michael collins

Well you're right about the first bit - a point well made. I see Adam Goodes apparently didn't realise the age of the girl concerned, which is fair enough given the speed with which everything happened. And he was indeed most understanding in his later remarks. For the second part, no, I wasn't suggesting that at all. I admit my limited understanding of this subject, and I have found your advice instructive, if somewhat harsh. I will study the matter further, but it was decent of you to go to so much trouble over your explanations.

I only found out about the term being particularly offensive to indigenous people recently. I just assumed it was ordinary rudeness. I was trying to explain that it is the intent of the user which makes the term racist and demeaning, and in some circumstances criminal. But the criminality depends on the intent - it is quite a complex situation. And Michael Collins believed in fair treatment for everyone, not just a particular group

I never thought I'd stick up for Collingwood supporters, and it may never happen again, but I will here. I don't think I'm racist - maybe we all are to some extent, I haven't thought about it much. I have thought about what's fair. Calling someone a monkey, a baboon, a chimp, is a common childish insult. Our Prime Minister is frequently referred to as a "ranga" (orang-utan). This might be rude, but it is not necessarily racist. If it is said to imply that indigenous people are more ape-like than others, it is racist. But you'd need a lawyer to work that out. Not the AFL. If Adam Goodes feelings are hurt, what more proof of racism do we need? I can't understand why the kid wasn't locked up immediately. Why bother with a trial or a fair hearing? Two hours of questioning by police is more than criminals are subjected to for some major crimes. Generally our society looks after the welfare of children, and I think this approach should be required of indigenous players as well, even if they are famous. As for the bloke in the crowd, I heard a news report saying police were looking for him. Are Victoria Police now agents of Andrew D and the AFL? Are they arbiters of social policy? What was his crime? If I understood correctly, because his words seemed a bit slurred, he was addressing the umpire(s) and accusing them of racial discrimination. Was that his crime? or was it the suggestion that Adam Goodes was black? Neither seems remotely criminal. He suggested that because it was the indigenous round, the umpires were giving a disproportionate share of the free kicks to an indigenous player. I may or may not have agreed, but I don't see that its racist to raise the question. Sounds like they've tracked him down though, and he will be given counselling. I'm not sure what for, but its something no Collingwood supporter should be without. Its just as well Collingwood supporters can give and take a bit, or the AFL would be sending Victoria Police to find me.

Both right as I see it - if the girl got lost, or hurt or whatever, there is no doubt the AFL would be seen as responsible, and it could cost them millions. Mum (or whoever) didn't follow, but should have - or been chucked out as well because if you're a parent or guardian you are responsible for the actions of children in your care. I wasn't sure what the fuss was about initially - I thought Goodes was being a bit precious, given that Bobby Skilton is still known as the Chimp, Fitzroy were the Gorillas etc.. After a bit of research I found that the term used is particularly offensive to indigenous players, and that explains AGs reaction. But the girl said she didn't intend it to be racist, and seemed genuine enough. Until now I didn't realise it was racist either - I thought it was just ordinary abuse. So based on AGs initial reaction, the AFL takes action, and publicly humiliates a 13 year old, without giving her a chance to explain her actions? Potential legal issues here I suspect. It opens a can of worms. Harry O'Brien's admitted remarks were uncouth, and may have upset the player he spoke to. Should he be reported for that? Calling an umpire a "white maggot" - assuming he is Caucasian - could also be interpreted as racist, and I'm sure it hurts their feelings too. The situation is very complicated, when you have to consider a player's ethnic (and presumably cultural, religious, and physiological) status before deciding what terms can be used to deride his performance. I don't think racist abuse should be allowed. For that matter I don't think obscenity has any place at the football, but the AFL seems to care about one much more than the other. Perhaps the AFL could provide a list of accepted abusive terms which will not cause any offence to players, officials or other supporters?

This thread really unravelled, but there was some useful advice, which I appreciate. I followed this up, and there have been three Board members posting in recent times. They posted under their full names, which makes them official in a way, and maybe the Club could go a step beyond sort of semi-official post and answer selected topics officially. So clearly the Board, or at least some of them, do read the posts here, or at least some of them, as Dj said. They might be surprised by the language and attitude, but what shows through is the posters' passionate support for MFC. There were a couple of good one-liners there - the 00 one was a ripper.

