Ouch!

Perhaps in the first interview, ... my view of the whole MC thing is that ever since MC has announced that he wants to play football again, the MFC seems to have been very quiet and more interested in getting rid of him. Which is very odd if we were investing as much effort as it sounds we were in rehabbing him with the view of him playing again for us. Something snapped between the MC camp and the MFC very very quickly, and it doesn't look like at any point since then that point that the MFC have wanted to keep him on the list at all.

Top clubs are more focused on taking players who are established, less of a risk, and fit a designated role to keep them up the top, whilst the lower clubs concern themselves with scurrying around after draft picks. 8 of the players that played for the Hawks on the weekend came from other clubs. 6 of the Sydney players came from other clubs. Look at Geelong, North and Port at the moment, more concerned with snagging players from other clubs rather than what comes out of the draft. Roos strategy for us is the same. Free agency has also driven a culture amongst players where even now instead of wanting to be 'traded' back home or away for better opportunity, they are publicly naming the club that they want to go to. Why does Clark get to nominate the club he wants to go to as a contracted player. Surely if the docs say he should leave to go to another club, doesn't that suggest that there are 17 other clubs... or even if you wanted to restrict it to Melbourne clubs, 9 other clubs in Melb that we should be able to negotiate with to get the best deal... not just one! Poor clubs, poorly managed, underperforming, call it what you like, free agency kicks these clubs whilst they are down, it doesn't assist them in any way except for the compensation aspect of free agency which the AFLPA and the 'suprise suprise' clubs higher up are saying shouldn't be factored in. Restricting free agency (in the fashion that I think GNF has suggested occurs in the NFL or NBA) might work where top 4 clubs cannot participate in free agents coming in etc, but as things stand the only free agents that are going to bottom end clubs are the discards from higher up clubs that no longer want those players anyway, and they can eke out a year or two more at the bottom clubs. This might sound harsh, but Rodan, Byrnes and even to a lesser extent someone like Cross (who I love as a player, don't get me wrong!) but they are free agents because they were pushed out the door by their current clubs.

Can any of the legal boffins here explain if Hird can actually sue for wrongful dismissal? I mean isn't he just on a contract with the club, and that if they sacked him they just pay out the contract? Otherwise why wouldnt someone like Sanderson do a similar thing, he has a year to run, and 'The board wanting to move in another direction, and thats without me as coach' type of comment would have no credence at all. I think rather than wrongful dismissal they attempted to negotiate an exit strategy that didn't require them to fully pay out the contract and he has told them to shove it, and now they are working out their next move next week.

In regards to what Brisbane want for Merrett, I think the fact that they are shopping him around, they want to offload his contract, and they would take the steak knives as a trade. You don't offer a player who is 30 and has 2 more years of a contract up for trade and then play hardball with any suitors that might come your way.

The Hawks made a call to go down a youth path, but that must be close to 10 years ago, They bottomed out for two to three years tops. This latest premiership side has 7-8 players from other clubs, Gunston, Burgoyne, McEvoy, Hale, Lake, Spangher, Gibson (Think there might have been one more) But to say you want to develop a list on our own, I think we can pretty safely say has been a failure for the MFC in recent years. Look at the Swans.... their 2012 team had a bunch of 'imports' from other clubs. It's a furphy to think that you can make it on your own without bringing in other kids. Good clubs are successful and settled off the the field, have a strong core of players and values, and then they bring in other players as required to fill gaps. The top 4-6 clubs are more interested in poaching players via free agency from other clubs than worrying about top 10 draft picks. This is the way of the AFL with free agency. How many people said that Geelong are going to slide now in 2015? Put Clark and possibly Frawley in and suddenly they look better. Port are going to land Ryder, and possibly Gorringe from GCS, Hawks are looking like they are first choice for Frawley and O'Rouke.... Even North are getting into this with trying to get Waite, Higgins and securing Dal Santo last year. Free agency and player trades are more crucial to winning a flag than ever before, and GCS and GWS, and to a lesser degree, Dogs, Saints and ourselves, can't kid ourselves that the draft alone will enable the club to rise up the ladder.

I think I recall Roos saying something about Plapp recently (B&F speech or in his end of year interview with Burgo) seemed to single him out and sounded like he had a bit of time for him, so hopefully they will be both on the same page in terms of Casey in 2015

Yup correct, my apologies! TBH I was actually thinking I posted this in relation to Beams, not Lumumba, not sure why though

That suggests you think that Paul Connor actually cares what Collingwood gets out of the trade. Connor is concerned with two things: 1. Getting the best contractual arrangement for his player. Doubt that factors in the club that the player is leaving. 2. Ensuring that the player goes to the club of his choice, or at least to a club that the player is willing to join. There is a tenuous link between this and the needs of Collingwood. His job is not to care about what happens to Collingwood. That is what the list managers, Eddie and co are there to worry about, just like our guys are looking after our interests.

