Mal Michael PSD ?

[Shane Hird]

Your typing skills are second to none, Nobby. Your enthusiasm is infectious, buddy!! Got me salivating over the VHS you mentioned on the other thread by the way

have to work out a way to get a copy to ya.


two finger typer.


As a piss-d Big Kev would say "I'm f-cking excited

 

[Shane Hird]

Our team for next year? looks better than this year....lots of options now


McV Fletch Welsh


NLM McPhee Big Mal


KB JJ Stanton


Scotty Gumby Johns


MJ Lloydy Monfries

Rucks-Hille,Watson,Hird

Bench- Laycock,Lovett,Dyson,Pev

Plus Paddy,Nash,Winderlich,Cole,Slattery,Dempsey,Bolton,Heff,Campo-rally

 

[Duckworth]

Our team for next year? looks better than this year....lots of options now


McV Fletch Welsh


NLM McPhee Big Mal


KB JJ Stanton


Scotty Gumby Johns


MJ Lloydy Monfries

Rucks-Hille,Watson,Hird

Bench- Laycock,Lovett,Dyson,Pev

Plus Paddy,Nash,Winderlich,Cole,Slattery,Dempsey,Bolton,Heff,Campo-rally

The enthusiasm is infectious isn't it???
That team looks much better (on paper at least) than anything we've had this year. Don't forget Lee in there either! Hopefully we can start developing some depth in our list. There are some good players you have in the emergency list that will get regular games next year.

 

[Shane Hird]

The enthusiasm is infectious isn't it???
That team looks much better (on paper at least) than anything we've had this year. Don't forget Lee in there either! Hopefully we can start developing some depth in our list. There are some good players you have in the emergency list that will get regular games next year.

Yer Lee,another one. Team looks good on paper alright. Every bomber fan has got to be a little excited i rekon

 

[Shane Hird]

Mal Micheal David rohdan what an great football club you guys are making a great future for your club sheedy at the top look out wooden spoon 2007 your club makes me sick if i had a membership i would toss it.

Hey Brock 'n' Dip Sh-t Roll, your an imbar-sole

 

[AnGuS#6]

Our team for next year? looks better than this year....lots of options now


McV Fletch Welsh


NLM McPhee Big Mal


KB JJ Stanton


Scotty Gumby Johns


MJ Lloydy Monfries

Rucks-Hille,Watson,Hird

Bench- Laycock,Lovett,Dyson,Pev

Plus Paddy,Nash,Winderlich,Cole,Slattery,Dempsey,Bolton,Heff,Campo-rally

Although Sheeds has sed Mal's gonna be the Full-Back and Fletcher will play at CHB. But Fletcher didnt rely take the biggest Forward anyway, so now he doesnt have to.

 

[RED STRIPE MAGIC]

Bottom 3 finish two years in a row... Ouch
Knowing Hirdy and Fletch will be gone in two years... double ouch

Pulling off the biggest recruitment coup of the last 5 years, simultaneously ripping off Brisbane and making Carlton look stupid?.....

PRICELESS

 

[Crave]

Hey Brock 'n' Dip Sh-t Roll, your an imbar-sole

HAHA! Love your work on the value for money thread.

 

[big bomber]

i reckon the team is more like this:

mcveigh michael welsh

NLM fletch mcphee

mj stants jj

Gumbleton lucas Jetta

lovett lloyd hird

ruck- hille davey watson

bench- campo laycock dempsey monfries

will get there during the year- ryder, hislop, houli, slattery, winders, cole, neagle, and young reimers will need time but might get 1 game or so.

personally i diont rate bradley so i purposely excluded him

now how good is that, finally we dont have to play pev, heff, bolton etc bring on 2007

 

[DaSawx]

No need to rush everyone

B: M.Johnson Michael Welsh
HB: McPhee Fletcher, Lovett-Murray
C: Bradley Stanton McVeigh
HF: Hird Lucas Lovett
F: Monfries Lloyd Johns
Ru: Hille J.Johnson Watson

Int: Nash, Camporeale, Slattery, Heffernan

Waiting in the wings: Gumbleton, Jetta, Hislop, Davey, Houli, Reimers, Winderlich, Dyson, Dempsey, Laycock, Cole, Ryder, Lee

 

[Shane Hird]

No need to rush everyone

B: M.Johnson Michael Welsh
HB: McPhee Fletcher, Lovett-Murray
C: Bradley Stanton McVeigh
HF: Hird Lucas Lovett
F: Monfries Lloyd Johns
Ru: Hille J.Johnson Watson

Int: Nash, Camporeale, Slattery, Heffernan

Waiting in the wings: Gumbleton, Jetta, Hislop, Davey, Houli, Reimers, Winderlich, Dyson, Dempsey, Laycock, Cole, Ryder, Lee

Its like having a vast war chest to fall back on.

