Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Chris

Why Tanking is Smart: Connolly

Recommended Posts

rjay    8,955
6 hours ago, Macca said:

Personally, I have a high regard for Bobby Rose,  Neale Daniher,  Rodney Eade,  Ross Lyon,  John Northey and a number of other coaches who have never attained the ultimate success - but in the eyes of many, they failed.  It's never been one size fits all in my eyes.

Len Smith is another legendary coach in the same boat 'Macca'...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TRIGON    759
14 hours ago, Franky_31 said:

Anyone who thinks that "the headline is enough" in the HeraldSun to make a character judgement has serious disadvantages.

'Tis the modern way Franky, judgements made off vry shrt cncntrn spns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
2 hours ago, Deeman said:

If you really believe that then you have your head up a place where the sun don't shine.

And you don't believe there was interference from above to the Football Department over a period of time?

(think 186...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whispering_Jack    14,843
18 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

And you don't believe there was interference from above to the Football Department over a period of time?

(think 186...)

WYL, I think the comment was directed to your statement about Dean Bailey being a very similar coach to Goodwin. Their styles are light years apart in terms of Goodwin's flexibility and the way he can quickly adapt his team's game style to suit the circumstances of each game. This was in my view one of Bailey's shortcomings as a coach and one of a number of differences between the two as coaches.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uncle Fester    1,629
17 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

And you don't believe there was interference from above to the Football Department over a period of time?

(think 186...)

You hypocritical POS. It was [censored] like you that cheered Richmond winning that game and now you want to rewrite history. You make me sick.

 

 "As long as the Footy Dept stand Firm, believe in the long term. Do not bow to media pressure. We will be alright.

I expect a lot of late night meetings this week.

Get it right boys.

I want North to be on 5 wins by sunday night....Just do it...."

 

"I would be Happy to get thumped in these last 4 games. I don't want to get close to anyone, last week was beautiful & indeed surreal! But it was too close.

I have just paid my M.C.C/M.F.C Membership for the year 2010

That's what i am waiting for now...Sure up those Draft Picks & Train Really Hard Demons 2010...."

 

"Could be the most important game for melbourne since the 2000 Grand Final. The Footy Dept this week & on Match day must stay so sharp.

We have come this far, the finish line is within sight in the distance. Get it Right Lads. Please."

 

"I don't want to beat Carlton till next year. With your Logic we would finish with 6 wins, & thus be a loser again.

Where is the joy in that?"

 

"Yes of course i wouldn't be able to party out in a few years because of last sundays Shame!!

I doubt ND would have done what Bails did last sunday.

We now know Dean Bailey wants to take this club all the way. Sunday was his "line in the Sand" game (our young talent almost buggered it up with their enthusiasm, but Sanity Prevailed)

Wonder whether Mike Sheahan will celebrate if we win a flag in a few years????"

 

"You bet i would Be!! That 2nd Pick might be the piece in the jigsaw we need.

If you are going to do a job, do it properly or not at all.

Bailey wants Top Cards in his Deck. So do i.

Otherwise we have to play against that player. 4 wins MAX this year. Next Year we go for it...."

 

"HaHa!! The second half was as good a game as you would want to see!!! What tablets are you on...Bailey did a great job today, planning for the future. He wants the PP, as i would if i were coaching.

Miller was playing midfield, warnock up forward. List management was on show thank god."

 

All yours from the first week in Aug 2009. More here for anyone that has the stomach for it. http://demonland.com/forums/profile/241-sir-why-you-little/?do=content&page=1123

 

Now just shut up, you turd. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Uncle Fester said:

You hypocritical POS. It was [censored] like you that cheered Richmond winning that game and now you want to rewrite history. You make me sick.

 

 "As long as the Footy Dept stand Firm, believe in the long term. Do not bow to media pressure. We will be alright.

I expect a lot of late night meetings this week.

Get it right boys.

I want North to be on 5 wins by sunday night....Just do it...."

 

"I would be Happy to get thumped in these last 4 games. I don't want to get close to anyone, last week was beautiful & indeed surreal! But it was too close.

