The heart beats true

I would imagine that not playing like the worst team we've fielded in the last 20 years would probably help both causes.

That's a very good description of his skill set rpfc.

You'd be even more confused if you've seen much of Cook playing at Casey. Looooong way to go.

Just saw that a reporter from the Hun wrote an article today suggesting that Kevin Sheedy will lose against GC Suns to ensure they get first pick in the draft. The club president issued a press release within hours saying what an insult it was to the club and coach. Meanwhile a former player accuses us of deliberately trying to lose and we do nothing. Neeld told the players on the weekend that it's time that this club stood for something. I wish those further up the chain agreed.

That article draws a parallel that simply doesn't exist in it's very first sentence.... 'FORMER Melbourne ruckman Paul Johnson has added weight to Brock McLean's claims of tanking in 2009, saying player development, rather than winning, was the priority under former coach Dean Bailey.' Choosing Player Development over winning does not equal tanking. Otherwise we could be accused of tanking in 2012 by picking Neeld as coach and changing our game plan.

I get your anger regarding the situation Pipefitter, but you can't side with Mclean on this. He went to play for the team that wrote the handbook on tanking.

This is absurd. If we got beaten by 10 goals I can understand the hand wringing but if ANYTHING had happened differently in that match we would have won it. It's no like we kicked the ball to Jordan McMahon deliberately, it's not like he was a certainty to kick it, and in fact the siren blew before he marked it and it shouldn't have been allowed! On one hand the media think we are irrelevant idiots, and on the other we are brilliant masterminds of the most complex rig in the history of sport. Which one is it?

Johnson certainly doesn't call it tanking. His story is very similar to what we are doing now. Nathan Brown is a paid media commentator. His account of this can't be seen as being very relevant in light of that. He has nothing to lose and everything to gain by placing himself in the centre of this (when really it has nothing to do with him and he can offer no insight that anyone that watches that game on TV can't see).

It's a slow news week is all. The talk before this came up was that the season is too long and that it's getting boring. This is a manufactured story being pushed by a group of people who rely on there being something to write about. If Scott Thompson had to face the tribunal then this would have been much less of an issue. Hopefully the AFL's investigation will take 5-6 weeks. This will take us to mid September when there is much bigger footy stories. Hopefully between now and then a couple of players hit there 3rd drug strike and Wayne Carey and Ricky Nixon stay busy and this will all be forgotten about.

Our general crapness actually works in our favor. Surely it proves a history of being non-competitive. You only have to point to this year and see that players are playing out of position. This year everyone knows it's because we don't have the cattle. In retrospect it looks odd but at the time of the accusations we were a struggling team just doing what we needed to do to get a better understanding of our list. If we get hung out to dry for this then it's going to start an all out war. Carlton, Collingwood, Hawthorn and WCE are all implicated. Last time I checked most of those clubs are at the other end of ladder to us. The only thing that can happen is that the AFL provide an amnesty and put in place a more severe deterrent. But I agree. If they come for us and us alone on this then it stinks of hypocrisy and they will have a MFC lead riot to contend with. Pitchforks and Blazers at dawn!

I think we can all agree we've proven this to be true over the last few years.

What happens if we lose? Half of D'Land gets what they want - an opportunity to kick the [censored] out of the coach, the players, the administration and anyone else that might be in the vicinity. If we win? They just wait a week for another opportunity to kick us.

I reckon Brock will clarify that he didn't like playing out of position and in a team that was experimenting and the AFL will accept it and move on. They look like morons if this goes further as they've already done an investigation. The good thing is that it's in the AFL's best interest for this to go away.

Depends whose telling the story Daisycutter

This makes it sound like something from the Hangover. Does it involve a donkey and Richard Gere's hamster?

If thats how you feel then please stop following the MFC. That way you won't get to bask in the glory of Watts, Howe, Clark, Jones, Trengove, Grimes, McDonald, Blease, Viney, Frawley et al.

Not wanting to get off topic but it's a lot easier to play in a midfield with a hard working Brownlow medallist, Scott Pendlebury and Dale Thomas (and 2+ other quality 100 game players) than to play alongside Nathan Jones and the latest from Casey. Let's not turn every thread into an excuse to kick our future shall we.

The facts: 1. Brock did appear to try and recast himself as harshly dealt by the club and leaving for cultural reasons (tanking). In the light of day this has been proven to be untrue, simply because he left for Carlton. 2. The On The Couch team tried to establish Brock as a real clubman by talking up his $10,000 contribution to the debt demolition. Posters here have pointed out that there is an allegation that this was his way of 'paying' a club sanctioned fine in a media friendly way. Still need confirmation, but it doesn't look good for Brock. 3. We tanked. You can call it whatever you want but we did. The issue for me isn't that we did it, because the system encouraged it. The issue is the residue this left on our culture combined with the handling of other issues (Jnr., 186). Brock is no angel and we did the wrong thing in hindsight. The only thing we can do is try and move forward with a cleaner slate. A lot of the players are gone/going so for mine that only leaves those further up the chain. They should be replaced so this can be put to bed and we can all move on.

Bit early for Sammy Blease BH. Has just started playing consistently this year (which is still not true of Strauss and Gys). If he was surrounded by better players to learn from he could be anything. Think about how everyone kicked Lewis Jetta for a few years and now look at him.

He has no contract at Carlton and I thought the interview would focus more on that but they really blew over it.

No, it's a by product, and again your not actually making an argument that says what he said was incorrect. All your doing is saying 'why is he even on?'. I'd argue that the 30+ posts on this site alone in the last 45 minutes prove that the story is relevant and you can stick your head in the sand as long as you want but the problems not going away.

Did you watch the game on the weekend? He kicked the winning goal. He's on because he's an interesting story about how football styles come in and out of fashion. Stop trying to distract from the fact that what he said was right and what the club did has left us in a poor position in terms of culture and pride.

Brock placed the blame very high up the chain. He laid blame on the same people who put the folks in place that we just got rid of last year for the new round of people that are struggling. Makes you wonder when everyone will start looking at those at the top doesn't it?

I would guess 'administration'. You know, the ones that the players felt were too involved in the football department before 186 last year.

Thought the irony of going to Carlton was rich, but I do think it points the bone fairly at the club's administration as Brock made it clear that players and coach did not agree with the policy. What goes around comes around and i think we are seeing it right now. To be honest I don't buy that it's entirely a media beat up. I think football fans are interested in it especially in light of our ongoing lack of competitiveness.