diesel

The fact contract differences were not a point of discussion in the interview is a serious flaw in the whole interview. Make no mistake it was agenda driven. Healey was jumping out of his skin to get to "tanking".

Some of the garbage coming out of the media mouths is cringeworthy. I despair at the lack of considered opinion in media today. I did a jig when MTR went under but there is a tidal wave of poor reporting and journalism continuing to pound us. Opinon presented or interpreted as fact and editorialising are perhaps the most pervasive and this is certainly the case with what McLean has said and how it has been presented and extrapolated.

After watching it all I can say is what a lightweight set-up of an interview. No hard questions of McLean on his 'principled' decision to go to Carlton or his ordinary behaviour and output as a Demon or the $100,000's less MFC offered to him against the Carlton offer. I hope we pay him back is 10k (I'd chip in), I'm embarassed for him.

Stage 1: Denial = Friday Stage 2: Anger = Monday Stage 3: Bargaining = Tuesday Stage 4: Depression = Wednesday Stage 5: Acceptance = Thursday and Saturday and Sunday I'm with PaulRB

For what reason do the AFL interview Brock, is this due to betting? As I mentioned before there are no rules on how a team prepares or performs in regard to matches so how the hell can there be any repercussions for the MFC re:draft picks, or are we just running with KB's sensationlist posing on this?

It would be great if someone from the MFC just came and spilt on the real reasons for Borcks agreed departure. Last night was all about Brock re-casting himself as unwanted at the MFC (at least on his terms?

That's just stupid, ignorant talk. There never was and never will be a rule which says you can't accumlate picks, be it by 'experimenting' or 'resting' players. Where would all this end if you opened that can of worms?

You're confused, perhaps the players were to? We were supposed to be winning games last year. The players thought Schwab was gone and Bailey was staying and they then went out and put on the Geleong display. Nice celebration of the departure of an administrator and vote of confidence in the coach? Fact is Schwab, Bailey, everyone fell for the theory that we could get a bounce through the draft but we've drafted poorly and one of the key draftees has gone. It just didn't work out, simple really. Some will hang onto it, like Sheahan, other media types, oppo clubs & supporters to bring us down a peg or pump themsleves up like Brock was trying to. To all of them I extend the middle finger. We've learnt from the experience and moved on, until the on field results turn we'll continue to be kicked. It happens to every club at the bottom of the ladder.

Roos has said he doesn't wnat to coach and our club stands for nothing, does that sound like he wants to enter an application? How the hell would you get Malthouse to replace his former, sacked assistant? Aren't we trying to build integrity around our club?

I've read that thread and the one thing it doesn't address is just what a frigging cess pool would be left if we removed another coach and who his replacement would be, therefore to suggest Neeld be removed is a totally moronic suggestion. I despair for the capacity to think clearly of those who vote in favour of his removal.

It's easy to forget that before the clean out that we were truely horrible that year and effectively handed a win we didn't neccesarily deserve, which pushed us back in the draft. WTH this is an issue only around the MFC has me miffed. Perhaps the journos are worried a Carlton supporter will try to strangle them if the mention Kreuzer or Judd?

Such hand wringing! Get a grip ppl. Clubs have been effectively tanking since they realised the importance of the draft 10 or 15 years ago. There is hardly a club that hasn't had a priority pick primarily through resting players at the end of the year when those at the top of the ladder were giving their best players jabs to get them through. Then there are the other forms of sanctioned cheating, the father son picks, priority zones, expanded salary caps. Roos club was/is the beneficiary of two of these. It's true that Melbourne have stuffed it up (the draft picks) but guess what? We would be worse off without them. Roos can bang on all he likes about the MFC not standing for anything because we stand for the MFC whereas the club he deserted is dead and buried.

I always thought Nath would look a better player with better players around him but he's obviously decided not to wait. He is nearly as goos outside as he is inside as well and is covering the ground beautifully, something which I wouldn't have thought would happen a few years ago! His win in the B & F should be the clearest in the last 10 years (if not longer) at this club.

I am judging this bloke solo, not against others and not just on yesterdays game, don't assume otherwise. After what we've been through this year I am seriously pi55ed at the lot and he's not the only one on thin ice (where do I start?). If we're going to make comparisons though why not Jones, why don't you compare Col with him? Came to the club years after Col, had less talent IMO but is twice to three times as good now? I've heard all the Col Sylvia platitudes thanks, can do this, can do that, save your breath. I was at the game as well, no idea what bay I was in but what is the relevance? Colin was anonymous yesterday until the game was effectively over. Like you he's probably quite happy with the fact he kicked a few goals from his 12 touches though. Maybe at the end of the year the percentage will keep us above GC or GWS, what a legend!

Great post.

Enough is enough for me on Col. All icing and no cake. He will never rise above where he is at now. I thought Neeld would be the one to snap him out of his lethargy but clearly not. He'll look good in a good side but just stands out as a down hill skier at the MFC, and we can't afford passengers.

I remember Richmond having a lot of Lefies in their side in the 90's, didn't help them! Their is some validity to this argument though, I learnt to kick with both feet and found my short passing was a lot better with the left, I'm convinced it' bio-mechanical? It should be the aim of every single elite footballer to be as good or at least nearly as good on their non-preferred. The value was in was in evidence last week when a couple of our blokes got tackled or had kicks spoiled because they wanted their preferred side.

This is probably the most used expression/thought on this forum, right behind "don't like Scully threads? Don't open them!"

They've only been in the comp 5 minutes. Get back to me when they've notched 150 years and we can compare worst, best, etc. but I'm tipping by then they'll have gone the way of University.

Leave it up to a jury then! It's hard to believe he could be found guilty though based on the contradictory evidence in this hearing and circumstances of the incident? In any case as I understand it the outcome of this commital hearing and a trial later will be irrelevant because of 'payback'. It's a shitful situation and there's is no likely resolution.

Whoever came up with the idea of putting him in their ad should get the rrrr's. Brand poison IMO.

How about if he's found guilty and didn't do it? How about if he's found not guilty but did? The fact is that this is a mess and I doubt we'll get to the truth, looking at the parties involved, the alcohol involved, the likely contrasting and conflicting versions of events!

Buckley got 1 week. Would expect that will be used at the precedent. Have to say I have no idea of the incident and haven't heard it mentioned elsewhere. Silly thing to do, if he's done it?

What would the award for damages comprise? 4 hour lunch at Flower Drum?

That's pretty unfair DC. Well known that certain posters on 'ology had either multiple accounts or multile personalties. Replying to oneself in these cases should acceptable!