An Alternate View on True Supporters

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
  • We have been getting regular requests for users who have been locked out of their accounts because they have changed email adresses over the lifetime of their accounts. Please make sure the email address under your account is your current and correct email address in order to avoid this in the future. You can set your email address at
  • Wwe are currently experience some server issues which I am working through and hoping to resolve soon, Please bare with me whilst I work through making some changes and possible intermittent outages.
  • Apologies all our server was runing rogue. I managed to get us back to a point from 2:45 today though there is an attachment issue i will fix shortly. Things should be smooth now though

Canteen Worker

First Grader
It strikes me that criticism is levelled at certain Alternate Eagles posters as they are seen to be very vocal and strong minded in their judgements and opinions re players and their form, holding high standards and expectations re form and ability. They carefully analyse and judge, calling things as they see them, sometimes without favour and often controversially. Some even construe this as disloyalty or some sort of anti-Manly sentiment . They view this as not supporting the Manly team but being destructive and critical. The whole site has even been labelled this way in certain circles!

I am not going to defend strong minded or supposed critical posters on this site (they don't need my imprimateur or support) but do wish to offer an alternative perspective on the perception that they don't support or love the club.

I see it as the opposite of this - some here are desperate to see this club climb out of the pit we have languished in for 8 years and get back to the lofty heights enjoyed by many of us in the seventies, eighties and nineties. Some are impatient for success and are critical when the chosen subject does not match up to expectation, reputation or is flawed in some fashion.

Jason King, Jye Mullane, Chad Randall and lately Michael Monaghan have each been 'supposedly' identified as AE targets. Each of the mentioned players has talent, has been highly lauded in the media but at times has failed to play to the high standards of their reputation. The four main players in question are discussed as follows:

Jye MullaneSome of the controversy about Jye last year was mirth based upon a couple of his bad games and the unreal expectations placed upon him by supporters, Johnny Raper (and maybe coaches) during a crisis time for the club. During this timehe was playing at half and he tried a lot of things that did not come off . Later it was learned that he had severe knee problems. The worst that was said about him was that he should play some Premier League to get his confidence back - and that is exactly what has happened this year. I think even Jye would admit he had a shocking time but several supporters saw any comment as gross disloyalty. Jye is playing well in Premier League and may be called upon again at some time!

Michael Monagahan and the 'Will we or won't we sign' and 'Orford v Monas' controversy has fired up many Manly supporters. Some love his passion, defensive intensity and determination whilst others are critical of his tendency to make mistakes under pressure, particularly in big games. Phil Gould himself lauded Monas in saying he has led Manly to the edge of the semi-finals but it remains to be seen if he is the half to take Manly to a premiership. Noone has ever said he can't play but for some there is a lingering doubt. Was he worth the money? Time will tell. Not many non-Manly fans would rate Monas ahead of Orford but the big question has been is Orford worth the big money and could Michael play hooker if we had both? The question may be irrelevant as the mail is that Orford will not come to Manly and Max stepped in to promote the signing anyway.

Jason King has been touted as the next big thing in front row play for several years. He has had a wretched run with injuries and so his time on the paddock has been limited. Two years ago he was selected in a representative train on group and early in 2005 the Roosters were reported to have been chasing him. The big problem is that some supporters don't see him as putting in or performing to the level of his reputation. He runs tall and seems busy but his impact is all too often limited. He does good things and noone doubts his credentials. What really polarised supporters this year was his call for 8 players to be picked in rep sides (himself included) and his subsequent selection in the City Origin side. Some feel that King's form does not live up to this whilst others support his rating with statistics. Somehow he is a player who polarises fans.

Chad Randallis the offspring of the one of Manly's favourite sons and was the Player of the Year in 2003. He looked set for stardom then but has failed to perform at that level since . He did not enjoy a good year in 2004, mainly due to injury and his play in 2005 is viewed by some as pedestrian and predictable. Interestingly Manly have given him permission to shop around for offers from other clubs, code that the club is not going to pay him what he is currently getting.

Supporters grow to love certain players and see past their flaws and faults eg Dorn and Torrens etc. They will show blind loyalty no matter what to current Manly players and hate anyone who plays in anything but Maroon and White. To them any critiicism is seen as lack of support and destroying the fabric of the club. Even the Media (probably Zorba) on the club forum has been openly critical of supporters who say (in their disappointment) somewhat negative things. One poster even said that instead of saying 'Stephenson can' t tackle' or that 'he is a weak defender' (on ME forum) that we should be writing along the lines of 'his defensive strengths are not as obvious as those of some of the other players In my view this is blatantly ludicrous and it leaves a forum as an empty sounding board of the blindly devout!!! There develops a total loyalty to the current players no matter our position on the table or what neutral opinion seems to be.

