Gerard Healy's view of the Demons

[Guest DeesPower]

Is it just me, but did anyone else notice Gerald Healey making repeated criticisms of the Demons, especially problems with the backline. He said four or five times that one of our weaknesses was the poor disposal of the backline. Whilst I concede there are some weaknesses in the backline, especially not picking up their men, and poor decision making ( Strauss is particularly a weak link here), but I would have thought Rivers, Garland, Strauss, Grimes,

Chip are all reasonable kicks. Bartrum is a work in progress in this respect. I would not say it is a blaring weakness though.

Anyone agree?

[rumpole 511]

Is it just me, but did anyone else notice Gerald Healey making repeated criticisms of the Demons, especially problems with the backline. He said four or five times that one of our weaknesses was the poor disposal of the backline. Whilst I concede there are some weaknesses in the backline, especially not picking up their men, and poor decision making ( Strauss is particularly a weak link here), but I would have thought Rivers, Garland, Strauss, Grimes,

Chip are all reasonable kicks. Bartrum is a work in progress in this respect. I would not say it is a blaring weakness though.

Anyone agree?

Let the commentators say whatever they want and let's hope that the rest of the world believes that rubbish.

BTW - a bit harsh on Strauss who is just finding his way in the game.

[Keyser Söze 0]

Bartram & MacDonald aren't the most reliable kicks.

Other than that, I agree with rumpole - let Healy talk as much crap as he wants.

It's only nab cup anyway

[JAG007 163]

Bartram & MacDonald aren't the most reliable kicks.

Other than that, I agree with rumpole - let Healy talk as much crap as he wants.

It's only nab cup anyway

I can't remember Healy having a positive word to say about Melbourne in his whole journalist/commentary career.

He waits till he sees something to be critical of and then gives it all he's got.

Somebody at Melbourne must have told him what a mercenary @^?% he was to leave and go to Sydney all those years ago.

I wonder how he and his brother get on?

[jayceebee31 697]

Healey's view is what I reported last year as a major weakness costing us goals. We need to kick to a man forward not risk kicking backwards like Grimes did constantly last year.In the first game against the Kangaroos last year it cost us several goals. We need to get rid of that for 2011 and kick forward at most times.

[Deeoldfart 7,993]

Bartram & MacDonald aren't the most reliable kicks.

Other than that, I agree with rumpole - let Healy talk as much crap as he wants.

It's only nab cup anyway

I would add Rivers to the list whose kicking is not as reliable as I would like. Just OK from my perspective, and very rarely damaging to the opposition.

[old55 22,766]

I think Matthew Warnock is the logical replacement for James Frawley while he's injured. That makes my back six - Warnock, Bartram, Garland, Rivers, MacDonald, Grimes. Kicking is an issue there.

[Theo 272]

Healey's view is what I reported last year as a major weakness costing us goals. We need to kick to a man forward not risk kicking backwards like Grimes did constantly last year.In the first game against the Kangaroos last year it cost us several goals. We need to get rid of that for 2011 and kick forward at most times.

I agree. Healey's view was that we have trouble clearing he ball from the backline and we needed more run from that area. Why does the opposition easily clear the ball from kick-ins and we struggle to find a man other than a 20 mtr kick to the back pocket. Our get-out kick during the NAB Cup was to play on and kick the ball long to Jamar in an attempt to kick over the zone. This is very predictable and only gives us at best a 50/50 chance of retaining possession. The opposition seem to effectively smother our backline and we need to have a strategy to clear the ball quicker and retain possession.

At the moment I see the forward line as our strength with our backline being serviceable. We lack marking and body strength. Shaun McKernan dominated in the air last week. Jay Schulz did the same thing for PA in Rd 21 last year when he kicked 5 goals against us.

I see Tom McDonald and Troy Davis helping us in this area bur they will take time.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Is it just me, but did anyone else notice Gerald Healey making repeated criticisms of the Demons, especially problems with the backline. He said four or five times that one of our weaknesses was the poor disposal of the backline. Whilst I concede there are some weaknesses in the backline, especially not picking up their men, and poor decision making ( Strauss is particularly a weak link here), but I would have thought Rivers, Garland, Strauss, Grimes,

Chip are all reasonable kicks. Bartrum is a work in progress in this respect. I would not say it is a blaring weakness though.

Anyone agree?

Depends, if you imagining if it is 'good enough', for now,,,, Or if your visualising it in a Grand Final.

I think it needs work, a lot, to make a Premiership defence.

[titan_uranus 24,562]

Let's not get defensive here (pun intended).

