Very astute. He'd make a great coach the boy from Kyabram.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/exercising-the-demons-20100402-rjwq.html

He is very astute, but it really is nothing new. Many people on this website have said the same things.

At least he did back his up with some facts/figures, unlike other so-called journalists who simply state the obvious and give nothing to substantiate their claims/opinions.

In terms of him coaching, he could be a good coach, but he does no seem to want to, and you need to have the passion to want to do it. If he changes his mind, and coaches us in the future and is great, I would be more than happy. Right now, I would love it if he would go down and help the players with his football smarts (not sure if he does already).

He is very astute, but it really is nothing new. Many people on this website have said the same things.

At least he did back his up with some facts/figures, unlike other so-called journalists who simply state the obvious and give nothing to substantiate their claims/opinions.

In terms of him coaching, he could be a good coach, but he does no seem to want to, and you need to have the passion to want to do it. If he changes his mind, and coaches us in the future and is great, I would be more than happy. Right now, I would love it if he would go down and help the players with his football smarts (not sure if he does already).

Nothing's ever set in stone. Passion and emotion can change people.

Reading between the lines of that article I reckon something's stirring in our Gaz.

He is very astute, but it really is nothing new. Many people on this website have said the same things.

At least he did back his up with some facts/figures, unlike other so-called journalists who simply state the obvious and give nothing to substantiate their claims/opinions.

In terms of him coaching, he could be a good coach, but he does no seem to want to, and you need to have the passion to want to do it. If he changes his mind, and coaches us in the future and is great, I would be more than happy. Right now, I would love it if he would go down and help the players with his football smarts (not sure if he does already).

I liked how he dissected the things that have gone wrong so far and then went on to address what he'd try to do about it.

I think he'd make a great gameday coach because he has a bit of aggression and arrogance about him on top of his knowledge of the game. I'm not saying Bailey doesn't, and I'm on the fence about Bailey's abilities (we'll know by the end of the season).

Inspiring article though. I'm going along today, and now have something to think about. I'll be watching Shaw and Maxwell and seeing how we combat their input. It's disheartening to read that Garry believes Cameron Bruce will need to earn Shaw's respect. I recall a day at the MCG (which seems like an eternity ago) where Brad Green and Cameron Bruce almost completely shut down Nathan Buckley and Scott Burns, getting plenty of it themselves, and us beating Collingwood.

Ahh... the good(ish) old days. Hope to see some of it today.

Nice article by Lyon, he made good points on Davey and especially Dunn, use him run with midfielder, and leave Grimes to do what he does best. Also his comments on letting players settle into ONE position is a good idea, I understand rotating through the forward line give them a 5 minute breather, but when the play ALL over the ground it would be hard for players to settle let alone know their role in the team.

If Lyon does not want to coach which he has stated, why not offer him a different role in the club where he can have a say.

Maybe DB needs a simpler game day plan to the one he is teaching the kids!

Clint Bizkit in April, 2009:

I also dare Dean Bailey to have Melbourne play man-on-man football with no zones and no loose players in defence.

Garry Lyon in April, 2010:

The team is just not capable of allowing an opposition side an extra man in the back half. Forward-line pressure has been poor for too long, and allowing an extra number exacerbates the problem.

Clint Bizkit in April, 2009:

I dare Dean Bailey to play six (6) players (preferably forwards) in the forward line (where goals are kicked), whereby a minimum of four (4) players must always be within the forward 50 at all times, two (2) of which within five (5) metres of the goal line for a whole quarter of football.

Garry Lyon in April, 2010:

There has to be a long option to the square, not only as a get-out play but one that enables small crumbers to turn their defenders around and dictate terms to them.

Clint Bizkit in April, 2009:

Garry Lyon in April, 2010:

Clint Bizkit in April, 2009:

Garry Lyon in April, 2010:

Are you Garry Lyon? Uncanny!

Are you Garry Lyon? Uncanny!

As someone else mentioned, it's a good article but it's hardly ground-breaking stuff and most of it has been mentioned before on Demonland.

What's frustrating is we all see what's going wrong and the various answers are there e.g. Lyons suggestions but will this be done? I can't fathom some of DB thinking

It is a good article and good for the heart to read. But realistically, today's side againt the Pies is the weakest Melb side on paper that I think I've ever seen. For all Garry's great ideas, I reckon the coaching staff would have considered them all. They are operating in the real world, and reality is we just don't have the players with the experience, hearts in some cases, or physicality to put Garry's plans into practice.

So we've got to work towards improving all the areas where we're lacking. That is reality and today could be very unpleasant as we go through that process (I hope they surprise us, it's a strange game).

The one telling point that I think Garry made, towards the end, is this:

"I'm not sure about the preparation just before the game, the motivation or the 'arousal' levels of the group, but, too often, the energy, spirit and relentless competitiveness required at this level rarely seems to last longer than two or three minutes of chest thumping..."

I'm not sure about this either.

What's frustrating is we all see what's going wrong and the various answers are there e.g. Lyons suggestions but will this be done? I can't fathom some of DB thinking

You're not serious are you? We all, us Demonlanders, know more of what is going on - can see it more clearly than the MFC Football Department. I've read some ridiculous posts but this is special.

