unit. No ultimatums, no demands of statements of love and fidelity. We negotiated well with Davey and Green ( what we know) - not backing anyone into a corner and we negotiated well with Bruce and drew our line as to what we were prepared to offer.

I have faith that club has open lines of communications with all players management and put our best case forward - at the end of the day it will be what it will be ( but do NOT take a negotiation approach based on rumour/speculation and pandering to the emotions of both the supporters and the shark feeding frenzy media)

Lets face it , at this stage in his development , if he signs for 350-400k per season he's acted in self interest any more and he's held the club to ransom .

"put your hands in the air and give me all your money - if nobody moves, nobody gets hurt".

Self interest ! I reckon Daniel Bell acted in self interest when he told the club "don't give me a contract - I want to retire and not play AFL again even though I am in my mid 20's".

This is a professional sport - and as emotional as we become the bottom line is that the club acts with self interest and the people who put on the show, the players act with self interest as well. There is certain demand and supply factors that come into all negotiations and we supporters should hope that there is an acceptable mid point of self interest of the club and the players. When players opt to leave for better pay or conditions - aka - Cam Bruce, the self interest of the player has outweighed the self interest of the club. When we said tata to Cheney, McDonald and Miller the self interest of the club outweighed the self interest of the players.

Its not really brain rockets surgery science.

Argh! Is it possible to be that stupid??

They are trying to placate the supporters.

That is who the press conference is for.

Not for the players or to improve the team's performance.

It's really not brain science...

Nothing short of I have re-signed will placate many supporters

" I love the Melbourne football club" ( then why dont you sign now ?)

" My management will work with club in the fullness of time to structure a deal to keep me at the MFC" (then why dont you sign now ?)

"I would love to be one club player" ( then why dont you sign now ?)

For some supporters who fail to grasp that negotiation is a two way street and should be handled delicately, professionally and with maturity, they will be satisfied with nothing short of "I have signed".

As an aside, I was thinking about the emotional side of our supporters.

Think back to when the club, extended out Baileys contract with a year to run. Go back to that thread and see a host comments like

"why on earth are we doing that now ?"

"it is not like Bailey will be in demand"

"lets wait until the mid point of his last season to see whether or not we should give him a further contract based on his performance"

So what we as supporters ( well not me !) are saying to the MFC is they should demand of Scully to put up or shut up now before the season starts to resolve it one way or another for the good of the club. But the club should have told Bailey - no,you won't get a contract until we are good and ready, no rush, lets see how you perform.

We the supporters ( well not me) are telling the club that it should control all contract negotiations and timings, and you the players and coaches should sign when we want, be it sooner or later or not at all, not when you want. Your welfare, be it in the Scully case where he is possibly looking to maximise his potential contract or in the Bailey case, where his livelihood was tied to getting a new contract for future seasons is irrelevant. To you fringe players - we wont give you a contract until seasons ends so to make sure we dont contract anyone who is possibly "redundant", but to you wanted players, don't you dare hold out until until the the end of season - thats not fair on the club.

Interesting negotiation stance and interesting in terms of the different standards of behaviour we find acceptable in the name of the club.

There is one very important issue forgotten in all this.

Why haven't the mods re-opened the last closed thread on Scully and see if the legitimately combined thread can top the 2000 post mark.

I too, have been following all these Scully threads just interested to see what fellow demonlanders have to say about a very serious issue for the MFC.

Firstly, people come to these forums to discuss and vent about issues like this, so people shouldn't get shut down and abused just because they are worried about losing potentially the best player of the next 10 years. If you can't handle the forums about tom, don't read them.. end of story.

I would like to add, it aint looking good..

However, we will be able to discover alot from Toms interview on friday.

If he says, 'I want to play with MFC and my mates for the rest of my career' We are safe

If he says, 'I want to leave to my management to work out' We are [censored]

90% of the players who have been linked to GWS have come out and said 'I want to play at my current club', so if Tom was that vested in our future plans, he would too, wouldnt he?

Its going to be sad to see him go (if he does)

Yes it is very important that Tom makes positive statements like Gary Ablett Jnr did in the Geelong advertiser

"I see myself very much as a leader on the field and I enjoy that part of it, but there's parts I need to work on off the field.

"I'd love to captain the Geelong Football Club one day, it's just something that would be great to do, it'd definitely be an honour. I love the club".

Talk is cheap

I suppose what I was saying was that they were perhaps editing to produce a piece that looked slightly amateurish... and now seeing that intro you mentioned, perhaps they are just generally trying to paint it in a bad light by giving a readers a preconceived notion before they have a chance to read it. I might be wrong, but it certainly looks that way.

I suggest you post a comment on the AFL's Facebook page to the effect that they are misrepresenting your views in their lead-in to the article. (on the off chance you are one of the few who has resisted the urge to create a Facebook account, I'm more than willing to do that on your behalf).

Already vented to the editor and now changed ( much better ) - umm please address me as Nutbean "power-broker" (fame has already gone to my head)

In the first of this series, reader Jeff Robinson wonders why the AFL does not make young talent off-limits from the new, cashed-up franchises

I didnt think the editing did much to the story however I was horrified that when i clicked into news and it gives a taste of the stories

Open Space: Evenness, what evenness?

In the first of this series, reader Jeff Robinson asks why the AFL won't restrict expansion clubs' poaching of experienced players

The argument and what I wrote on free agency and the suggested solution is not about restricting the poaching of EXPERIENCED players but the likes of Scully, Martin and now add Callum Ward to the list.