I have just paid my M.C.C/M.F.C Membership for the year 2010

That's what i am waiting for now...Sure up those Draft Picks & Train Really Hard Demons 2010...."

 

"Could be the most important game for melbourne since the 2000 Grand Final. The Footy Dept this week & on Match day must stay so sharp.

We have come this far, the finish line is within sight in the distance. Get it Right Lads. Please."

 

"I don't want to beat Carlton till next year. With your Logic we would finish with 6 wins, & thus be a loser again.

Where is the joy in that?"

 

"Yes of course i wouldn't be able to party out in a few years because of last sundays Shame!!

I doubt ND would have done what Bails did last sunday.

We now know Dean Bailey wants to take this club all the way. Sunday was his "line in the Sand" game (our young talent almost buggered it up with their enthusiasm, but Sanity Prevailed)

Wonder whether Mike Sheahan will celebrate if we win a flag in a few years????"

 

"You bet i would Be!! That 2nd Pick might be the piece in the jigsaw we need.

If you are going to do a job, do it properly or not at all.

Bailey wants Top Cards in his Deck. So do i.

Otherwise we have to play against that player. 4 wins MAX this year. Next Year we go for it...."

 

"HaHa!! The second half was as good a game as you would want to see!!! What tablets are you on...Bailey did a great job today, planning for the future. He wants the PP, as i would if i were coaching.

Miller was playing midfield, warnock up forward. List management was on show thank god."

 

All yours from the first week in Aug 2009. More here for anyone that has the stomach for it. http://demonland.com/forums/profile/241-sir-why-you-little/?do=content&page=1123

 

Now just shut up, you turd. 

Yes my opinions changed from actually listening to people on here. 

BUT as i often said. 

WE HAD TO GET IT RIGHT 100%. All of it

That is the only way Tanking will ever work

WE actually got it Very wrong, so it was a failure and very devisive. 

I always maintained that i didn't like tanking, but if it is to be done, make sure it is right. 

It wasn't as we all found out

Edited by Sir Why You Little

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
26 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

WYL, I think the comment was directed to your statement about Dean Bailey being a very similar coach to Goodwin. Their styles are light years apart in terms of Goodwin's flexibility and the way he can quickly adapt his team's game style to suit the circumstances of each game. This was in my view one of Bailey's shortcomings as a coach and one of a number of differences between the two as coaches.

Dean Bailey had lines of players running up and down the ground by 2010-11

think 2010 against Sydney, but a better example was from 2011 Round 2 against Hawthorn. 2nd Quarter. 

We absolutely klled them in that Quarter, but ran out of petrol in the 3rd and got slaughtered. 

But you could see what Bailey had planned and wanted, he just didn't have the list...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uncle Fester    1,629
1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes my opinions changed from actually listening to people on here. 

BUT as i often said. 

WE HAD TO GET IT RIGHT 100%. All of it

That is the only way Tanking will ever work

WE actually got it Very wrong, so it was a failure and very devisive. 

I always maintained that i didn't tanking, but if it is to be done, make sure it is right. 

It wasn't as we all found out

Blah blah blah. Just shut up. You talk, and talk and talk about how Schwab and Connolly and blah blah nearly destroyed us, but it was you - YOU - and so called supporters like you that gave them the green light to do it. I've read your crap for many years on this and bit my tongue on it, but enough is enough. Your credibility is zero, and you really need to shut up and stop looking like a C grade politician.

 

As an aside I found this under my old name (before I had a run in with Rhino and told him to GGF)

 

Posted August 2, 2009

Putrid and embarrasing. I am ashamed to be a Demon today. The only positive was that the players left nothing on the field.

 

You don't have the right to talk about those days unless you use the word 'sorry' over and over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deeman    595
Posted (edited)

WYL. That's what makes your position so full of hypocrisy.

 I think the great majority of Demon fans were in favour of tanking, list management or whatever you prefer to call it but most of us were uncomfortable with the fact that it was something to be done to get draft prizes in the end. You WYL claim to talk about a culture of losing and then claim that it was ok to tank but that we didn't tank the right way.

