rjay

It will

Corcoran...say no more.

I think the decision to appoint him from the start was the problem 'old dee', 186 only proved in my mind that my thinking was correct. There is no doubt Jimmy should have stood down when diagnosed with his illness, his decision to ask Lyon into the club to help out really was not his to make. There was a board in place and that board needed to take the action needed and if they didn't have the expertise and if the head of the board (Jimmy) was in no shape then they needed to appoint the right person. This is a professional (supposed to be) organisation, what other professional organisations does anyone know of who bring in an unqualified mate to help out.

McVeigh made a little slip about the other one, so he reckons Zaharakis and another he wouldn't name....interesting about the don't like needles line, heard Scott Lucas trotting out the same. Can't even trust that to be true unfortunately.

He should not have been offered the Vice Presidency at all, he needs to be kept out of the board room full stop.

Unfortunately he was pretty right.

So the question is, why was the previous CEO's (CS) tenure extended twice? and are there any still on the board that supported his extension? ...if so please go now. Looks like it was a free for all at the MFC.

Always worth a try.

Then the question in the thread comes into play and the follow up question, is Melbourne better off with a standalone VFL team?

Priority pick means first pick to me.

I understand the injury argument and this may well be right, I would hope it is but someone had posted that Neeld saw him as a forward. Of course this may be off the mark. He seems to be up and running now so hopefully will get a bit more time in the middle. I think he has a lot of ability and we are crying out for players who can play mid and who are good kicks, he ticks both these boxes.

I find it funny that Stockdale's main issue is governance when his mob tipped out elected council officials and put in administrators. Good or bad thing I'm not going to argue but the government at the time thought the councils where unable to run themselves. Same now. The AFL believes, with good reason that the MFC hasn't been able to run itself properly. The record would show they are correct, I'm not sure many would disagree. Forget it Alan, the people don't seem to be with you on this one.

No, never said it was. I would like to see Taggert spend more time in the centre square though. I know Neeld was pushing him as a forward, I think he had it wrong.

I'm not sure it's about sharing a load but at times it looks as though preference is given to Couch, Magner and Roden to take these midfield positions when maybe it would be better for the club to develop some of the younger players. Now there could be a number of reasons for this, some to do with injury and development and others to do with just winning games of football. Personally, form the outside looking in I think a few of our younger players would benefit from more midfield time.

He hasn't shown that he can 'Adam' and it's hardly a wake up call when he is being shopped around by his manager for more cash.

He hasn't shown that he has, more like he has self interest at heart.

Small forward are a waste of time, he's no good to us unless he can run through the middle. LeCras kicking has also bee off a bit this year 'stuie', but he is still streets ahead of Betts as a player. Much more flexibility.

...and I'll say again. A fly in the ointment. No Way Alan.

There is definitely a need for Taggert to play mid to develop, when he plays there he plays well and his disposal into the forward line is far superior to the senior players who have been clogging places in both VFL and AFL. When Kent goes back he needs to build his work rate as a mid in the VFL and not a forward, Tapscott the same, they need to get the footy. At least they've started running Tynan up the ground a bit. It's good to have the likes of Magner but not with Couch and Roden in as well taking the midfield spots. Have them rotate through with one or two of the younger players in there with them. I'm not sure what experience they give to the younger players anyway as they have really not achieved much at the higher level but at this level they play some good footy and help balance the team I guess.

That's what I've been trying to get across to people here for ages now, Hawthorn and Geelong are the same. It's no wonder they are the top 3 sides in the AFL.

I agree with this thought, a true small forward is worth jack... Apart from your back 3, pretty much everyone else is a mid these days. The Milne/Betts type small forward offers nothing.

I think you are not reading me right 'PJ', the talk of docklands was the smoke and mirrors I'm talking about when the club was struggling on field. The AMMI set up has been a good move.

Think it's a good job for Tommy Mc.

Yep,agree. I think we might have a few other things to focus on at the moment. It's not like we are back at the Junction oval. This kind of thing was part of the previous admins smoke and mirrors approach.

I'm not as sure 'Ron', I get the feeling it's all about 'Choco' and that's no the right way to build a culture. I do worry about how he exited PA and GWS. Of course I might be way off the mark. Eade left Sydney a better place and even though the Dogs have gone down there is still a strong senior culture that is leading the way forward at that club.