Whats Bailey doing?

[Guest unstable punt]

I know its his first season but l hope Bailey knows what he's doing because apart from playing young kids, which is fantastic, the game plan is horrible, and l can't work out what he's trying to do. There is NO-ONE up forward, they stuff around with it in the middle because they haven't got anyone up forward to kick it to :wacko: :wacko:

[Eastie Boyz 0]

Maybe it's just the players pushing too far up the ground?

Wouldn't knock a coaches game plan til you know exactly what he wants the players to do, rather than what the players are actually doing themselves

[Guest unstable punt]

Maybe it's just the players pushing too far up the ground?

Wouldn't knock a coaches game plan til you know exactly what he wants the players to do, rather than what the players are actually doing themselves

thats it though, l wouldn't mind knowing what he's trying to do, because whatever it is, it aint working

[Eastie Boyz 0]

Nothing would work though.

You could have all 16 coaches working together and they'd hardly be in a different situation

[Jaded No More 68,974]

I refuse to believe that our coach, or any coach, would instruct the players to handball unnecessarily through the middle of the ground before turning the ball over. There is no way Bailey is asking them to over-possess the footy.

IMO it's just a basic lack of skills and most importantly a lack of smarts that is causing us to look like a mess on the field. We have so many dumb footballers that even the simplest of game plans cannot be executed properly.

How much do players like Garland, Maric, Morton, even Grimes stand out from the rest because you can see they think the game through, not just panic, fluff a kick/handball and run around in circles before running into an opponent. That some players (our most inexperienced ones at that) are capable of executing the game plan to me demonstrates that Bailey is not really at fault here.

[Hards 2]

I refuse to believe that our coach, or any coach, would instruct the players to handball unnecessarily through the middle of the ground before turning the ball over. There is no way Bailey is asking them to over-possess the footy.

Normally I'd agree, but five minutes into our first NAB Cup game you could see that we were over possessing the ball with excessive handballs in the middle.

That we are still doing it in Round 22 suggests the instruction has not changed from day one.

I watched the game on 7 and they interviewed Bailey at half time - he complained that we weren't getting the ball inside 50 enough. Newsflash! Instruct the players to move it quickly by foot and you'll get the ball inside 50 much more, rather than getting caught with over handballing in the middle.

This uncontested handball happy style of footy will not work.

[mo64 5,881]

I refuse to believe that our coach, or any coach, would instruct the players to handball unnecessarily through the middle of the ground before turning the ball over. There is no way Bailey is asking them to over-possess the footy.

You're kidding me?

Bailey's game plan is run and carry. He spelt it out at the start of the year. We've been playing the same way since our 1st practice match.

It's the coach of the side who outlines the team structure, ie; how many players push forward or back. Blind Freddy can see that we don't have enough players forward of the ball, hence our need to overpossess.

Ok, so if as you say, Bailey isn't instructing the players to overpossess, he has to be held accountable for not getting the message through. That's a coach's job. :angry:

[jabberwocky 2,301]

You're kidding me?

Bailey's game plan is run and carry. He spelt it out at the start of the year. We've been playing the same way since our 1st practice match.

It's the coach of the side who outlines the team structure, ie; how many players push forward or back. Blind Freddy can see that we don't have enough players forward of the ball, hence our need to overpossess.

Ok, so if as you say, Bailey isn't instructing the players to overpossess, he has to be held accountable for not getting the message through. That's a coach's job. :angry:

Our midfield in not currently capable of carrying out a decent game plan. We are unable to sustain decent pressure with attack, not smart enough and have no confidence. We also have a lack of forward targets.

But just because we are not capable of carrying out this game plan doesn't mean he should change it. That would would be conceding. Ie we aren't good enough to work to plan A so we will work to plan B.

What you want your players to do is IMPROVE enough to follow the game plan not compromise it down to your players' ability level.

Just because we aren't capable of executing the game plan atm doesn't mean we never will. DB knows what he is doing.

[Hannabal 4]

I have to say that I'm wrapt that the season is over. By instinct I tend to think the best of people and I usually scoff at the nuff nuffs that quickly blame the coach, but it's hard to defend Bailey. He obviously instructs the players to NEVER kick to a contest and I'm sure he wants us to play like Geelong and Port (at their best), but what transpires is reactive football from players that seem devoid of flare and too scared to make a mistake. Bailey may be a ripping coach, but how the f... would you know ?

