robbiefrom13

My mate is an Aboriginal elder who had never seen the Centre, so he took off and had an extended look earlier this year. Without prompting him, he spoke at length when he returned about how depressed and depressing and clearly dangerous the place was around and in Yuendumu. Surely, we have no idea. I'd love to see Liam Jurrah resurrect his career. If he did, please let it be not against us, and please let it be with us! So he's got problems, he didn't make the choices we reckon we would've. Quite apart from the extraordinary problems of the background he couldn't fully leave, he is also clearly a man with quite extraordinary talent inside him. Talent doesn't conform, often. Beethoven, van Gogh, Leonardo, Mozart, Chopin, Cellini, Picasso, Dylan Thomas, Einstein, Socrates, etc etc etc were all to us weird blokes one way and another, and all certainly made some very peculiar choices. I don't like thugs, but they have their place in a team. I like intelligence, but Ablett was pretty impressive as a footballer. Polly Farmer and Tiger Crosswell and Jeff Farmer etc etc etc had issues. Conclusion: a bit of variety in people doesn't have to be a problem, if you have the management ability to harness it all. In an homogenised and bland club, or one reeling from its own incompetence, you'd run from the thought of another try with Jurrah; but I trust the management team we now have. I think to so authoritatively condemn the prospect of Jurrah possibly returning to AFL is a sad and dumb response to what for-all-we-on-here-would-know could be a real opportunity for something exceptional. I think narrow-mindedness and lack of imagination/trust (or maybe shell-shock, from disasters unrelated to Liam Jurrah) is colouring some posters' thoughts on the distant glimmer of a possible Jurrah return. Sit tight I say, watch and see - Melbourne-supporting is in new territory, the club is in wiser hands...

I wonder if in time you'll see that "tad" as a bit of an understatement? Still, a grudging apology is, pride allowed for, still an apology, no matter how ungracious. Good of the unreal you to concede so much! "Right now" nobody impacts games of footy. These guys are about to learn under a new and experienced and highly credentialled and impressive new coach, and will go on doing so, intensively, for several months before any of us will be in a position to judge or comment on their next outings. "Bullish" in these circumstances surely has to mean watching with interest and anticipation, not still spouting backwards-firing bulltish. "Stating the obvious" may refocus the discussion, which I thought was a reasonable idea in the aftermath of your leaving yet another abusive dump on the board, having been annoyed again because somebody has again disagreed with you. Your past aggro and bullying instinct has been a given, as "obvious" and predictable as anything posted here. But Roos with his entirely different approach has hit your radar - worth reminding you, I thought... Maybe obvious, but is it getting through? Do we evolve, or are we going to be a placard our whole life?

Paul Roos is not a bullyboy; he follows his own ideas, and operates in respect, with intelligence, and so on... We believe he is very good at what he's been employed to do at Melbourne. We really hope he is going to change the culture of the club - and by his own words we can see the sorts of attitudes and relationships that would characterise a culture he'd built. Wouldn't it be nice, while he labours away at rebuilding our footy club, if Paul Roos also had an incidental effect on the supporters? In particular, on the thinking and manner of speaking of those he-man Demonlanders who are still posting unadulterated intolerance and abuse? (How juvenile it is, to endlessly be telling people what to do, issuing directives and judgments as though you are the reference point for all discussion!) Roos has signed on for two, possibly three, years - could he have an impact on the team's supporters that quickly? But whether the jocks of Demonland get it or not, Roos and his enlightened approach is a most welcome alternative story for many of us. Maybe "harden up" isn't the only way; thuggery not the inescapable price of success; maybe sneering at our players and calling them "choir-boys" and "crap" is no longer going to be the dominant story in the community of the Melbourne footy club. Nice to have you aboard, Paul!

The thing is, as I see it, Neeld was an old-school bully type. Intrinsically just as destructive as an old-school party type. The appointment of Neeld was presumably bringing in a wrecking ball to break up that long-standing clubby set-up that was causing our steady slide towards oblivion. Good-hearted supporters saw the benefit of Neeld achieving his intention, at times refusing to allow scrutiny of the methods Neeld used: they focused solely on the fact that what Neeld was offering to do to the unprofessional culture was certainly something the club needed and long overdue. Given the club's history, opposition to Neeld's intent was seen as likely, and incredibly frustrating, and for many supporters I suspect all criticism of Neeld's methods was interpreted as opposition to his intention. Maybe too, some supporters were not as tuned as they could be to current methods for maximising the performance of high achievers; bullying is endemic and widely approved of, still. In any case, in appointing Neeld, the club appears to have - in desperation or in plain stupidity - thought they could use one out-of-date and psychologically dumb model to counteract another - and this was never going to work. Roos will bring something wholesome to our club - because he understands both people and sport intelligently, and because he acts from a position of strength and respect. Bullying is hopefully over, and likewise partying as a culture - and both these changes will bring huge gains, I believe. I liked Sylvia, but maybe it is all to the good.

a lot of merit in that suggestion - if he came back

I like the carton bit, and "rubbish". Clever, guys! How often do I miss this stuff, and naively suppose you are all being serious?