X-mas came early for bomber fans

 

[Storyboy]

It seems to me that Brisbane have half-a-point when they are expressing their displeasure at the current turn of events. (But not a full point . . .) They have in-effect received nothing for a player who was until recently contracted to them. The only reason they mutually agreed to dissolve Mal Michael's Brisbane contract was because both parties were of the belief that the situation was unresolvable. This alone is cause for frustration.

However, Leigh Matthews had made it clear that Michael would not be traded and that his proposed training schedule with the Lions was unacceptable. Given this hard-line there were two options open to the BFC: To retain Michael on the list by paying him his contract and allowing him to have nothing to do with the club a-la Akermanis for the second half of season ‘06; or to de-list him and mutually agree to dissolve the existing contract. Naturally the Lions went with option two.

With this impossibly difficult situation in place Brisbane must take some responsibility for not at least attempting to broker a deal similar to the Akermanis-Dogs trade. As it is the Michael signing by EFC has made a mockery of the existing trade and draft laws by exploiting an unanticipated loophole. Doubtless the AFL’s in-house legal team will have some serious review work to do before next year’s draft even if, as I suspect, nothing will change.

The only way Brisbane will be able to mount a successful legal challenge to this change of heart is if they can demonstrate that Michael was deliberately negotiating in bad faith when agreeing to dissolve his existing contract. And/or if they can demonstrate that the EFC deliberately attempted to tamper with the existing draft and trade laws prior to Michael's retirement. This will be a big ask as the burden of proof will be with the Lions. Conversely the presumption of innocence must remain with the accused - in this case Mal Michael and the Essendon Football Club. I cannot say that I wish Brisbane well in their legal endeavours, but I do hope and trust that justice will be done whatever the outcome.

As a postscript, it does occur to me that had Brisbane simply been more flexible as a work/life balance employer or paid out Michael's contract under their salary cap for 2007 (just as they are for the retiring Michael Voss), this situation would not have arisen.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

It seems to me that Brisbane have half-a-point when they are expressing their displeasure at the current turn of events. (But not a full point . . .) They have in-effect received nothing for a player who was until recently contracted to them. The only reason they mutually agreed to dissolve Mal Michael's Brisbane contract was because both parties were of the belief that the situation was unresolvable. This alone is cause for frustration.

However, Leigh Matthews had made it clear that Michael would not be traded and that his proposed training schedule with the Lions was unacceptable. Given this hard-line there were two options open to the BFC: To retain Michael on the list by paying him his contract and allowing him to have nothing to do with the club a-la Akermanis for the second half of season ‘06; or to de-list him and mutually agree to dissolve the existing contract. Naturally the Lions went with option two.

With this impossibly difficult situation in place Brisbane must take some responsibility for not at least attempting to broker a deal similar to the Akermanis-Dogs trade. As it is the Michael signing by EFC has made a mockery of the existing trade and draft laws by exploiting an unanticipated loophole. Doubtless the AFL’s in-house legal team will have some serious review work to do before next year’s draft even if, as I suspect, nothing will change.

The only way Brisbane will be able to mount a successful legal challenge to this change of heart is if they can demonstrate that Michael was deliberately negotiating in bad faith when agreeing to dissolve his existing contract. And/or if they can demonstrate that the EFC deliberately attempted to tamper with the existing draft and trade laws prior to Michael's retirement. This will be a big ask as the burden of proof will be with the Lions. Conversely the presumption of innocence must remain with the accused - in this case Mal Michael and the Essendon Football Club. I cannot say that I wish Brisbane well in their legal endeavours, but I do hope and trust that justice will be done whatever the outcome.

As a postscript, it does occur to me that had Brisbane simply been more flexible as a work/life balance employer or paid out Michael's contract under their salary cap for 2007 (just as they are for the retiring Michael Voss), this situation would not have arisen.

A very level-headed approach to the situation and you raise some good points. The one I've bolded is incorrect however - Mal was very much a required player, but if he really wanted to be traded we would have entertained it. In Mal's own words he didn't seek a trade because he though all club would be the same (paraphrasing) wrt to training flexibility, which voids some of your thoughts. The Lions through the Right Questionable Michael Bowers have said they would have tried to arrange a trade if he'd wanted. I agree, that I wish we'd been able to be flexible, but it's impossible to know if this was truly workable and I'll have to trust the club's judgement on that.