Today was one of my greatest lows since 1981. The team didn't try. There was no intensity whatsoever and the coach simply has to wear some of it.

Presently I hate football. The way we play is terribly boring. It's just a shocking spectacle. I hope things change next year cos I'd never have thought I'd question whether it's worthwhile bothering to turn up.

[maximum bob 462]

Well I for one am looking forward to the Cats giving the Dorks a towelling in the Granny. (Hopefully.)

I still love football, but like you Hannabal, not the way we're playing it.

Finals footy is something only rivalled by an Ashes series.

[Dee1987 277]

you should look at the bigger picture, our team is nearly full of kids with enourmous talent but need alot of teaching!! Bailey and the recruiting staff are in the box seat this year to do some excellent recruiting for the future! Stynes himself has even said, we may well wittness more pain on field next year. I know its tough but we gotta stick by them

[Jerry Lundergard 420]

If you are a crap team it probably doesn't matter what structure or game plan you have in place, you'll still look bad and get flogged a fair bit.

The Bombers have a far more attacking game plan, and move the ball inside 50 alot better than us, but they have copped just as many beltings as us, but on their plus side they have managed to win a few more.

I couldn't make it to the game today, so i listened in on the radio and then chose not to watch(first time this year). I just couldn't bear to watch us play another pathetic game, it was bad enough listening to the radio commentators lamenting our skills and play in general.

I want to have a crack at Bailey, but i feel that i need to wait until next season gets into full swing before i can really make an objective opinion about him.

[Damo 3,374]

I believe you have to be at the game to see how bad we play.

I have watched parts of the replay and it does not look as bad on TV as when you are at the ground.

The players dont even look into the forward for an option even if one is obvious.

They wont kick quickly without a long think to see if it will be worth getting slammed by the coach for making a mistake.

Morton waiting for 3 seconds to square it to Cam Bruce 30 out on his own is a typical example.

Took too long and a floaty kick and it just kills the instincts of natural football players.

The members ran out of pies today and there was hardly any staff in the Blazer bar at half time.

There was a lot of depressed demon fans in the line-up hungry and thirsty who showed up today to look for a silver lining.

[Beamer 1]

Basically I think the structure was very poor.

Apart from Miller, our main targets when entering the forward 50 were Maric and Sylvia. Both simply not the players to do the job required.

[Guest melbman]

I find this interesting. It is from the art of war by Sun Tzu

Sun Tzu Wu was a native of the Ch`i State. His ART OF

WAR brought him to the notice of Ho Lu, [2] King of Wu. Ho

Lu said to him: "I have carefully perused your 13 chapters.

May I submit your theory of managing soldiers to a slight

test?"

Sun Tzu replied: "You may."

Ho Lu asked: "May the test be applied to women?"

The answer was again in the affirmative, so arrangements

were made to bring 180 ladies out of the Palace. Sun Tzu

divided them into two companies, and placed one of the King's

favorite concubines at the head of each. He then bade them

all take spears in their hands, and addressed them thus: "I

presume you know the difference between front and back, right

hand and left hand?"

The girls replied: Yes.

Sun Tzu went on: "When I say "Eyes front," you must

look straight ahead. When I say "Left turn," you must face

towards your left hand. When I say "Right turn," you must

face towards your right hand. When I say "About turn," you

must face right round towards your back."

Again the girls assented. The words of command having

been thus explained, he set up the halberds and battle-axes

in order to begin the drill. Then, to the sound of drums, he

gave the order "Right turn." But the girls only burst out

laughing. Sun Tzu said: "If words of command are not clear

and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then

the general is to blame."

So he started drilling them again, and this time gave

the order "Left turn," whereupon the girls once more burst

into fits of laughter. Sun Tzu: "If words of command are

not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly

understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders ARE

clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the

fault of their officers."

So saying, he ordered the leaders of the two companies

to be beheaded. Now the king of Wu was watching the scene

from the top of a raised pavilion; and when he saw that his

favorite concubines were about to be executed, he was greatly

alarmed and hurriedly sent down the following message: "We

are now quite satisfied as to our general's ability to handle

troops. If We are bereft of these two concubines, our meat

and drink will lose their savor. It is our wish that they

shall not be beheaded."

Sun Tzu replied: "Having once received His Majesty's

commission to be the general of his forces, there are certain

commands of His Majesty which, acting in that capacity, I am

unable to accept."