Liam Jurrah. Please. Let Roos and Ling loose on Jurrah, Watts, Sylvia, Garland, Trengove, the whole lot of them - respect and know-how will bring belief, and belief will upend the MFC. First assemble the cast, then press GO! And there is no icing in the land that would match a Jurrah in full flight. Bring it on!

ok

Why are posters setting out predictions placing limits on what's going to happen? Why the half-empty insistences? What for? I for one have a ticket to this ride, and I am excited to believe anything can happen. No pre-conceptions - it's all new and every weakness is now under capable care. I am going to love watching this, seeing what our players really can do. Roos will remind them with inarguable logic and in inarguable sincerity of what they can do, based on their shared experience from the time when he was coaching Sydney. He is a proven builder of men and culture and enduring good things. We have now entered the time when belief is going to come to the fore at the Melbourne footy club. Who knows what will emerge? The bus-[censored] is over!

you'd have the courage to explain your reasoning to Paul Roos, I suppose? Seems he doesn't see it your way...

Exactly. How much are we going to pay this guy? - and we want to tell him how to do it?!?

please, Paul, do it your way. We here are pretty very bloody stressed out.

I think we'll try Roos' methods.

WOW! Tough guy! And they didn't offer you the job...

Ben Hur's answer: "Yes." That was a pretty odd response to a simple question, Ben. Sure you went on to complain about Watts "softness", but in doing so you'd moved on from the question, and were just reiterating your usual point of criticism of Watts as a player. If what you wrote is read as an answer to the question, it is just silly: kicking goals is the essential thing for winning - even more fundamental than being tough. If a "soft" Watts kicked 4 goals every week he would be a champion, no matter what you think. The fact is, you weren't complaining about the 4 goals Watts kicked yesterday - you were simply not budging from your opinion about him as a player, which is for you non-negotiable irrespective of goals he kicks. Rendering his performance (in what is the essential of the game for forwards) irrelevant to what you think is the real issue. You are sounding a bit like Neeld, in that when you consider our players you appear to be applying a pre-determined template, disregarding what the players are actually like.

I am hopeless, I admit it. Should go away, shut up and leave you all alone. Probably will. But I would buy another membership, take me grown-up kids to the footy again, forgive everything, and love it like I used to back in the day when it was Robbie Flower vs the world pretty much, walloped on the weekly basis - I'd be in, if we kept Watts and got Jurrah back. No head involved whatsoever. The whole thing is about heart! and the magical world of the impossible happening out there right in front of you...

Lots of people claim 100% this or that, but the reality is rarely so absolute. Is posturing with the right words, never mind the truth, really what we require? The elephant in this chatroom is the almost entirely disfunctional state of our club. And history tells us that lots of those who have "bled red and blue" have plssed off elsewhere without a backward glance when their door opened. But, oh, Jack, don't you dare tell the real and obvious and entirely reasonable truth!! The Emperor is beautifully dressed, how can you say such things! I say it takes a kind of courage, not a pea-heart, not to mention integrity and intelligence, to say what is true but which will obviously be unpalatable to those listening. And meanwhile we bay for blood because Essendon is trying to evade telling the truth. Is there some inconsistency here - what are we really wanting in the world of sport? Or is the issue of honesty different when it is about our own club? Watts is just like Roos, admitting when asked that he is thinking about it, and not convinced yet. Pathetic, both of them!

How can you call yourself WattsJurrahDunn and argue for recruiting Robinson? Was it sarcasm, to identify yourself with Watts and Jurrah's names? Talk about desperation...

I wonder what responsibility would bring out of Jack Watts? Time he was considered for the leadership group, I say. Once he signs, that is. Part of the Jack Watts story has always been that his team-mates and coaches have not expected from him what he is capable of, not looked for it, maybe put off by the easy manner; and he appears to me to have accommodated himself (perhaps not all that happily) with their view of him. In junior footy, he was well used to standing up. But he is clearly very team-focused now. Somebody here suggests Watts is likely to become a regular match winner, while others suggest our captains are not showing that quality. On Watts, I agree. Well then, if I was coach, I'd want the selection process for leaders to end up with the right blokes, reflecting the team's intentions and dynamics - and I'd be wanting to know why Watts plays like that, speaks like that, is well liked, but is overlooked while the team goes regularly down the drain for lack of players leading with impact. I'd be wanting to put an end to having Jack watts plugging backline fears when we are losing the game because there's no-one doing the job in the forward line. I'd want to be putting it to Jack, "why not?" and giving him opportunity to show us what he's always had in him. Me, I see him as actually modest...

taking this all in, Jack?