Which one was it?

Edited by Deeman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Uncle Fester said:

Blah blah blah. Just shut up. You talk, and talk and talk about how Schwab and Connolly and blah blah nearly destroyed us, but it was you - YOU - and so called supporters like you that gave them the green light to do it. I've read your crap for many years on this and bit my tongue on it, but enough is enough. Your credibility is zero, and you really need to shut up and stop looking like a C grade politician.

 

As an aside I found this under my old name (before I had a run in with Rhino and told him to GGF)

 

Posted August 2, 2009

Putrid and embarrasing. I am ashamed to be a Demon today. The only positive was that the players left nothing on the field.

 

You don't have the right to talk about those days unless you use the word 'sorry' over and over again.

You can have your opinions and i have mine. 

IF we had recruited right like Hawthorn and Collingwood DID then the strategy would have been applauded by all. 

I don't like planned loss. It's too easy

But the club had already decided that that is what it was going to do, so if that is the case, get it Right....

But to plan to lose and then recruit poorly is a double king hit and that is what happened. 

 

Edited by Sir Why You Little

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
Just now, Deeman said:

That's what makes your position so full of hypocrisy.

 I think the great majority of Demon fans were in favour of tanking, list management or whatever you prefer to call it but most of us were uncomfortable with the fact that it was something to be done to get draft prizes in the end. You WYL claim to talk about a culture of losing and then claim that it was ok to tank but that we didn't tank the right way.

Which one was it?

Hawthorn and Collinwood did it right

The MFC didn't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uncle Fester    1,629
2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

You can have your opinions and i have mine. 

IF we had recruited right like Hawthorn and Collingwood DID then the strategy would have been applauded by all. 

I don't like planned loss. It's too easy

But to plan to lose and then recruit poorly is a double king hit and that is what happened. 

 

You are stuttering and backtracking again. Zero credibility. Zero.

I'm done. I made my point. Long time coming, but gee it feels nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
1 minute ago, Uncle Fester said:

You are stuttering and backtracking again. Zero credibility. Zero.

I'm done. I made my point. Long time coming, but gee it feels nice.

I am not back tracking at all. You have thrown a lot of dirt...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DeeMfc    600

Just on Dean Bailey. 

Leaving personal opinions at the time, along with current opinion now out of the picture re the tanking saga.

Dean Bailey's tenure was one of the most 'controlled' coaching roles in the history of football. He was given directives from above, some of which went against and some that went with his plans. 

'In my opinion' Bailey was criminally underrated, especially by those above him, mainly because of the reason stated above. He had a great working relationship with the players and was pulled from pillar to post to please the playing group and the hierarchy simultaneously. This is what lead to his downfall.

With the right culture and support he would have been a very successful coach. You only need to look at what he was capable of doing as a coach when looking at the game against the Swans in Paul Roos last season there as coach. With the benefit of hindsight, the awful drafting and players at his disposal makes it even more compelling. 

The defensive aspects of his game plan would have come with time but he knew what he was working with and all out attack was the best option and all out exciting football was one of the directives from above anyway (to get more members on board).

I had the pleasure of chatting with Dean on occasion and if given a bit more responsibility, respect, input into drafting and a non toxic environment I believe he would be spoken of now in much higher regard.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
1 minute ago, DeeMfc said:

Just on Dean Bailey. 

Leaving personal opinions at the time, along with current opinion now out of the picture re the tanking saga.

Dean Bailey's tenure was one of the most 'controlled' coaching roles in the history of football. He was given directives from above, some of which went against and some that went with his plans. 

'In my opinion' Bailey was criminally underrated, especially by those above him, mainly because of the reason stated above. He had a great working relationship with the players and was pulled from pillar to post to please the playing group and the hierarchy simultaneously. This is what lead to his downfall.

With the right culture and support he would have been a very successful coach. You only need to look at what he was capable of doing as a coach when looking at the game against the Swans in Paul Roos last season there as coach. With the benefit of hindsight, the awful drafting and players at his disposal makes it even more compelling. 

