La Dee-vina Comedia

I thought he was CEO for a while but not President. But still great that he took the time to speak to you. On a slightly tangential point, I've always liked players who have real nicknames (Flash, Russian and Hassa, for example) rather than derivatives of their surnames (eg, Greeny, Browny, etc). I grew up in the 60s and it took many years until I found out what his real name is.

So, at least 7 of the starting 22 last year won't be playing on Monday because they've either left the club or are injured. And quite possibly, none of the back six or the centreline will be playing in those positions, either (although a couple - Sellar and Nicholson - might). That's a lot of change in 12 months.

Part of me thinks it would be great not to sack Mark Neeld just to stick it up the journos who keep reporting it as a fait accompli.

I like the outside the square thinking. Four Ins and three Outs. Should help even things up...but probably still won't be enough.

To be fair, there's probably an 80% chance we'll be b1tching about it in two years time whoever is appointed. I'm not in favour of Knights right now for another reason. He has no AFL premiership experience as a player, senior coach or (I believe) an assistant coach. Which means he hasn't experienced the extreme efforts necessary to achieve that goal. That's not his fault, but until he's been an assistant coach in that environment, I don't think he's ready. Of course, that could change by the end of this year. Then I think Knights would be ready to be reconsidered but that may be too late for the Melbourne appointment.

Actually - I think the opposite. On TV you generally only see what is happening where the ball is and not what else is happening - such as who is leading, who's running hard and who's not in the right position (such as players standing too far away from a free opponent who is obviously going to come into play. We have a prime candidate for that last comment, but I won't name him here as that's not what this thread is about).

A few posters here seem to think Neeld is going to continue. That's a surprising shift in sentiment I would have thought. I'll restate what I've said before. Neeld should only be sacked now if keeping him is going to put players offside to the extent that key players may decide to leave the club. Otherwise, I can't see how replacing Neeld now actually benefits the club. Sure, it gets rid of some angst and allows us to find a sacrificial lamb, but what does a stand-in coach do for the next 12 rounds? On the other hand, if things have not improved by round 19, that's when it's time to act and start the process of selecting a new coach for 2014.

With respect to the question of alignment, it's not just a question of what Melbourne should do. Let's hope that Casey doesn't commence divorce proceedings from the dysfunctional Melbourne Football Club. Who could blame them if they wanted to go their own way? In my view, the best long-term solution is for Melbourne to have its own reserves/VFL team. But that, should not be on the mind of the Board and Peter Jackson right now. There are more pressing matters...

I'd keep Joel Mac and send him to the backline in place of either Dunn or Strauss. Strauss played very poorly, but as there's no upside in Dunn, I'd keep Strauss and send Dunn back to Casey. Bail's had a few poor games in a row now, so he should go, too. I thought Pedersen and Fitzpatrick both struggled, but (assuming Tom Mc is not ready), I'd keep them both as they need more time. If Matt Jones needs a rest perhaps Dunn gets saved. But given it was M Jones only poor game for the year he deserves another chance. So, I would bring in Sylvia and Magner and drop Bail and Dunn (or M Jones).

6. Dawes 5. N Jones 4. Frawley 3. Garland 2. Rodan (although terrible in the first quarter where he fumbled everything) 1. Howe Interesting that Kent got votes from many people. I didn't think he deserved votes but I liked what I saw for the future. If he can build a tank, I see him as a potential classy midfielder. with pace, evasive skills and a great left foot. And I didn't think Bail was the worst. I thought Strauss and Pedersen had him covered.

There's some very well written stuff on this thread. Well done in particular to Whispering Jack, Baghdad Bob and I'va Worn Smith. Intelligent and beyond the superficial, angst-driven knee-jerk criticisms on some other threads.

If we require a caretaker coach I don't think it should be Todd Viney. Not for any reason other than it will create unnecessary media tension when Jack Viney plays...or doesn't. Denis Pagan faced similar problems when his son was on the Kangaroos list (albeit Denis was the full time coach). If Viney was the only option, I'd take him, but with other experienced coaches in Craig and Rawlings in the employ of the club, I'd choose one of them first.

I think he'll kick 5, but he may well be their third highest goal scorer after Roughead and Breust.

Hey CHAMP. Serious (but off topic ) question. is your avatar a picture of Mark Neeld or Michael Douglas? I can't tell.

Why not? I think we'd all appreciate the novelty.

I'm not sure that's correct. I seem to recall hearing that the club gets a payment for every person who goes through the turnstile whether they pay or not. And that includes MCC members. If anyone knows, it would be helpful to have the facts.

I was referring to the 'Hollywood Boulevard allegations made by Charles Happell many years ago. I accept they may be without foundation.

I'm a dinosaur. What's that in imperial terms?

There are a number of players whose names should be on that list with '(no heart)' in the injury column.

Interesting. Some media reports suggest our problems might have something to do with Neeld doing exactly this with negative consequences...such as players wanting to leave at the end of the year. The whole issue of players v coach and who is making the decisions seems to have been an ongoing issue for a number of years with allegations players told Daniher and Bailey what to do and, conversely, Neeld telling the players in no uncertain terms but the players not liking it. Perhaps there's a happy medium which we haven't found yet.

You mean this particular board, or in general? I would have thought it's hard to make a Board subsequently accountable for something they are not actually involved in.

It’s all been a bit too gloomy on the board in recent weeks. So, given the call by many posters for the MFC Board to be replaced, who would you like to see on the (hypothetical) Demonland ticket? Personally, I’d be happy with Whispering Jack, rpfc, Daisycutter, Nasher, Redleg and Jaded. Each offers wisdom, humour and passion without the need for vitriol. I’m tempted to add Bitter But Optimistic although perhaps I just want to quell the stereotypical image most people have of Melbourne supporters. I can’t find a spot for Why You Little or Ben-Hur although I don’t doubt their passion. I just feel they might struggle with the need for a unified voice. And Rhino Richards might aggravate the supporters a bit too much with his, er, biting commentary. Who would you choose? (And lets keep it friendly, OK?)

Loveable? Malthouse? I don't see it. I'm always in favour of a coach who has had some relatively recent involvement as player, coach or assistant coach in an AFL premiership. Which would go against Matthew Knights (although in his favour is that he built the key building blocks of the Essendon list).

I'm not necessarily promoting him, but I think you should add Mark Harvey to that list. And John Northey will be 70 years old next month. I'm not convinced he's necessarily au fait with the modern game.

Actually, the person who struggled most on FC last night on this issue was Craig Hutchison who seemed quite unconvincing when he tried to argue that he'd never discussed Melbourne approaching Clarkson with Liam Pickering who is both Clarkson's manager and Hutchison's colleague on radio.