Another way to look at this latest bit of player-bashing: Garry was a great player, but his efforts over the past few years have pretty well cancelled out the good he did us in the past, wouldn't you think? Caro is no fount of wisdom, either. Lloyd? These are the commentators we are quoting approvingly. But how exactly is Watts holding the club to ransom? Has his manager suggested Watts wants to be consulted, or has told the club who to appoint "or else"? Obviously not - and it cannot be a ransom note unless it states what it wants. (It would be possible that there have already been talks between Watts and the club, in which Watts indicated what coach he wanted next year, but that has not been reported, and it would be a whole different story.) All that has gone on here is his manager has indicated that Watts is cautious and concerned about what appointment the club will make - and, given recent history, of course he would be! Garry and his mates resent the implications of this - because it reflects directly on Garry. Well, suck it up Garry, because this is the hardly surprising outcome of damage that has your fingerprints all over it. Those running the Garry Lyon line on this, do you really object to a player seeing the last two MFC coaching fiascos in the same way as most on here see them? do you really require Watts to close ranks and protect the reputation and appearances of the Old Boys Club? And on the analogy with Port, do you really think the hole Port was in last year was as cavernous as the one we are in now? Do you really suppose Watts or any other player should be acting on such a belief? Garry, you are deflecting away from your own recent impact on the club, demanding everyone pretend it wasn't so bad, and doing this at the expense of one of the players of the team you supposedly still support. You should be ashamed.

Moloney probably did bleed red and blue - just could not cope with the coach. Not too much soft about Moloney. We may be underestimating the capacity of a coach to mess with the heads of the players. It seems to me (for a variety of reasons, including his contract extension, public statements he made, his elevation to captaincy having to be reward for something exceptional) that no-one "bought in" as much as Trengove. Certainly nobody has underperformed as a player more than Trengove (unless we think Moloney last year). Could be Trengove has injury issues, yes, but it's always denied and he keeps getting picked; if there aren't injury problems, then there must be something else to explain his underperformance. Perhaps the coach really does have a powerful and lasting impact on a player's headspace, either positive or scrambling. Watts always appears to me to be glaring intently when listening to the coach - a picture of intensity. Neeld took him to the presser after one nightmare loss - he would have been unlikely to do that if Watts was less than on-side. Yet Watts admits he did not find it easy under Neeld. Maybe we are seeing the still-messed-up minds of these young players who listen to their coach and really try to get it right, setting aside what they already know (and which Neeld clearly was not interested in) in order to be part of the coach's grand plan for the team. With no certainty about their future coach, why wouldn't they be still adapted to that moulding, with Craig only temporaery and therefore making minimal direction-setting moves? Craig would be well aware of how fragile the team became under the direction-setting of Neeld. Craig also was seen making very positive statements about what Neeld had built - presumably only for the sake of the players' confidence. If Craig is just caretaking, he isn't going to embark on wholesale re-configuring. Thus, Watts along with everyone else remains largely in a Neeld-overshadowed limbo. Moloney jumped ship, although he says he did not want to, but he was mature enough to know he could not handle it and survive. Spot on - the club caught up to him six months later. Players now must be waiting to get the new plan put in place. Isn't that really what Watts is saying he's holding out for?

Young players are often tentative. May look like "soft" to some. Tentative comes of not being too sure what to do out there. Watts needs to settle to some role, get some understanding of how he gels with team-mates in his part of the ground - and he has not had the chance. His development has been held back by the club. I think this is fairly close to what Roos said... So, I don't accept that he is soft. He's tentative. Just needs to know what he's expected to be doing, and a Roos would sort that quickly enough. Some here want to see the grunt first, but that just isn't Jack's starting point or his strength. He's not built to be a battering ram, and not everyone has to be, no matter what disappointed one-track-mind Demonlanders may think. But what he is, that has yet to be identified, and put in place, and developed. Apparently Roos has some confidence it can be done. (If "soft" was how Roos perceived him, would Roos be speaking so positively of him?)

Bb, you have got points to make that are hard to refute, but putting this "honest speech" into Watts' mouth was silly: "Im a prodigious talent yet to realise my potential for a myriad of reasons including less than ideal ardour of the contest and inconsistent efforts and application to the task at hand. Despite this I want to consider my options which will be heavily influenced by my preference of senior coach. I reserve my right as an employee to weigh my options." I think Jack speaks pretty honestly and modestly about his achievements. This all must be tough for him at least as much as it is for us. I don't reckon it's fair to lampoon him the way you did there.

silly talk bb