I've been thinking about this for a while - its complicated, but I reckon it can be done, and that both the Club and the supporters could benefit from it. From about 2011 I started to think that the Club answers what it wants to, not what the members want to know. Firstly, MFC should recognise that the supporters are a vital part of the Club - not as obvious as the players, but you can't have one without the other - and accept that the Club needs to look after supporters as much as it does the players. Then, think for yourselves how well the MFC communicates with supporters. They tell supporters the news as they see it, but looking through the threads, the big questions are rarely addressed in Club handouts. The Club has an interactive chat session for about 40 minutes a week, but this format doesn't allow complex questions and answers. I know the MFC can't publicly release details of salaries, players personal details etc, but there is stuff they could release. If a player is injured, post the details. If a player is sent back to Casey or picked for the seniors, tell us why. What has PJ been doing - not specifics, but some big picture stuff wouldn't hurt. Where does the Board expect the Club to be next year? What are the players doing at training? Some of these questions, and I'm sure many more, could be answered without giving away secrets. When suggestions are made like a joint MFC-Melb Storm membership, or using the royal blue jumper as a clash strip, what does the Board think? How does the MFC vote on the issues affecting the AFL? I am not suggesting that they should answer all these, or that they should publicly address matters like the tenure of officials. But Demonland has the hard-core supporters, and to respond officially occasionally, whether as a poster or through an Administrator or whatever, would provide some interest and insight for those hard-core members. The electronic media are the way of the future, and Demonland is a real asset for the Club - direct access to thousands of people vitally interested in their product. Its nearly midnight and there's still 236 people reading Demonland. If they are that passionate, their interest deserves to be recognised.

Five years - no problem. I've waited 50 years, I can wait another five. But there need to be some changes. In most businesses, the board establishes the targets, not the factory manager. I want the board to set targets for the players and the coach. Targets that determine whether or not the individual is performing. There are so many stats kept on players, it shouldn't be too hard to establish targets for them. Make match payments performance based, as far as the salary cap allows. For coaches,there is one main performance indicator - number of wins. I want targets set - 2 wins this year, 8 wins next year, 12 wins the year after. That fits comfortably into the coaching contract. This year is gone, 8 wins next year or we replace the coach, with someone who is prepared to meet the targets set by the board, not someone who starts another rebuild. A previous poster pointed out that the Club is the players, the coach, the administration and the members. I'd include all the supporters, members or not. We need information from the Club, not platitudes. Get someone from the Club to respond to selected posts each week - let the Board and Administration show some interest in what the supporters think.

I had some idea that the Selwoods had a high count, but these figures are really alarming. A free kick in these circumstances is determined by what other players do to you - I could understand a player having a high count for frees against, if they had an ongoing bad tackling technique. But these stats imply that opposing players tackle Selwoods high and hardly ever anyone else, which is clearly ridiculous. The only other explanation is that umpires are paying a disproportionate number of frees to Selwoods, because of some technique they have developed. The technique needs to be looked at, like Murali and his doosra. I wonder if it is possible to bet on the number of frees paid to a player? Or on who gets the most frees in a game? I hope the AFL has more backbone than the ICC though.

You're right about the physical side of it - women are built differently thank God, but they aren't built to take a big hit. A hit that hurts a big bloke might kill a female. Think of the legal implications for the AFL and the Clubs. Its just not going to happen. Most girls realise this, like Daisy said, when they get to about 12. But a national womens' competition is a great idea, and fittingly, Melbourne is there at the beginning.

This might be exactly what he was asked to do - wouldn't be at all surprised. I'm not saying we should expect better results. I am saying I think its fair that we are told what task he was set, and what results we should expect, in what timeframe. I don't expect confidential or personal information, but there is nothing but platitudes coming out of the club at the moment. If we were told two wins this season, 8 next season, finals the year after - I could live with it. But we may be told, after this year, that we have to start again, under a new coach, who will say "we have to rebuild - be patient - everything is on track". There's just no way for supporters to assess how things are going, unless the club lets a bit more information out.

So he thinks he was asked to demolish the club? Seriously though, he may be right, but it would truly help if he could tell the supporters what he is doing and what the timeframe is - what his targets are etc. Otherwise, at the end of this year, whatever happens, he can still say "everything is on track" and there's no way to judge the truth of it.