Bartram, Rivers, MacDonald and Warnock are all likely Round 1 starters, and none of them would be classified as a 'good kick'. Grimes turns it over sometimes too.

If there was a weakness to our backline, that would be it.

[jnrmac 19,890]

Let's not get defensive here (pun intended).

Bartram, Rivers, MacDonald and Warnock are all likely Round 1 starters, and none of them would be classified as a 'good kick'. Grimes turns it over sometimes too.

If there was a weakness to our backline, that would be it.

Davey floats across half back and he js as good as Hodge when it comes to kicking.

[praha 11,100]

Healey rarely has anything nice to say about Melbourne. I remember him (rather pointlessly) ranting on about how overrated we were leading into the 2000 finals. The guys just doesn't like the club. Also, in 1998, I remember distinctively him saying that there was no chance of us improving and that we'd finish last again in 1998 by a country mile.

[jayceebee31 697]

I agree. Healey's view was that we have trouble clearing he ball from the backline and we needed more run from that area. Why does the opposition easily clear the ball from kick-ins and we struggle to find a man other than a 20 mtr kick to the back pocket. Our get-out kick during the NAB Cup was to play on and kick the ball long to Jamar in an attempt to kick over the zone. This is very predictable and only gives us at best a 50/50 chance of retaining possession. The opposition seem to effectively smother our backline and we need to have a strategy to clear the ball quicker and retain possession.

At the moment I see the forward line as our strength with our backline being serviceable. We lack marking and body strength. Shaun McKernan dominated in the air last week. Jay Schulz did the same thing for PA in Rd 21 last year when he kicked 5 goals against us.

I see Tom McDonald and Troy Davis helping us in this area bur they will take time.

I thinking we have a good backline , however it has the possibility of a great backline. We need to cement a group of say 8/9 players and then make sure they are all coherent in what is needed to be done. It maybe also a weakness with our current plan in playing or going backwards. Tickeing with that plan and having confidence in our mid and forward line will indeed make sure our backs try to kick forward on most occassions. This no doubt minimises risks that easy goals were kicked against us last year due to our mistakes through bad kicking.

Our backline can stand up against any forward line in the league is my opinion.

[Fork 'em 6,938]

Healey hates us so no surprises there .

Our problem is we don't have a Heath shaw or Harry O that can run and deliver .

Edited February 20, 2011 by Fork 'em

[rpfc 28,045]

I thinking we have a good backline , however it has the possibility of a great backline. We need to cement a group of say 8/9 players and then make sure they are all coherent in what is needed to be done. It maybe also a weakness with our current plan in playing or going backwards. Tickeing with that plan and having confidence in our mid and forward line will indeed make sure our backs try to kick forward on most occassions. This no doubt minimises risks that easy goals were kicked against us last year due to our mistakes through bad kicking.

Our backline can stand up against any forward line in the league is my opinion.

You best get used to us kicking backwards and sideways across half back - it is apart of the 'switch' of play which is a cornerstone of modern football.

Kicking forwards along the boundary line generally reduces the amount of direct turnovers but it is a 'safe' option that coaches hate.

We are a daring, corridor-centric footy team and that means sometimes our players are going give it up trying to get that footy through the middle or over to the 'fat' side.

I applaud the boldness, really.

Edited February 20, 2011 by rpfc

[diesel 420]

The ball entered our back line far too many times last year and too easily. You'll always loose more games than you win when your are behind in F50 entries stat. I suggest Healy is being simplistic in his assessment and look further upfield at how easily it's coming in. The blokes we have down back will get tighter as the year goes on but they need to be under less pressure.

[praha 11,100]

Healey hates us so no surprises there .

Our problem is we don't have a Heath shaw or Harry O that can run and deliver .

I think Rivers can be this type of player.

[Fork 'em 6,938]

I think Rivers can be this type of player.

You must be high .

[jayceebee31 697]

You best get used to us kicking backwards and sideways across half back - it is apart of the 'switch' of play which is a cornerstone of modern football.

Kicking forwards along the boundary line generally reduces the amount of direct turnovers but it is a 'safe' option that coaches hate.

We are a daring, corridor-centric footy team and that means sometimes our players are going give it up trying to get that footy through the middle or over to the 'fat' side.

I applaud the boldness, really.

I don't have to get used to anything. I have been involved with football for over 45 years and know how the game has evolved.But I also know that to win games and that is kicking a score and it is not kicking backwards and furthermore creating risk.Furthermore, do you know the word- iniatitive. Maybe, just maybe we can create a change by having confidence in our own players and kick forward "MOST TIMES".

