Hannabal

I understand. Morabito and Trengove look terrific. It would be interesting to know who would be chosen first out of Lucas and Morabito from the WA clubs. Morabito's upside is enormous and the kicking concerns are exagerated imo - albeit from very limited viewing.

I've seen Scully quite a few times over the last 12 months and he'll be a star. You're welcome to disagree. And as you know, Rich and Selwood were both considered top 2 quite a way out from their respective drafts. Selwood slid due to missing the champs with his injury. I just don't reckon they're great examples, more anomolies than anything.

So he's no longer at 5 in your rankings ?

Mate, you have no clue as to how good Scully is. Some junior watches say that he's certainly in Judd's league. Stars come into the game and stars leave the game. Other than Franklin who's the last star KPP ? Brown and Riewoldt are the last and they were drafted nearly ten years ago. The competition is due for another one and Watts will be the man. And the competition is due for the next Judd or Ablett. We haven't had a star mid come into the club for 30 years, Bobby. That's 30 years, Bobby. It's not as easy to get a star as you seem to think. And Scully will be a star. We have the chance to pick up two stars, Bobby. Two.

I voted Trengove. I really really like Morabito, but just feel that Trengove is the safer option. I'll be pretty happy either way. And if Prendergast likes Butcher, then that's fine too. I salivate over a Scully, Trengove, Grimes, and Blease midfield in 3-4 years. The first two would arguably be our best mids come round 1 next year. No joke. Here's some more info on Trengove: http://www.contestedfooty.com/2009/07/jack...2009-draft.html But I really like Morabito.

Dean Bailey is a smart man.

Under Bailey's stewardship we've won 6 of 40 games at a success rate of 15%, but some think that we'll win 50% of our remaining games even though we're clearly trying to lose and have a lengthy injury list. Yeah right. Come on down Tom.

You said Carlton were far more obvious. I don't agree. I think Bailey just won the gold medal.

Yeah, at the start of the last quarter when your team is in front then you'd make the moves he made. Sure.

You reckon ? They must have been good, because yesterday was the greatest display of tanking I've ever seen. It was so blatant it was extraordinary. I couldn't go to the game as I had my Boy in a Lightning Premiership in East Bentleigh, so I watched the second half live on TV. When Petterd kicked the running goal in the last you could almost see the disappointment on Bailey's face. I felt the same way. And when he left the box with 20 seconds to go no-one looked happy in there. Warnock, Frawley and Bartram as forwards in the last when we're up at 3/4 time. Johnson in the backline on Brown. Jones resting on a forward flank. Miller in the ruck. Newton up on the wing. Grimes sent to the bench when he was blitzing. Etc, etc. EDIT: also letting their best midfielder in Cousins (their best player last week) run free. If Carlton were far more obvious in 07 I take my hat off to them.

I'm not a fan, but can't believe the comments on here. I feel like I'm on Bay 13.

You should vote a). I can [censored] further than you because I have a bigger doodle.

I laughed. Well, kind of. Only seven more days to worry about winning.

So with what part might a club member disagree ? Btw, I used the words "sole" and "club" deliberately. And I gave option C for a reason.

You've had about 6 pages to make that point, but predictably you just agree with someone else when it's made. As you know, I had trouble getting the poll up because having not done one before I wasn't filling in mandatory spaces - I thought they were options because it's not made clear. For the sake of any ambiguity, not that there'd be much whichever way you look at it, take the thread topic as the question. Choice a) clearly confirms this assertion. I don't think too many people have had trouble understanding what's been asked. Pedants trying to make a 'point' might. And Jack. I get your "point" and clearly disagree. Do you get anyone elses point ? Have you read all the "points" ? Afterall, more people have voted with the "point" that represents my view than any other.

I don't agree. It doesn't validate anything. It's just an opinion. And almost half the poll say otherwise. It's as silly as me saying "if members of the club have voted yes it must be true". It's not something the members have to offically vote on. As you know, my assertion is "The Melbourne Football Club exists solely to win the annual competition it's entered since the nineteenth century. By-products and worthwhile community projects culminate from that very participation, but it's the essence of competing for the flag that is at the core of the very existence of the club and nothing should compromise its quest to win the flag within the fair and legal guidelines set before it by the governing body - the AFL." Explain why a club member would have issues with the statement, Dan ?

I told you I'm a member. Why ?