Fortunately the coaching staff don't subscribe to this view and allow players to be released, even amidst outcry and controversy. After all they know the plan and direction of recruitment. Their aim is to get the club to the top and hard decisions are required to be made to ensure that the best possible squad gets on the field. I admired the spirit of players like Brandon Reeves, Jason Ferris, Danny Lima and Tony Jenson etc who saw us through the horrible NE back to Manly transition but to think they were ever players that would lead us back to the top was fantasy. They were steady plodding NRL players but were never going to lead us to the top.

What is good about this forum is that most posters are genuinely able to engage in coherent and rational debate towards the relative merits or otherwise of the players and team as a whole. Whilst there does seem to be an AE “Conga line� towards one or two players (not without justification) and several are very outspoken on the merits of our players and form, it is only done so in the passionate love of this club and a fervent desire to see us back as the Premier team of the NRL. Some posters do not want to tolerate mediocrity!

I would love to see King smashing and crunching Ryles, Stevens,, Cayless and Co and dominating opposition packs, Monas holding the ball on a string and using great grubbers and deft kicks to bamboozle defences and provide buckets of tries to his outside men, I crave the day I see Jye cutting oppositions to ribbons as he beats his man and cuts out Hil/Alberts to put Hicks, Stewart and Donal in the clear and I can't imagine how good it would be for Chad to dart one way, pick up his runners with deft passes and to creatively scheme around the rucks.

I do reserve the right though for my more critical peers to call things as they see it, to comment on poor performance when warranted, to ‘call a spade a spade’ and to make a call when they believe things aren't good enough. Argue with them, discuss with them and attempt to impact on their views with reasoned argument, just don't claim that they don't love the club or that they are not a TRUE SUPPORTER!!!
Outstanding summation. Exactly what you said.

Though I'm sure there'll be the usual panel of 'experts' who had sweet bugger all to do with this site's genesis that will line up to differ.

An accurate article from an AE original and stalwart. Onya CW.
Haha, since I'm not an original AE member, I'm not a true supporter of this site? Just a tad ironic imo.
I didn't say you had to be sweety. :wink:

There are some souls who think they know our history better than we do ourselves. Present company excluded of course.
I think all the AE posters are true supporters. The problem as I see it is that some people simply CANNOT give credit were its due therefore making some of there views redundant. Some can’t eat some humble pie and say “well played�. i.e. Monas. He played very well against the knights but yet again people try hard to find negatives in his game.

When there flavour of the month player (Orford, Anasta) has an ordinary game they’re happy to come up with all sorts of Lame excuses to support them.

Give credit were its due.
i said in a previous post that i thought he was good,but it doesnt change my opinion of him come a big semi final against a top team.ffffaaaaaarrrrrkkkkk i hope i am so wrong about the guy.
Good to hear.
I may not of seen to many good comments from you chaps because of all the bleeting about him stepping up in semis etc.

It's not semi atm so i'm not to know how well he'll go, he did perform well against the Roosters.
Good write-up there. But thing I've got an issue with is this-

What really polarised supporters this year was his call for 8 players to be picked in rep sides (himself included) and his subsequent selection in the City Origin side. Some feel that King's form does not live up to this whilst others support his rating with statistics. Somehow he is a player who polarises fans.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did actually say he should be picked in the Rep sides. King's the player's representative I think, so when saying some of the players should be picked, was he referring to himself?

Apart from that, good summation, even from a non foundation member, and therefore a far insuperior supporter.
Articulate argument, Canteen Worker. Some clarification please.

In the important threads,under the heading No Bagging Officials it says (in part) :

The offending post has been deleted but I thought I should remind you all that publicly bagging an employee's work ethic, character and so forth is against the rules of the forum. Whilst on this occasion it did not cross any legal or civil grounds, it was offensive and I am sure the person mentioned would not have appreciated the post if they read it.

We maintain a fun and fairly free speaking site but some things require a bit of responsible thought on your side prior to posting a thread.

If it would offend you if the post were about you then don't post it.

Do the same standards as are expected for officials apply to the players as well?
Candy - this site does not exist as a vehicle for bagging anyone. On rare occasions moderators here have deleted threads where posters have gone too far - referring to both club officials and players.