The way I see it is that the MFC has to get stronger on every line, not just the midfield although there is a weakness there in our depth and quality to be sure. I actually don't think we will have to give up a lot for HL, possibly less if it involves Clark. So if he can strengthen our half back, or move to a wing like some have suggested, I don't see this as a bad thing.

Normally such statements are 'Left Nut' bets, putting both out there is a big call

What is starting to be clear is that PJ has been at pains to clarify that we have asked for special assistance and not a PP. Whilst that is in part due to the fact that you can't ask for a PP, it makes me wonder what the MFC have actually requested from the Commission. I think someone (on here I think?) mentioned that it was assistance to enable the club to pay 100% of the cap, but I wouldn't have thought that we would do that through the commission as a special assistance request but through the equalisation process that is there for all clubs. It is actually intriguing to me as to what might come from this request. PJ is at pains to reinforce the message that the AFL needs MFC to be strong, we had a request last year knocked back, and I suggest that our application this year will be all the stronger as a result of the feedback we would have received from the commission. On field our list is no better (in fact it can be argued that the list has been weakened since our last request)... so yes... very interesting.

Surely if there was to be no compensation that would come out as a simple statement from the AFL, and everyone moves on. Something is about to happen you would think,... perhaps the Commission has sought some clarification on our request before announcing details? Seeking some information in regards to Frawley and Clark from the club... interesting that nothing has come out though.

... two different meetings aren't they? Club presidents are meeting, AFL Commission are the ones talking about our assistance.

Call me a hopeless optimist, but I actually am starting to think otherwise.... If it was going to be a no, I think we would have heard immediately, and the world would move on! The longer we hear nothing, the more likely that there is something to be announced that needs to be timed appropriately.

So, whilst we were made aware that this meeting was occurring today? Are we expecting an outcome or comment on this today? Given the clubs are meeting today as well, and it's only a few more hours to the Brownlow, I wonder whether things will not be disclosed until after tonight. That is unless we are getting nothing in which case it's just a simple statement to the media stating that no assistance has been granted.

Highly unlikely we will land a first round pick, although if we did, I would imagine we would be required to trade it. I suspect it's more likely that we get a pick between the first and second rounds. I think it will be interesting to see if Clark comes into factorings as well.... or whether the Commission believes that trading him is compensation enough.

To be fair... after seeing how Ziggy has handled the NBN stuff, I struggle to pay him much heed!

They had no choice but to play along with the charade of Hird coming back until the point that this decision was made, and possibly at best he might survive until the judgement is made against the 34 players... To act on Hird earlier than now would have shown the public that the EFC believed they were in trouble. They tried to bluff, but had nothing in their hand. Little sounded like he had to railroad some board members into presenting a 'united' response to taking this to court. I suspect that the outcome of this case will cause him a terrible amount of damage to his credibility, and I would imagine numerous 'vested interest' groups looking to form tickets and to cause a spill in the name of putting this in the past and attempting to salvage whatever they can from the wreckage

I can't see how even Bomber will survive. I think if someone comes in to clean the decks, all coaches, conditioning areas of the football department will struggle to survive from this.

I'd be amazed if Hird, Little or any of the board at the time all of this taking place would be there for much longer. I'd go as far to say as I don't even know if Thompson would be able to continue as coach. Best thing from here that I could see for the EFC is someone comes in to take charge, clear the decks of anyone associated with this whole affair (barring the players) and show the AFL that they are prepared to work with them and the other clubs. Offering any form of defiance from this and fighting further will not achieve anything!

If they attempt to appeal I suspect the AFL community as a whole would tear them a new one! Even Little would be stupid to attempt it. Hird on the other hand.... well....

I believe that Clark was suffering from depression. If for nothing else than to come out and say such a thing if you didn't have depression is just extremely poor taste, and it makes a mockery of the people that do suffer from depression. ... I am less inclined to believe however that this is the reason behind why he chose to retire from the club. I get a sense that there is far more to what has occurred, and that it is extremely unlikely to ever come out. A month ago, my thoughts were that Clark would be delisted. Now even though he is likely to leave the club, we get the chance to trade him out, save some salary for next year, and bring in some players that want to play for the MFC. In anyones book thats has to be seen as a positive.

I posted a while back in one of the threads on this topic as well. I would have thought that he was going to replace another of our coaches, not sure who that might be though.

Interesting... Oh I really really hope that the Adelaide Football Club have done a Brisbane and pulled the trigger thinking that they had to act on a coach only for that coach to sign with us!

we should give up now then I guess. close the door on the way out :D Edit: And this was my 1000th post, apologies all, not my best effort!