I don't buy the members argument being thrust around - it's a turkey. I'm a member too, but only as a donation. I don't need a membership to see games, which I assume is the main reason people buy one. Functions, etc are great, but they're only a by-product of having a club competing in the AFL. You're saying that a "statement" is wrong because some [censored] becomes a member of a 150 year old club in 2009 and says in a whiny voice "a flag isn't that important, I just love seeing my team play". Get real. Every club in the AFL exists in that competition to win it. And they realise that anything less is unsuccessful.

Firstly Dan, you make a blanket statement about a blanket statement ? Alanis Morrisset wrote a song about that. Secondly, a question can't be "flawed". It's a question. And there were 3 options given which has enabled a healthy response. Thirdly; to a degree your last observation has some merit, but it's not quite right. If someone believes that 'list management' is cheating and it goes against their principles to embrace such a philosophy then I have no qualms, I mean how could I ? However, some supporters want to win meaningless games that will inhibit our future and this got me thinking "is a flag a be all and end all to some supporters". And as time went on I sensed that a flag was not the highest priority to all supporters. At first I was staggered, but I wasn't completely sure that I was reading the mood correctly, hence the poll. So, it's not so much an issue of 'list management'; and I think there are different interpretations as to what that means, but more whether supporters understood that ending on 5 wins instead of 4 would greatly impact on the club adversely. Do you see the difference ? One can want to win less than 5, but at the same time be against tanking. Are you with me ?

They'd rightly have 100 objectives. So no, their sole objective would not be to win a flag and nor should it be. The MFC as an entity soley exists to win premierships in the competition in which it is a participant - the AFL. You can keep trying to turn things anyway you like, but try responding to the hundreds of words I've written in this thread, even on this page. Just scroll up a bit. Tell me what you disagree with, but be sure to use quotes. As for Board objectives, start a new thread. The governance of the MFC is a different topic to why it exists.

We can all sight memories; I did a few posts back. A football club in a competition must have a defined agenda. It's great to go on a journey, but I want a clear and absolute destination, otherwise I wouldn't have made that first step down the path. A journey without a stated destination might be fun, but it's a roadmap to nowhere. Whispering, like others, misses the point. None of the love that you all have, none of the fond memories you enjoy, and none of the history you embrace would have happened without this club each year competing to win a premiership. It can't win every year, but the sole purpose for being in that competition is victory. To allow your expectations to be lowered is to not fully understand why the club competes. You all embrace the history and understand the significance of the premierships, but in the same breath argue that it's not the be all and end all. The MFC is defined by its history and past success. Liam Jurrah's story thus far is an amazing one. The Pink Lady initiative, etc, are fantastic. But none of this happens without the participation of this club in a cut-throat competition. Unfortunately, our place in that competition seems to escape many of you.

Who are going to be in our top 6 players next year ? It will be interesting. A teams number of wins and ladder postion is nearly always predicated by the quality of their top 6 when compared with the rest of the competition's. I think you're very ambitious with your prediction.

It was a rhetorical question You've long ago removed any doubt as to who's the idiot.

You misrepresent me by telling me that I "admit" things when I haven't. You incorrectly insinuated I'd changed my position from 'sole reason for a club existing' to "core" reason, which naturally I had to correct; so you then conclude that I'm possibly being to macho to admit I got it wrong. No, you need to improve your comprehension skills. You've been disingenouos. There's no hyperbole in my views. I believe every word and created a poll with very fair options. And I note that you haven't responded to my last post, but are merely deflecting your own inaccuracies. This thread isn't about tanking, but I note that some are trying to twist it down that path. I repeat, I want the club to win the flag under the guideline set out by the AFL - which shouldn't need to be stated it's that obvious. Carlton were deemed to have won the flag in '95 fairly and squarely whether one thinks they did or didn't. If they didn't the AFL can/would strip them of it. To make it clear and to help stop your drammatical sighing: "The Melbourne Football Club exists solely to win the annual competition it's entered since the nineteenth century. By-products and worthwhile community projects culminate from that very participation, but it's the essence of competing for the flag that is at the core of the very existence of the club and nothing should compromise its quest to win the flag within the fair and legal guidelines set before it by the governing body - the AFL."

One of the crucial aspects in their search for a premiership will be whether their top 6 becomes top 4 material once Fletcher and Lloyd depart. You need stars to win a flag. They may or may not develop top end elite players.