There is a big difference between saying an employee of the club is incompetent (an opinion - also hard to justify and possibly libellous) and saying that Player A is ineffective in defense, does not seem to be putting in or is soft. If the team is pathetic I am happy to have someone say so - this political correctness where we must be positive to support our team is kiddy stuff - usually it is said out of frustration rather than malice. Look to the fallout after the Penrith debacle last year. Posters were banned left, right and centre for saying it was a pathetic performance and then Cummings himself came out and said the same things in his apologies!!!

I have read on the ME forum threads along the line that a certain player should never play first grade again and that a notorious ex-player deserves to never play again. I had no problems with either of those, simply as they were opinions. Should it go further and question the players morality, sexuality or something malicious I would then say it was improper. What I object to is when posters who disagree resort to abuse and sledging, something that a few posters on ME seem to do and get away with, from time to time.

Should anyone ever feel a post goes too far or is objectionable there is a vehicle on this site to have the thread to be reviewed by the main admin or a mod.
Ill add this vehicle has been used by myself and sometimes action has been taken, sometimes not, but it is always taken seriously.
I wonder who Candy really is?

First time poster or one of the "few" hiding under an alias.
I wonder who Candy really is?

First time poster or one of the \"few\" hiding under an alias.

jeez wheel, settle - the aliens arnt out to get you

id say candy is more than likely candy cane from ME. Not everyone is part of the conspiracy
its obvious since they are peddling the exact same line they did under another of their names in the rules thread above mentioned.

Bagging players... laughable not every player plays at their best every time they play, they are in a public arena, public personalities and their job is to perform on the football field. Being in the public arena means they are open to criticism (it is part of their job and they know that).

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and thats what 99% of the posts on the site are. To say someone is being bagged is just laughable and as CW so aptly put it "Kiddy stuff".

Some like to stay in the paddling pool, users of this site generally like to swim in the deep end and voice our opinions and/or perspectives. That is fine and legal. We are welcome to our points of view and simply, if you dont like hearing what we have to say, no one is forcing you to read it.

Bagging and criticism are 2 different things in most peoples minds and I think you will find we sit on the critical side of the fence between those two. Most points put forward are presented with a reason for why that user has come to that conclusion.

But I will say to you exactly what all this crap about true supporters makes me think of every time.... "Meh whatever"
Thanks for your reply Canteen Worker. I'll add that there is little difference between calling an employee of the club incompetent (an opinion - also hard to justify and possibly libellous) and calling a player incompetent (an opinion - also hard to justify and possibly libellous).

But there is a world of difference between:

a) pointing out a player's defensive deficiencies, or high error rate, calling for him to be dropped and replaced by a better player, etc (legitimate, constructive criticism) and

b) labelling a player "incompetent", "a fool", "lazy", etc, etc. (an unconstructive whinge in the form of an unsupported personal attack)

Some of the recent global generalisations in the posts on the ME website (although I see it is no longer called the "mightyeagles" website) were offensive and libellous. Reading current postings on this site, the tone seems superior and criticisms generally seem better supported, specific and constructive. And any abuse generally seems to be more light-hearted banter between posters than serious attacks against a person who is not there to defend himself.

If this is the case, then your site somehow is doing a lot better than the official club site at managing negativity and inappropriate postings.

100% correct. Most of what is posted here is light hearted banter and should be taken as such.

I am sorry i misjudged/read what you were saying earlier, it seemed more of an attack on us, and i have had my wits end with that. So I apologise for possibly going over the top in my last post.

It is important to remember when reading posts here that we really are a bunch of smart asses we try to add a twinge of comedy to the things we say, and if we do throw criticism around we either try to support it with a factual staement or argue our point.

The other thing to remember is the entire site can not be labelled as a whole, everyone has their own opinion on here and everyone voices it, there arent many occasions when everyone unanimously agrees!.
So when people say AE is this or that, it is an incorrect statement simply because each person here is stating their opinion and each person should be judged on theirs not the platform being judged on the basis of the person standing on it

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
10 9 1 124 20
10 8 2 81 18
10 7 3 70 16
10 7 3 69 16
11 7 4 59 14
10 6 4 -10 14
11 6 5 107 12
11 6 5 -9 12
10 5 5 -56 12
11 5 5 30 11
10 4 6 15 10
11 5 6 -12 10
11 4 6 -7 9
10 3 7 -103 8
10 2 8 -81 6
10 2 8 -91 6
10 1 9 -186 4
Top Bottom