The defensive aspects of his game plan would have come with time but he knew what he was working with and all out attack was the best option and all out exciting football was one of the directives from above anyway (to get more members on board).

I had the pleasure of chatting with Dean on occasion and if given a bit more responsibility, respect, input into drafting and a non toxic environment I believe he would be spoken of now in much higher regard.

Spot ON....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whispering_Jack    14,843
41 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Dean Bailey had lines of players running up and down the ground by 2010-11

think 2010 against Sydney, but a better example was from 2011 Round 2 against Hawthorn. 2nd Quarter

We absolutely klled them in that Quarter, but ran out of petrol in the 3rd and got slaughtered. 

But you could see what Bailey had planned and wanted, he just didn't have the list...

Are you serious?

That 2011 Round 2 game between Melbourne and Hawthorn is one of the prime examples of Dean Bailey's shortcomings as coach. His major problem was the inability to combat a strong forward press and as soon as the Hawks did that in this game, we went to water because our style was based solely on attack and we weren't programmed to defend. You said it yourself - we were slaughtered but it was worse than that because there was nothing done to stop the onslaught when it came.
 
Here are the quarter by quarter scores from that game:-

Melbourne 3.1.19 8.2.50 9.3.57 12.5.77 

Hawthorn 2.8.20 3.13.31 11.24.90 16.26.122 

The only thing you're half close to being correct about in terms of the second quarter is that Melbourne did outscore them but that was due to the fact that we kicked straight and they didn't. By half time they had 16 shots at goal to our 10. Then look at the third quarter.

To pick a game in which we suffered a 45 point defeat as an example of his coaching prowess is really mind boggling.

Sheesh!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whispering_Jack    14,843
14 minutes ago, DeeMfc said:

Just on Dean Bailey. 

Leaving personal opinions at the time, along with current opinion now out of the picture re the tanking saga.

Dean Bailey's tenure was one of the most 'controlled' coaching roles in the history of football. He was given directives from above, some of which went against and some that went with his plans. 

'In my opinion' Bailey was criminally underrated, especially by those above him, mainly because of the reason stated above. He had a great working relationship with the players and was pulled from pillar to post to please the playing group and the hierarchy simultaneously. This is what lead to his downfall.

With the right culture and support he would have been a very successful coach. You only need to look at what he was capable of doing as a coach when looking at the game against the Swans in Paul Roos last season there as coach. With the benefit of hindsight, the awful drafting and players at his disposal makes it even more compelling. 

The defensive aspects of his game plan would have come with time but he knew what he was working with and all out attack was the best option and all out exciting football was one of the directives from above anyway (to get more members on board).

I had the pleasure of chatting with Dean on occasion and if given a bit more responsibility, respect, input into drafting and a non toxic environment I believe he would be spoken of now in much higher regard.

Some interesting points there but I must say that from my understanding there was no indication whatsoever that the "defensive aspects of his game plan would have come with time". He was, after all, five years into his coaching tenure when he was sacked.

I also had the pleasure of having some great chats with Dean on occasions. I thought he was a terrific bloke who willingly gave of his time to speak with supporters. This debate is not about his character which is not in question so far as I'm concerned. He did what he believed was right with the club and deserves praise for that aspect of his coaching.

But he was no Simon Goodwin in terms of his coaching prowess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whispering_Jack    14,843
33 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Hawthorn and Collinwood did it right

The MFC didn't

So in fact, the issue wasn't tanking but rather, that we made bad choices with our draft picks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
Just now, Whispering_Jack said:

So in fact, the issue wasn't tanking but rather, that we made bad choices with our draft picks?

Both, getting our hands on those picks by planning to lose and picking the wrong players to do the job killed the spirit of the players already at the club, which to me is what ultimately led to 186. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Why You Little    11,917
13 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Are you serious?

That 2011 Round 2 game between Melbourne and Hawthorn is one of the prime examples of Dean Bailey's shortcomings as coach. His major problem was the inability to combat a strong forward press and as soon as the Hawks did that in this game, we went to water because our style was based solely on attack and we weren't programmed to defend. You said it yourself - we were slaughtered but it was worse than that because there was nothing done to stop the onslaught when it came.
 