We will have a very potent forward line this year.Josh Mahoney believes it may even be the best or potent forward line in the league. Several of our players have the capability of being a match winner- therefore why would we want to have a game plan whom just follow others. We need a game plan to evolve to try to bring the ball forward at most times .Also having that game plan will bring people to the game and give us the opportunity ti increase membership.

[rpfc 28,045]

I don't have to get used to anything. I have been involved with football for over 45 years and know how the game has evolved.But I also know that to win games and that is kicking a score and it is not kicking backwards and furthermore creating risk.Furthermore, do you know the word- iniatitive. Maybe, just maybe we can create a change by having confidence in our own players and kick forward "MOST TIMES".

We will have a very potent forward line this year.Josh Mahoney believes it may even be the best or potent forward line in the league. Several of our players have the capability of being a match winner- therefore why would we want to have a game plan whom just follow others. We need a game plan to evolve to try to bring the ball forward at most times .Also having that game plan will bring people to the game and give us the opportunity ti increase membership.

You cannot kick into the forward line from half back.

We have an exciting gameplan.

What I am saying is that when Grimes or Batram or Rivers kick backwards-across goal-sideways, they are trying to open the field up to play that running attacking game off halfback and through the centre.

It is necessary at times, and much 'braver' than pumping it down the boundary line to a 50-50 on centre-wing..

And it is instruction.

[Demon Rob 2]

kicking back:

just remembering the grand final replay where sk refused to kick forward or even move the ball,

that gameplan certainly didn't work.

[Dee Dee 1,099]

Healey rarely has anything nice to say about Melbourne. I remember him (rather pointlessly) ranting on about how overrated we were leading into the 2000 finals. The guys just doesn't like the club. Also, in 1998, I remember distinctively him saying that there was no chance of us improving and that we'd finish last again in 1998 by a country mile.

When Healy left Melbourne for the Swans I believe the MCC committee may have vetoed his membership of the MCC.

While he is now an MCC member (got it a couple of years ago)I still think he holds it against us (the MFC).

[jayceebee31 697]

You cannot kick into the forward line from half back.

We have an exciting gameplan.

What I am saying is that when Grimes or Batram or Rivers kick backwards-across goal-sideways, they are trying to open the field up to play that running attacking game off halfback and through the centre.

It is necessary at times, and much 'braver' than pumping it down the boundary line to a 50-50 on centre-wing..

And it is instruction.

Your debate is flawed- You can kick to the forward line that is how you WIN A GAME. I understand your points and at times that is the right way to go but one can become predictable also. The shortest way home is through the guts and to the forward line.I have confidence in the team I barrack for and hope the FD has the same.Also, that is what Healey is intimating.Also as other posters have stated, we are not the most reliable and accurate kicks on the backline and just replay the first NAB cup matches and note even Garland is not an accurate kick .Therefore, if Grimes, Bartram, MacDonald,Rivers and Garland and not accurate kicks- then I'd prefer pumping the ball forward down the boundary line to a 50-50 on centre-wing than a 50/50 position on the backline creating opportunities for the opposition to score.Actually and to be honest I'd prefer to kick through the CHF or FF area.We would become the glamour team of the league and I also believe the BEST.

Edited February 20, 2011 by jayceebee31

[rpfc 28,045]

kicking back:

just remembering the grand final replay where sk refused to kick forward or even move the ball,

that gameplan certainly didn't work.

Collingwood have got an extremely good press.

And when all St Kilda have is a high pressing CHF and nothing else it makes it difficult to move the footy - all you have to do is block their run and get around Riewoldt and say 'go ahead, kick it to Kossie.' And the St Kilda players rightly said 'nah.'

[dee-luded 2,959]

*** You best get used to us kicking backwards and sideways across half back - it is apart of the 'switch' of play which is a cornerstone of modern football.

## Kicking forwards along the boundary line generally reduces the amount of direct turnovers but it is a 'safe' option that coaches hate.

!!! We are a daring, corridor-centric footy team and that means sometimes our players are going give it up trying to get that footy through the middle or over to the 'fat' side.

I applaud the boldness, really.

*** I agree, we need to switch play, but we need to do it with some more precision & penetration for it to become our offensive waepon.

## Boundary line is a good defensive ploy to chew up 'Time', or to gain some tempo footy. It's a nowhere strategy offensively.

!!! I agree, & like to see us taking it on, hopefully blended with some good old fashioned hard ass footy.