IMO, there are no real bad guys in this, although Mal being an ambassador to the Lions, then playing for another teams stinks a little bit. Essendon, while it can be argued they were simply oppurtunistic, are still on shaky ground ethically, but I don't think for a second they were orchestrating this. It's easy for me to say, but I'd think if the situation were reversed I wouldn't be happy with my club. It's like divorcing your wife and then finding out she's shacked up with your cousin.

 

[stander]

A very level-headed approach to the situation and you raise some good points. The one I've bolded is incorrect however - Mal was very much a required player, but if he really wanted to be traded we would have entertained it. In Mal's own words he didn't seek a trade because he though all club would be the same (paraphrasing) wrt to training flexibility, which voids some of your thoughts. The Lions through the Right Questionable Michael Bowers have said they would have tried to arrange a trade if he'd wanted. I agree, that I wish we'd been able to be flexible, but it's impossible to know if this was truly workable and I'll have to trust the club's judgement on that.

IMO, there are no real bad guys in this, although Mal being an ambassador to the Lions, then playing for another teams stinks a little bit. Essendon, while it can be argued they were simply oppurtunistic, are still on shaky ground ethically, but I don't think for a second they were orchestrating this. It's easy for me to say, but I'd think if the situation were reversed I wouldn't be happy with my club. It's like divorcing your wife and then finding out she's shacked up with your cousin.

Its quite simple- EFC have stated they did not engage with Michael prior to his retirement. A lie means we are in trouble- the truth means he's ours.

 

[silk]

A very level-headed approach to the situation and you raise some good points. The one I've bolded is incorrect however - Mal was very much a required player, but if he really wanted to be traded we would have entertained it. In Mal's own words he didn't seek a trade because he though all club would be the same (paraphrasing) wrt to training flexibility, which voids some of your thoughts. The Lions through the Right Questionable Michael Bowers have said they would have tried to arrange a trade if he'd wanted. I agree, that I wish we'd been able to be flexible, but it's impossible to know if this was truly workable and I'll have to trust the club's judgement on that.

IMO, there are no real bad guys in this, although Mal being an ambassador to the Lions, then playing for another teams stinks a little bit. Essendon, while it can be argued they were simply oppurtunistic, are still on shaky ground ethically, but I don't think for a second they were orchestrating this. It's easy for me to say, but I'd think if the situation were reversed I wouldn't be happy with my club. It's like divorcing your wife and then finding out she's shacked up with your cousin.

You're a good man belgian

I think the lesson for all clubs here is that not playing for another club after retiring (early) should be a standard clause.

 

[Crave]

You're a good man belgian

I think the lesson for all clubs here is that not playing for another club after retiring (early) should be a standard clause.

I wouldnt go that far, Id suggest their most recent employee gets first crack before the open market.

 

[Storyboy]

I certainly make no claims as to what Mal Michael himself felt or said about being traded and nor do I make any claims as to what other club officials have said in the past either. However I was certain that I saw Lethal say on Brisbane local TV in the context of the Akermanis situation that Michael would not be traded. Now I say 'was certain' because your claim to the contrary has raised enough doubt in my own mind about the subject so as to be no longer sure. It may have been that the term 'required player' was used and that was all. If so I stand corrected.

 

[Malibu#27]

I doubt we wouldn't have released him from his contract.

Once you release a bloke, regardless of the reason, I don't know what the AFL can do unless there is proof that Essendon forced Michael's hand towards retirement. I don't believe that is the case here.

What if Mal rather than Essendon orchestrated this as a way to get out of his contract at Brisbane.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

Its quite simple- EFC have stated they did not engage with Michael prior to his retirement. A lie means we are in trouble- the truth means he's ours.

If you want to look at it simply, with concepts like morals and ethics, then yes, I'd agree. Again, let me say I don't think Essendon did anything more than seize on an oppurtunity. It's the dissolution of Mal's contract with the Lions and the reason for that that's the issue IMO. Forget what Bowers says. Legal action won't happen. He is, after all just a lawyer. Beleive me I know planty of them and the majority are imcompetent without someone telling them where a fullstop goes. But there is the legal concept of "good faith".

I certainly make no claims as to what Mal Michael himself felt or said about being traded and nor do I make any claims as to what other club officials have said in the past either. However I was certain that I saw Lethal say on Brisbane local TV in the context of the Akermanis situation that Michael would not be traded. Now I say 'was certain' because your claim to the contrary has raised enough doubt in my own mind about the subject so as to be no longer sure. It may have been that the term 'required player' was used and that was all. If so I stand corrected.