Accordingly, he had the two leaders beheaded, and

straightway installed the pair next in order as leaders in

their place. When this had been done, the drum was sounded

for the drill once more; and the girls went through all the

evolutions, turning to the right or to the left, marching

ahead or wheeling back, kneeling or standing, with perfect

accuracy and precision, not venturing to utter a sound. Then

Sun Tzu sent a messenger to the King saying: "Your soldiers,

Sire, are now properly drilled and disciplined, and ready for

your majesty's inspection. They can be put to any use that

their sovereign may desire; bid them go through fire and

water, and they will not disobey."

[mo64 5,881]

If you are a crap team it probably doesn't matter what structure or game plan you have in place, you'll still look bad and get flogged a fair bit.

The Bombers have a far more attacking game plan, and move the ball inside 50 alot better than us, but they have copped just as many beltings as us, but on their plus side they have managed to win a few more.

Jerry, whilst your 1st statement is true, the gap between the Bombers and ourselves, in terms of performance, has been monumental. We've rarely been competitive this year.

When you look at our list, and Jim Stynes pointed this out during his DD speech, we have alot of top 20 draftees. I've got no doubt that most of them have got talent, but they're made to look inept because they're not allowed to play instinctively. As Hannabal pointed out, they're playing out of fear rather than with flair. And it's been the case all year.

Even with the addition of some quality draftees, I can't see anything changing next year, except maybe the coach.

[Rogue 585]

I refuse to believe that our coach, or any coach, would instruct the players to handball unnecessarily through the middle of the ground before turning the ball over. There is no way Bailey is asking them to over-possess the footy.

IMO it's just a basic lack of skills and most importantly a lack of smarts that is causing us to look like a mess on the field. We have so many dumb footballers that even the simplest of game plans cannot be executed properly.

Our forward structure is at least part of the problem, and not a small part, either. Countless times we win the ball in the defensive half of the ground, only to find that we have to 'over-posess' the footy going forward (and sideways) due to a lack of structure up forward.

I assume you've seen at least a few games live, and if so you would have noticed a recurring theme over the season, exemplified by Richmond's four to five defenders camping in our forward half against two Demons. As Franky_31's said, this isn't as obvious on TV, since the camera focusses on the ball/where it's going, but if you're at the ground it's bleedingly obvious.

Bailey might not be asking players to 'handball unnecessarily' (OT: talk about a loaded comment), but if we have players outnumbered 2-to-1 or worse in our forward line, it's inevitable that we'll muck around with it going forward, or have it come out of the 50 promptly.

[gOLLy 401]

Normally I'd agree, but five minutes into our first NAB Cup game you could see that we were over possessing the ball with excessive handballs in the middle.

That we are still doing it in Round 22 suggests the instruction has not changed from day one.

I watched the game on 7 and they interviewed Bailey at half time - he complained that we weren't getting the ball inside 50 enough. Newsflash! Instruct the players to move it quickly by foot and you'll get the ball inside 50 much more, rather than getting caught with over handballing in the middle.

This uncontested handball happy style of footy will not work.

Spot on. Casey Fields all year.

[deanox 9,989]

I assume you've seen at least a few games live, and if so you would have noticed a recurring theme over the season, exemplified by Richmond's four to five defenders camping in our forward half against two Demons. As Franky_31's said, this isn't as obvious on TV, since the camera focusses on the ball/where it's going, but if you're at the ground it's bleedingly obvious.

when watching the game, i actually noticed that richmond would consistently line up with only 4 or 5 players in their forward line leaving us with spare defenders back there. i am not sure to what extent we did it as well, but richmond definitely put numbers back.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Our forward structure is at least part of the problem, and not a small part, either. Countless times we win the ball in the defensive half of the ground, only to find that we have to 'over-posess' the footy going forward (and sideways) due to a lack of structure up forward.

I assume you've seen at least a few games live, and if so you would have noticed a recurring theme over the season, exemplified by Richmond's four to five defenders camping in our forward half against two Demons. As Franky_31's said, this isn't as obvious on TV, since the camera focusses on the ball/where it's going, but if you're at the ground it's bleedingly obvious.

Bailey might not be asking players to 'handball unnecessarily' (OT: talk about a loaded comment), but if we have players outnumbered 2-to-1 or worse in our forward line, it's inevitable that we'll muck around with it going forward, or have it come out of the 50 promptly.

