Hannabal

And that's what he's got - excellent footskills. He's an elite kick. Btw, did anybody see Gibbs absolutely torch the footy by foot today ?

I'm still not with you. It's pretty obvious Petterd and Cheney aren't competing for the same spot - and yes you say "I didn't say they were". You may have an obscure viewpoint I'm yet to understand.

They weren't competing for the same position. Cheney was usurped by Whelan not Petterd.

Why wouldn't you compare them ? They were both first round picks in the same draft, so right from the outset it's a reasonable proposition. The conclusion people come to may cause reason to raise eyebrows, but not the comparison itself. Value and output can be determined with all players, especially when measured against cost, ie the pick used. Follow ? As an aside, what did you expect from a 19 year old 193cm utility a third of the way through his second season ? Has he exceeded your expectations or failed to live up to them ? Naturally when these players were chosen they weren't chosen with year 2 in mind, otherwise Rhys Palmer would have been pick 1. They were chosen for what they will deliver in years 4/5 years plus. They were chosen for what they would do between the ages of 22-30. We all know that you think he'll never adequately fill into his frame, which will inhibit his progress. You don't believe that he can pack on the required weight. So scrub that question. Your view on him in his second year isn't worthy of consideration. I hope footy savvy supporters aren't reading this.

Flower Schwarz Stynes Lyon Neitz Apologies to Greg Wells, A. Johnson, Alves, Viney, B. Lovett, Fowler, Farmer, ... In reality, the above players highlight what a barren period it's been for the MFC. Not many 'stars' there.

Ditto. Stynes and Co are doing a great job. In fact it's beyond my expectations.

Great retort. And I don't have a "close association with former Board members".

Yes...

You had a question embedded in that garbage ? But as you're attention seeking I'll highlight our differences: You are so tarnished by bias that any decent points you might make become almost irrelevant to many posters. We hadn't heard your opinion of the current Board since you were giving sole credit to a supporter for getting Kaspersky as a major sponsor. In fact you found it comical and mocked the administration. You conveniently overlooked the comments from Kaspersky's AsiaPac CEO that Stynes' impressive youth work and social vision outlined at their meeting made them decide that the MFC would be a valued and ideal partner. You comment on every miniscule political detail when it suits you, yet overlooked the Betezy sponsorhip that followed. You also failed to comment when the announcement was made that we'd become a section of the MCC. You're glued to political threads when you think there's an ounce of mileage - much like this thread, but predictably become morbidly silent at the hint of good news. You're a grubby political mendicant mired in deceit by your unwillingness to admit your allegiances. You're a stale remnant of the unstable past, a Board junkie, a suckhole - probably started out as a coterie member, but thankfully your stench is being neutralised by the small steady incremental steps the club has collectively taken. I know you have trouble with the spelling, but most here believe we're heading for a sustained period of success on and off the field. But I doubt you'll ever enjoy it. It's a pity that you're using this thread to attention seek and target Stynes under the guise of supporting Mick Coglin. The thread probably would have run its race by now if not for you. I'm sure Mick's wrapped to have you as his spokesperson perpetuating the rift whilst massaging your own ego. Some mate.

Don't think that I'm an apologist for the previous Board - I'm not. I can however distinguish between issues and judge them on their merits. If you want to start a thread about the performance of the previous Board then do so. This thread is about Jim's foot in mouth grandstanding gone wrong.

Do I really need to point out the bleeding obvious ? I'm referring to the MFC's initiatives of inclusion when it comes to women. That's it. Nothing more. Just that one point. Which is the topical point that caused this circus. Jim's point. Kapeesh ?

Those that know Stynes don't think that he's above a bit of grand standing or chest beating. What better way to highlight your achievements than make the place look ordinary when you arrived ? I support Coglin and his decision not to allow Stynes to misrepresent the whole club - not just the previous Board. I think Mick was probably a tad over sensitive, but if he felt so aggrieved at the untruth that was publicly paraded, especially when the opposite is true, then I can understand his sentiments and admire his personal values. I'm led to believe that a couple of other Board members were dismissive of Coglin's concerns. I'm not suggesting that he needed placating, but their attitude may have strengthened his resolve. I suspect Coglin went to the paper as he believed it to be the only way he could rectify mistruths sprouted about the club he loves. No public retraction was going to be forthcoming from Stynes. And he did so in the full knowledge that it would hurt him personally. I believe that he pulled the wrong rein, but that doesn't mean I'm right. At the end of the day he got his point across and in my opinion the issue hasn't damaged the MFC. Perhaps he achieved what he set out to do. One thing I do know is that Mick Coglin only has the club's best interests at heart.

I agree that Maric has better skills and I'm a Maric fan. I heard Jetta played well yesterday. Were you there ?

I thought the Bulldogs supporters were more to blame. Ours may not have been wonderful, but their turnout was pathetic.

I agree. I like Maric, but I see him and Jetta rotating for the time being and I reckon Jetta is ready for another shot and Maric is the one to make way.

Thanks.

What do you put Watts lacklustre performance down to ? The style of game, inexperience, position he played, tiredness, or just one of those days ?

I think you and Coglin are making a mountain out of a molehill, but he may well have some argument if Stynes' speech was clumsy and misrepresented the previous Board. You're just using the issue to peddle your personal bias. I replied to Enforcer because I like Michael Coglin very much and wanted to state that I don't believe that he's egocentric, or a hothead, as asserted.

An accusation of not being inclusive doesn't equal "hostile". Also, your assertion that the Cronulla players are "pack rapists" is ridiculously over emotive and inaccurate in my opinion.

Having spoken with Michael Coglin on many occasions at the footy watching Sandy, and at Casey, I can assure you that he's anything but the description you use. He was obviously personally aggrieved by Jim's speech, which was probably clumsy, and felt the need to correct a couple of observations. If anyone is egocentric it's Stynes. That said, in the scheme of things relating to the MFC it's a minor diversion. But it won't stop some peddling personal agendas. It will only encourage them. Thankfully, most see their jaundiced views for what they are.

In: Bennell, Jetta, Green Out: Dunn, Petterd, Maric

Factionalised ? Noooo. I won't have it. Surely not. There'd be nobody that has already posted in this thread that would be factionalised, or have an axe to grind. (Where's that Yze Magic photo of a storm in a teacup when you need it.)

You obviously weren't at the game.

Eagleton was switched on to Morton and helped nullify his influence whilst winning his own ball. Both players have an attacking mindset and Eagleton was the forward, so he wasn't going to play the Cameron Ling style shut down role, but force Morton to spaces that would limit his influence and make him as accountable as possible. Come and stand at the footy with me next week and I'll give you a few pointers.

Yeah and had Murphy not got injured and Higgins played they would have. Silly comment.