Here are the quarter by quarter scores from that game:-

Melbourne 3.1.19 8.2.50 9.3.57 12.5.77 

Hawthorn 2.8.20 3.13.31 11.24.90 16.26.122 

The only thing you're half close to being correct about in terms of the second quarter is that Melbourne did outscore them but that was due to the fact that we kicked straight and they didn't. By half time they had 16 shots at goal to our 10. Then look at the third quaeree.

To pick a game in which we suffered a 45 point defeat as an example of his coaching prowess is really mind boggling.

Sheesh!!!

Watch the 2nd Quarter Jack, not the rest of the game. I know we got smashed, i said that. 

But the 2nd Quarter was how Bails wanted to coach...

it was very effective when it worked, our list wasn't good enough to sustain it sadly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Uncle Fester    1,629
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Are you serious?

 

The one that opened my eyes wide and I knew at that moment that he had to go was against WCE a couple of rounds later on a Friday night. I knew at q time that the Bails experiment was over. The I50's at q time were something stupid like 23 - 3, and none of our players knew what to do when they (WCE) had the ball. They all stood around in no mans land waving their arms like drunk basketballers.

How we didn't lose by 200 pts that night I'll never know, but I did know that one day a team would really get hold of us and smash us badly. It was only a matter of time and who.

I think it was Kennedy snr that said something along the lines of football consisting of 3 things: what you do with the ball, what you do without the ball, what you do when no-one has the ball*

Bails, great bloke he was, only seemed to focus on the first.

 

*apols to whoever it was if I got the person wrong

Edited by Uncle Fester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beelzebub    14,853
20 minutes ago, Uncle Fester said:

I think it was Kennedy snr that said something along the lines of football consisting of 3 things: what you do with the ball, what you do without the ball, what you do when no-one has the ball*

Very smart man me Kennedy ;)  Nothing has changed in this regard..The three legs of the stool as it were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Uncle Fester said:

The one that opened my eyes wide and I knew at that moment that he had to go was against WCE a couple of rounds later on a Friday night. I knew at q time that the Bails experiment was over. The I50's at q time were something stupid like 23 - 3, and none of our players knew what to do when they (WCE) had the ball. They all stood around in no mans land waving their arms like drunk basketballers.

How we didn't lose by 200 pts that night I'll never know, but I did know that one day a team would really get hold of us and smash us badly. It was only a matter of time and who.

I think it was Kennedy snr that said something along the lines of football consisting of 3 things: what you do with the ball, what you do without the ball, what you do when no-one has the ball*

Bails, great bloke he was, only seemed to focus on the first.

 

*apols to whoever it was if I got the person wrong

The one that did it for me that year was the game against the Western Bulldogs at Etihad Stadium when we had everything to play for and we played a static game against a team that worked hard all night and got the 10 goal win that they deserved. 

We simply weren't fit enough or hard enough to compete in those days. 

I really can't connect a lack of fitness compared to the leading teams in the competition in 2011 with the supposed "losing culture" developed within the team in 2009. 

Nor did a losing culture hurt Hawthorn or Collingwood when they picked up their priority draft picks. They got their windfalls because they managed to get Roughhead, Franklin (in the case of the Hawks) and Scott Pendlebury and Daisy Thomas (Pies) instead of the kid who did a runner for more 💵 at the first opportunity and Jack Trengove who was blighted by injuries with ours. There is an element of luck in there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dappa Dan    1,154
19 hours ago, rpfc said:

The garbage in this thread doesn't sit well with me. Chris Connolly made some mistakes but had the best interests of your club at heart, and got strung up on trumped up charges just the same as your club did.

Now it comes up again and we regurgitate and eat our own again.

Sometimes I wish we had a stubborn, arrogant, pigheaded culture like the Bombers.

We are not big enough to maintain all these grudges.

Agree.

He and Bailey have protested their innocence from day one. Should be offered more respect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×