It's been a major problem since round 1, last year.

I believe I may have mentioned it once or twice.

[Jaded No More 68,974]

Our forward structure is at least part of the problem, and not a small part, either. Countless times we win the ball in the defensive half of the ground, only to find that we have to 'over-posess' the footy going forward (and sideways) due to a lack of structure up forward.

I assume you've seen at least a few games live, and if so you would have noticed a recurring theme over the season, exemplified by Richmond's four to five defenders camping in our forward half against two Demons. As Franky_31's said, this isn't as obvious on TV, since the camera focusses on the ball/where it's going, but if you're at the ground it's bleedingly obvious.

Bailey might not be asking players to 'handball unnecessarily' (OT: talk about a loaded comment), but if we have players outnumbered 2-to-1 or worse in our forward line, it's inevitable that we'll muck around with it going forward, or have it come out of the 50 promptly.

I've seen every Melbourne game live this year (minus the Essendon game), and I agree about the forward structure. The problem is, we have no forwards.

Miller is the only one still standing, with Neita and Robbo gone, Davey injured, Green down back and Newton and Bate off with the fairies. So there is only so much Bailey can do to fix the forward structure when he has no players to work with. Notice he put Garland down there for a bit yesterday, but the ball never even made it to the forward 50!

Mind you, if we actually won a clearance every once in a while our forward line would perform a hell of a lot better. We so often get the ball out of the backline (because thankfully our defence is pretty strong these days), and break down across half-back and on the wing. Not always because we over-possess, but sometimes because our players are completely devoid of kicking and contested marking skills. It's little wonder we can barely muster 15 inside 50's a game.

You can't work miracles when you don't have the cattle.

[Rogue 585]

I've seen every Melbourne game live this year (minus the Essendon game), and I agree about the forward structure. The problem is, we have no forwards. [...]

You can't work miracles when you don't have the cattle.

Who's asking for mircales? Perhaps I've misunderstood, but I think some people are asking for more than two guys in the forward fifty, so we have someone to kick it to who isn't outnumbered 2-to-1 or worse.

The 'cattle' cry seems to be missing the point. Guys like Miller, Newton, Green, Bate, Sylvia, Yze, White, Holland, Maric, Wonna, and Garland have some sort of chance if there are five Demons versus five defenders when we go forward - not so much when it's two of them versus five.

We so often get the ball out of the backline (because thankfully our defence is pretty strong these days), and break down across half-back and on the wing. Not always because we over-possess, but sometimes because our players are completely devoid of kicking and contested marking skills.

Many times when we win the ball out of the backline and break down, it's because the options forward of centre consist of Melbourne players double or triple-teamed. That has a fair bit to do with it, wouldn't you say?

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

...

Spot on Rogue.

[H_T 3,049]

IMO it's just a basic lack of skills and most importantly a lack of smarts that is causing us to look like a mess on the field. We have so many dumb footballers that even the simplest of game plans cannot be executed properly.

How much do players like Garland, Maric, Morton, even Grimes stand out from the rest because you can see they think the game through, not just panic, fluff a kick/handball and run around in circles before running into an opponent. That some players (our most inexperienced ones at that) are capable of executing the game plan to me demonstrates that Bailey is not really at fault here.

Agree with what is highlighted along with lack of confidence.

See, the likes of Garland, Maric, Morton and Grimes (as you mention) stand out because they are young and seem to have the confidence to use the first option unlike the others who second guess themselves and that's where it gets messy and falls down. It erodes confidence. Then it gets "contagious" and infiltrates through the side. You're quite right that it demonstrates that bailey is not entirely or really at fault here, it's the players not executing or following the tasks set by the coaching staff and essentially not taking the game on.

[titan_uranus 25,043]

For a lot of this year I couldn't bring myself to blame the coaches. In hindsight, this may have been me trying to defend Bailey in his first year. However, as the year progressed, I became increasingly aware that, regardless of whether Bailey is asking the players to play a ridiculous handball game, he isn't doing what he should be doing, which is stopping it from happening. My feeling is that the players are unable to play how Bailey is instructing them, leading to the over-possesive gamestyle we have so often shown this year. I doubt this is Bailey's plan, but what worries me is that he has done nothing of notice to fix this problem in 22 rounds of footy.