Come on everyone, give them a fair go. The MFC has lots of female supporters, and this might add some interest for them. I'll be interested to see what the standard is. A national competition has worked for women's cricket so far. I know winning is important, and the top priority is getting the blokes competitive, but that doesn't mean we have to forget everything else. This is a big day in football history, and I'm delighted Melbourne is involved. And there's a 50-50 chance we'll win.

PM24 has produced a couple of insightful paragraphs here, and the depth of other posters passion for the MFC comes through loud and clear. I admit I don't have the same knowledge of the Club and the player careers and performances, but I would like to add that the Club is bigger than the Board and the players, and that the members and supporters are an important part of it. The Club has told the members nothing, other than the same platitudes which are wheeled out for media conferences. I accept that we have to keep MN for financial reasons, but the jury is still out on his rebuild, because we just don't know enough. How long is the rebuild supposed to take? (because players have a limited career) What are the signs of progress in the rebuild? When can we expect to field a competitive team? The pain would be so much more bearable if we were given some information. Let Peter Jackson or someone with a little credibility log in to Demonland each week, pick some of the questions and provide answers. We don't need secret or personal information, just answers to some basic questions like "Do the players have access to a sports psychologist?" "Do we really have a game plan?" "How long do we expect the club to be rebuilding?"

What a great thread - really interesting reading. I learned to hate Collingwood before I barracked for Melbourne - my grandfather would be in a rage if they lost - nobody dared speak until about Tuesday, and I hated Collingwood for how they made people behave and how blind and ugly their supporters were. Still do. I started supporting Melbourne in 62 or 63, probably 62. Melbourne were very much the toffs, and we were fairly poor, and I guess I saw the MFC and MCC as having everything you could ever want. I eventually got the RDB boots, and I remember him on TV explaining how to tie your boots with the laces at the side. As the club's fortunes faded, you are sort of committed - changing clubs is like changing religions - almost impossible. But there was still some pride in being a Melbourne supporter. MCC membership wasn't going to happen, I'd be a fish out of water, but the club still stood for something. It had a stable administration, didn't change coaches every season, didn't have players getting into strife - it was a club you were proud to be a member of, even if it wasn't winning. Melbourne had doctors and lawyers playing as well as plumbers. I think RDB insisted everyone had a job or was studying. The club inspired loyalty. I had a mate who was a Collingwood supporter - he used to go to Melbourne games with me to watch Robert Flower play. I used to admire Melbourne players at the Brownlow count - set up each time to be beaten by a vote or two on the last call. Never anything but sportsmanship shown. I remeber the Galahs tour. One strange aspect of Gaelic football is that instead of bouncing, you are allowed to kick the ball to yourself as you run. Easy when you grow up with it. But to see Robert Flower run flat out down what passes for the wing there, toe-tapping the ball like he'd been born to Gaelic football, was just awesome. I saw David Schwattz, in a hard-fought Melbourne-Hawthorn game, pick a flattened Shane Crawford up by the jumper (in one hand mind you) and set him on his feet, grinning with the fun of playing football. He seemed then to be the spirit of sportsmanship, and of how Melbourne played the game. I think of the characters who've come and gone - Stan Alves, Stretch, Glen Swan with his 8 goal game, spalding. Parke, Dillon, Diamond Jim, Darren Bennett, Alan Johnson., Tassie Johnson (we could use him now - geez he could do a drop kick) David Schwartz Big Jim RIP, Big Max - only 6'2" I think but rucked his heart out. they are almost like family. A good friend of mine fell off the perch a couple of years ago - as they wheeled him out of the church they played the "Grand Old Flag" and the whole church clapped in time - the Melbourne supporters sang. .What a send-off. It bothers me now that those club traditions are rocky - the administration is shaky, the coaching is unstable, the players' loyalty is wavering. I know its a business now, but for me, if Melbourne fold or merge, I'm gone. I'd rather see Melbourne playing in the SE Suburban League than in Darwin or Tassie.

If Col is to be believed, their fitness and training are up to scratch, the game plan is OK, they just can't put it together on match days. That suggests a sports psychologist might be of some help. I don't know if MFC have one on their list, but I know some clubs do. In fact, just listening to him, and guessing that other players are feeling much the same, I reckon a sports psychologist really is needed in the interests of their welfare, never mind about winning or losing. I know the Coaches Association said they were supporting Mark Neeld, but I see it as a club issue, particularly for the players. Maybe the club has looked at this, but I can't recall seeing any mention of it.