Hawthorn themselves have said that they enquired after Mal's services but didn't want to meet his demands training-wise. So where the truth lies, no one knows. I don't for certain. One thing you can be certain of, there would have been some discrete enquries made to and from our club. And what's said for the cameras may have been the way of thinking at one point, but opinions, even Leigh's can change. I can remember we weren't going to trade Headland initially.

What's you guys opinions on recruiting a 29yo who may not have his entire heart in his football? From what I understood up here he didn't want a reduced workload, just 7 days compressed into x days and I guess it's not costing you much in terms of draft picks (now! ). So is it a bandaid solution because you don't want to spend too many years out of the eight? Is he there to impart knoweldge and wisdom? Maybe being out of Brisbane might invigorate him. From what I've been told he's been sick of the city itself rather than the club.

As for a new clause for all contracts, I'd guess it'd be along the lines of you can't play for another club until the length of your last contract would be up, unless agreed otherwise by all parties.

 

[Storyboy]

It seems to me that with the poor form of Solly recently and his subsequent trade, coupled with Kepler's change from back to wing, adding to McPhee's recent wobbles and Cole's unproven quality and Welsh's often poor disposal, we really need some more experience and strength down back. With the youth of our side getting a ready-made full-back was a gift. Because we just picked up six new kids and got a bunch last year as well, I don't think that this was a bad move. It also enables Sheedy to try Fletcher in some interesting ways. As they are different types of full-backs it also adds flexibility.

As for a new clause for all contracts, I'd guess it'd be along the lines of you can't play for another club until the length of your last contract would be up, unless agreed otherwise by all parties.

In that circumstance I would not advise any player to sign unless the additional clause was added gauranteeing the full payment of the contract. This takes me back to my original post-scriptural musing that had the BFC paid out the contract rather than disolving it this situation would not have occured.

 

[Shane Hird]

It seems to me that with the poor form of Solly recently and his subsequent trade, coupled with

Kepler's change from back to wing,

adding to McPhee's recent wobbles and Cole's unproven quality and Welsh's often poor disposal, we really need some more experience and strength down back. With the youth of our side getting a ready-made full-back was a gift. Because we just picked up six new kids and got a bunch last year as well, I don't think that this was a bad move. It also enables Sheedy to try Fletcher in some interesting ways. As they are different types of full-backs it also adds flexibility.



In that circumstance I would not advise any player to sign unless the additional clause was added gauranteeing the full payment of the contract. This takes me back to my original post-scriptural musing that had the BFC paid out the contract rather than disolving it this situation would not have occured.

kepler is now playing on the wing? wen did that happen?

 

[Storyboy]

It seems to me that Kepler started to play on the wing and forward more in the second half of the season. Also he got beaten quite a lot down back and after Richo smashed him I noticed that Sheedy was either attempting to re-mould him into a mobile tall/small ruckman or to diversify him completely the way he tended to do with players in the eighties and nineties. In the end, just my opinion though. I have never seen him live and the TV may play tricks.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

In that circumstance I would not advise any player to sign unless the additional clause was added gauranteeing the full payment of the contract. This takes me back to my original post-scriptural musing that had the BFC paid out the contract rather than disolving it this situation would not have occured.

I'm not sure why. You break a contract mid-way without going through the normal channels (i.e. trading) then you're effectively retiring, unless the contract is dissolved by both parties knowing full well the player will be entering the draft with it's former clubs best wishes. This is where it comes back to intent. If we knew Mal was nominating for the draft and let him go, then fine. This is where it comes back to "good faith". But yes, in the future all contracts should guide against ****************s.

When a player says that he doens't want to train the way everyone else does, why on earth would you pay out his final year if he retires? That's ludicrous. The only payout that Mal would be getting was if his contract was bacn-ended in which case like Voss, he'd be effectievly getting backpay. Is the EFC in the habit of paying players for sesaons they don't actually play?

All I was saying is that if Mal was really retiring and his heart was set on it he wouldn't be able to play for another club (in the event he changed his mind) for the rest the term of his contract. Even going back to your club is nigh on impossiable as all salary cap and player list issues have already been finalised.

 

[DaSawx]

What if Mal rather than Essendon orchestrated this as a way to get out of his contract at Brisbane.

We've stated we didn't. People can either believe us or believe we are liars, not that Kevin Sheedy really cares.

 

[markfarmer]

Gee, I don't know if its been said anywhere else but, what if crazy Carlton used their first pick to pick him up.. That would free up Lance to the forward line at FF and Fevola to CHF. ..They have to condider it...and hope Cain is available in the 2nd round....But you know the Dons would take Cain.......just because...