I hope Bailey read the article so he can follow what the under 12's coach would do!!

Edited April 2, 201015 yr by Roost It

He is very astute, but it really is nothing new. Many people on this website have said the same things.

At least he did back his up with some facts/figures, unlike other so-called journalists who simply state the obvious and give nothing to substantiate their claims/opinions.

In terms of him coaching, he could be a good coach, but he does no seem to want to, and you need to have the passion to want to do it. If he changes his mind, and coaches us in the future and is great, I would be more than happy. Right now, I would love it if he would go down and help the players with his football smarts (not sure if he does already).

I'm not so sure that he's 'very astute', although he makes some good points about the forward line having to make the opposition defenders more 'accountable'. He might make a good game day coach, too, but he hasn't mentioned the main defect of Melbourne's 'game'.

As numerous members, including myself, have noted, the Melbourne players don't run hard enough, either ahead of the ball carrier to make position or around the ball carrier to support and protect. Too often the ball carrier has too few options in the form of players already on the run, or downfield making themselves targets, leading their opponents. What is the point of all those players in the forward 50, except to occupy defenders, if they are not making or finding space?

He's probably right about Dunn's position on match day, although I think his mere position in the team is more questionable. Perhaps he's right about Davey, also. The points headed 'Be in it at quarter time' and 'No cheap free kicks' seem statements of the bleeding obvious and more like mere exhortations than practical suggestions about how to achieve these things. Focusing on two C'wood players in Shaw and Maxwell seems to me pointless when it is really the shape - for want of a better word - of Melbourne's play that is lacking; improving it would automatically place pressure on opposition players. Focusing like this on specific players is the sort of thing you would do in a Grand Final, when it could be assumed that the team already knew how to play bloody well.

Yes I am serious. Shove your dismissiveness where it might fit. Lyon observes the obvious that Bailey is chopping and changing far too much with little to show for it. I do agree though .. Hope Dean read it 11

He's right on every point. It's a good article.

Except for the bit about Dunn having the potential to be a good run-with player.

Yes I am serious. Shove your dismissiveness where it might fit. Lyon observes the obvious that Bailey is chopping and changing far too much with little to show for it. I do agree though .. Hope Dean read it 11

So last year Bailey was developing players by playing them in different positions. this year, after 1 round, that policy is seen as a mistake. What a difference 1 game can make!

Too much panic not enough reason. Lyon trots out some obvious points that all at the club would be well aware of. You seriously want Bailey to read the article and change his plans accordingly? If that occurred I would be happy to see him go.

If Dunn is the answer to the run with player why is he so scared of the contest?

The shorter Gary Lyon: "Go man-on-man."

If Dunn is the answer to the run with player why is he so scared of the contest?

Hey Roost, I agree with your other points. Why not give Dunny the challenge, make or break him. If he's half sensitive to the criticism he's been copping everywhere, Dunny needs a challenge and opportunity to prove all his critics wrong... if he's got it in him. I hope he has!

So last year Bailey was developing players by playing them in different positions. this year, after 1 round, that policy is seen as a mistake. What a difference 1 game can make!

Too much panic not enough reason. Lyon trots out some obvious points that all at the club would be well aware of. You seriously want Bailey to read the article and change his plans accordingly? If that occurred I would be happy to see him go.

If Dunn is the answer to the run with player why is he so scared of the contest?

One game made a massive difference last year and we all know it. There is no benefit to switching players around willy-nilly this year other than to find out more about where a player is suited to. I would argue that there should be only very few players on our list whose best position is still not known by Bailey. I'd like him to conduct a survey of his players and find out what they think, if he doesn't know by now. Putting someone in a position that they are comfortable in and in which they think they play their best footy can really empower them to "own" that position.

I'm certainly not saying "stick everyone in a position and leave them there come hell or high water," though.

Edited April 3, 201015 yr by Chook

I thought it was a poor article by Garry. He is one of the panel that hired Bailey on a pitch to cleanout and start again. He certainly wasn't complaining at the end of last year, so after one poor game with several quality players out injured he jumps off. Poor form imo.

The problem with Dunn is he has deficiencies no matter what role the coaching panel try to use him in. Without injuries he'll struggle to be best 22 atm and he needs to improve or he could be looking for a new job next year.

Aaron Davey is clearly not fit after an interrupted preseason and will be better with a few runs under his belt. Playing him forward last week was probably the only option as I think he would have struggled to run the game out in the midfield or defence.

I think Bailey is still coaching for the future as I hoped he would. Our window isn't open yet and Bailey's eyes seem to be on the long term benifits rather than instant gratification. Grimes would've learnt plenty running with Hodge, he may have been more damaging elsewhere but it might make him a better player for the experience. Martin probably offers more than Spencer right now but the word coming out of the club is that they have high hopes for Jake. Maybe he's pumping a few games into him while the injury list allows so he can go back to Casey and build on what he's learnt.

