Mitchell watch

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Don't think so. I think he left the club at around the same time Tom did.

In hindsight one wonders whether Barry's employment doesn't look a tiny bit reminiscent of the Scully's-dad-deal GWS got pinged for.

[liz]

In hindsight one wonders whether Barry's employment doesn't look a tiny bit reminiscent of the Scully's-dad-deal GWS got pinged for.

Possibly, and there were questions raised in the media at the time he joined the Swans. I presume the AFL looked at the arrangement. I guess the difference was that Mitchell had more experience than Scully in relevant roles. As a forward scout, he also probably wasn't on that big a salary.

I also believe it was Barry Mitchell who chose to leave the Swans, rather than the Swans terminating his employment (though of course I can't know for sure). It may just have been that Barry thought it would be awkward to continuing working for the club when he knew Tom had decided to leave, rather than the Swans deciding he was no longer the right man for the job.

[MattW]

Not sure a moments flip Tapatalk realy compares intellectually with George and Charles, but RWO is a broad church, so thanks for contributing.

In any case cognitive science has confirmed that "Banging on" is actually needed for learning/education.
The attitude that you express is the thing that fuels the March of Folly,

I was referring to lessons learned by the club. Your quotes imply the hand-wringing on here about Mitchell's departure was somehow educational (although it's hard to know for sure, because you presented them without commentary). I don't see whom it educates. I'm sure the club has noticed Mitchell's Brownlow. As for this forum, the same talking points have been exchanged on here for two years.

But anyway, I'm not really suggesting the thread be locked. It's on me to overlook it.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

Good solution, even before departure I found the "changes for next week" threads not to my taste and avoided them.

I'd hate to lose any contemplative thread regardless of how obstruse, or lacking in currency some find it, so I'm glad you weren't seriously calling to shut down the is thread.

[barry]

As I said before, Losing a player who is a gun at another club once (mitchel) is mistake, losing another (possibly hannerbury) is incompetence.
Time will tell if we learnt our lesson or not.

[AnnieH]

As I said before, Losing a player who is a gun at another club once (mitchel) is mistake, losing another (possibly hannerbury) is incompetence.
Time will tell if we learnt our lesson or not.

Yes, Hannerbury is incompetent.
That's the only right thing you've said all day.

[barry]

Y
That's the only right thing you've said all day.

Score check: Barry 1, Annie 0.

[Bloods05]

Score check: Barry 1, Annie 0.

But Annie was right to say it was the only right thing, hence one-all.

[stevoswan]

Cliched slogans are the curse of the 21st century. We have no choice now, but there must be accountability of poor decisions past, otherwise poor decisions will continue.

Pointless....they're only poor decisions in hindsight. If the same circumstances presented again, I doubt the club would do anything different. In the absence of a crystal ball, which you don't have, I doubt you'd do anything different either. It is very easy to be a hindsight expert.

[stevoswan]

+1 and people who keep telling themselves he wasn't as good when he was with us know FA.

+1?? That post you quoted has already been debunked. He was behind our entire midfield in the Bob Skilton medal count in his final year with us.....but like a good US republican, you keep pushing that fake news.

[barry]

+1?? That post you quoted has already been debunked. He was behind our entire midfield in the Bob Skilton medal count in his final year with us.....but like a good US republican, you keep pushing that fake news.

Pot, kettle, black.

The negative spin:
He was 4th best midfielder in 2016 (fact based on B&F data)
He was daylight 4th best. (Fake news, was top 10 in b&f)
He was behind k.jack. (fake news. Finished higher than Jack in b&f)

The positive spin:
He was a top ten player in a very strong midfield (5 of top 10 were midfielders).
He was young and improving (fact. Improved to a brownlow).

[stevoswan]

Pot, kettle, black.

He's gone!!! Move on.....no one is going to say you are right on this one, except maybe your republican mate SSB. As I said in the 'Mitchell' thread, hindsight.....if you can republish some real posts from late 2016 of yourself bemoaning Mitchells departure and predicting it's a mistake and that we'd regret it (which I don't) and predicting he'd win a Brownlow etc etc, then you might have a point to make. Do such posts exist?

[AB Swannie]

Pot, kettle, black.

The negative spin:
He was 4th best midfielder in 2016 (fact based on B&F data)
He was daylight 4th best. (Fake news, was top 10 in b&f)
He was behind k.jack. (fake news. Finished higher than Jack in b&f)

The positive spin:
He was a top ten player in a very strong midfield (5 of top 10 were midfielders).
He was young and improving (fact. Improved to a brownlow).

What is to be achieved by this debate? I don’t get what benefit is to be gained by either side. At what point do you just agree to disagree and let this thread return to current trading and drafting?

[stevoswan]

What is to be achieved by this debate? I don’t get what benefit is to be gained by either side. At what point do you just agree to disagree and let this thread return to current trading and drafting?

True... and there is a 'Mitchell watch' thread.

[CureTheSane]

Let's talk about religion rather than Mitchell. Will be easier to win a debate....