As for players getting sucked up the ground I'm not sure that's part of Bailey's plan or a symptom of our blokes lack of confidence in themselves and each other. I think an extra man was required down back at times last week to stem the bleeding which would of only made things worse. I for one am glad Bailey is persisting with trying to teach our list how to play modern football rather than reverting to some Daniher style quick fix.

I thought it was a poor article by Garry. He is one of the panel that hired Bailey on a pitch to cleanout and start again. He certainly wasn't complaining at the end of last year, so after one poor game with several quality players out injured he jumps off. Poor form imo.

At the end of 2007, Lyon, along with others, thought Bailey was the best option put in front of him. That doesn't preclude him from making critical comments about him 2.5 years later.

I thought it was a poor article by Garry. He is one of the panel that hired Bailey on a pitch to cleanout and start again. He certainly wasn't complaining at the end of last year, so after one poor game with several quality players out injured he jumps off. Poor form imo.

The problem with Dunn is he has deficiencies no matter what role the coaching panel try to use him in. Without injuries he'll struggle to be best 22 atm and he needs to improve or he could be looking for a new job next year.

Aaron Davey is clearly not fit after an interrupted preseason and will be better with a few runs under his belt. Playing him forward last week was probably the only option as I think he would have struggled to run the game out in the midfield or defence.

I think Bailey is still coaching for the future as I hoped he would. Our window isn't open yet and Bailey's eyes seem to be on the long term benifits rather than instant gratification. Grimes would've learnt plenty running with Hodge, he may have been more damaging elsewhere but it might make him a better player for the experience. Martin probably offers more than Spencer right now but the word coming out of the club is that they have high hopes for Jake. Maybe he's pumping a few games into him while the injury list allows so he can go back to Casey and build on what he's learnt.

As for players getting sucked up the ground I'm not sure that's part of Bailey's plan or a symptom of our blokes lack of confidence in themselves and each other. I think an extra man was required down back at times last week to stem the bleeding which would of only made things worse. I for one am glad Bailey is persisting with trying to teach our list how to play modern football rather than reverting to some Daniher style quick fix.

Mostly very sensible comments. I agree about Dunn, but if he is in the selected 22, that 'run with' stuff is probably what he's best at.

Trouble with 'stemming the bleeding' is that if you have an extra man in defence, the ball is going to come down there many more times on the rebound. And if your extra man is not able to read the play very well he'll be of little use, especially if one of your other back-men is potentially brilliant but already as 'loose' as my bowels on Boxing Day. If Bennell were as good at reading the play off the pack and disposing of the ball as, say, Alan Johnson, a bit of looseness man on man would not be such a great problem. I think in this regard, Lyon is right about the 'loose' man in defence. In reality, for this Melbourne side he's actually a 'lost' man.

Mostly very sensible comments. I agree about Dunn, but if he is in the selected 22, that 'run with' stuff is probably what he's best at.

Trouble with 'stemming the bleeding' is that if you have an extra man in defence, the ball is going to come down there many more times on the rebound. And if your extra man is not able to read the play very well he'll be of little use, especially if one of your other back-men is potentially brilliant but already as 'loose' as my bowels on Boxing Day. If Bennell were as good at reading the play off the pack and disposing of the ball as, say, Alan Johnson, a bit of looseness man on man would not be such a great problem. I think in this regard, Lyon is right about the 'loose' man in defence. In reality, for this Melbourne side he's actually a 'lost' man.

I'd prefer he teach this group how to play properly rather than throwing up his hands and saying we're not good enough to try things. It's self defeating in the long term.

I'd prefer he teach this group how to play properly rather than throwing up his hands and saying we're not good enough to try things. It's self defeating in the long term.

A comment was made on the radio this afternoon that Garry is by coaching the U16 which were coached by Buckley last year, still is undecided and is keeping his options open.

A comment was made on the radio this afternoon that Garry is by coaching the U16 which were coached by Buckley last year, still is undecided and is keeping his options open.

So Lyon is now undecided if he wants to coach AFL foortball?? I thought he came out and publicly said NO

I liked how he dissected the things that have gone wrong so far and then went on to address what he'd try to do about it.

I think he'd make a great gameday coach because he has a bit of aggression and arrogance about him on top of his knowledge of the game. I'm not saying Bailey doesn't, and I'm on the fence about Bailey's abilities (we'll know by the end of the season).

Inspiring article though. I'm going along today, and now have something to think about. I'll be watching Shaw and Maxwell and seeing how we combat their input. It's disheartening to read that Garry believes Cameron Bruce will need to earn Shaw's respect. I recall a day at the MCG (which seems like an eternity ago) where Brad Green and Cameron Bruce almost completely shut down Nathan Buckley and Scott Burns, getting plenty of it themselves, and us beating Collingwood.

Ahh... the good(ish) old days. Hope to see some of it today.

If he wanted to be a coach, he would have been coaching. He's had more opportunity to coach & learn the craft than almost any other Coach.

IMO Gazza isn't really all that passionate about coaching.

Gazza, if your at all interested in AFL coaching at the top level, Lets hear it from you now, loud & clear, or forever hold your silence.

I knew you at the start & I don't believe your hearts in it.

Lets hear the commitment or tell us so, again.