A STEP BACKWARDS? by The Oracle

After a relatively impressive showing in Adelaide, Melbourne's undeafeated NAB Cup run came to a shuddering halt yesterday when it ran into a fitter faster Essendon at Etihad Stadium.

Not only did the Demons look positively sluggish (make that pedestrian) against the Bombers, their skills and decision making were reminiscent of the way they went about things two or three years ago in the club's darkest hours. We thought we had gone past the days of hesitant play, poor disposal, panic under pressure across the backline and gifting away easy goals through shambolic turnovers but they were all back with a vengeance last night.

Coach Dean Bailey said it all after the game when he told the media:

"The stats tell the facts of the game, the tackling, contested possessions, clearances and inside 50s just weren't good enough,"

"We had a poor start and poor finish."

That just about sums it up, but he could also have added that what he was describing was an exact facsimile of the way his team played in the bad old days suggesting that, despite the aspirations of the club and the hopes of the supporters, the reality might be that the team is going backwards. Of course, the excuse can be given that it's just the pre season, that we were experimenting, yadda yadda etc but actually, it was Essendon that was doing the experimenting as it rested some of its beetter players to give youth a go and it paid off handsomely. Perhaps Melbourne would have done well to give Sam Blease and Lucas Cook a go on the big stage this time as well and then the excuses might have been valid.

After his charges capitulated to a 39-point loss, Bailey could also have added that he was outcoached by his counterpart James Hird.

All Australian Mark Jamar dominated the hit outs in this game but, apart from very brief periods, the snappier and more desperate Essendon on ball brigade was too good.

The Bombers started brilliantly with the opening two goals but the Demons fought back to get their noses in front. This was partly through the sublime brilliance of Liam Jurrah and the improved Addam Maric up forward but they had little else up forward. They began bombing the ball high and hoping on a wing and a prayer that something would happen but it was often to little avail. Jack Trengove and Jack Grimes were good for the team but too many players were quiet and the Bombers had all the answers as they forced an indecisive Melbourne into errors.

Of course, many errors were also self-inflicted as hesitancy and poor skills saw the ball being coughed up to opposition forwards enough times to ensure that the catch up Demons would never get back into the game and allowied the Bombers to eventually run away to an easy win - 1.17.10 (121) to 1.11.7 (82).

Melbourne was truly pitiful in the final term when mistakes gifted two early goals away after it had fought hard to reduce the margin to just 10 points at the last break. The final term was particularly disappointing as the opposition piled on six goals to one as a tired and undsciplined Melbourne revived too many haunting memories of its recent past ensuring that the team is relegated to the backblocks for the rest of the pre season.

Knowing how nasty the authorities can be, there is every chance the club and its number one draft choice of 2009 will end up facing the dark side in Blacktown next week.

The players deserve it.

Melbourne 1.3.1, 1.6.3 1.10.5, 1.11.7 (82)

Essendon 0.7.3, 1.8.5, 1.11.9, 1.17.10 (121)

Super Goals

Melbourne A Maric

Essendon M Hurley

Goals

Melbourne L Jurrah 3 L Dunn A Maric 2 N Jetta C Sylvia J Trengove J Watts

Essendon P Ryder 3 A Davey D Heppell A Monfries 2 T Bellchambers T Colyer S Crameri B Howlett L Jetta B Stanton M Williams J Winderlich

Best

Melbourne J Grimes J Trengove B Moloney L Jurrah A Maric

Essendon P Ryder B Stanton A Davey M McVeigh L Jetta.

Injuries

Melbourne Garland (calf)

Essendon Colyer (leg) Dempsey (concussion)

Reports

Melbourne nil

Essendon nil

Umpires Rosebury Nicholls Ritchie

Official crowd 13,863 at Etihad Stadium

A bit harsh to say we're going backwards after one preseason game but we're not going as fowrwards as many here might have thought.

We are going backwards - for most of last year we were playing games for premiership points - now we are playing practice matches

Edit: please note sarcasm - its our second ( well third) PRACTICE match of the year.

Jones is a good case in point - lots jumping on him and he tweeted he felt "rusty" - PRACTICE match

Wow.

These articles are usually fairly close to the mark, but that is a massive overreaction for our first proper practice match.

Freo last year anyone..?

edit: I'd also make a case that it's easier for Hird to plan for Bailey, having been able to observe his gameplan and setup for a few years now.

Bailey had little idea of what to expect from Essendon.

This does make a difference.

Real coaching is making the little adjustments during a match, not being prepared for the unknown.

That was an eye opener and a wake up call.. Half a game of so-so...and half a game of crap

Not good enough...nowhere near it.

Lets see how they respond.

Definitely seemed to be a step back in time - hopefully it will prove to be an abberation rather than a proper reflection of where we're at

Sloppy disposal, poor decision making, lack of pressure - it really did remind me not so much of the cellar-dwelling efforts of '08 or '09 but moreso of our ordinary games in 2010

F*&king hell, have not read any of this and won't bother.

I came in here for a quick check to see if the world had ended after last night's loss in A PRE-SEASON GAME one month away from the first game of the home and away season. It seems it almost has.

Freo last year anyone..?

Freo occupied 3-4th spot for most of last year.

Essendon won't .

We lost because they killed us for intensity. Words are being used like "desperation", "forward pressure"; they laid 80 tackles (who lays 80 tackles in a praccy match? that would equate to 100+ tackles in a full-length match) & got 10 of their goals from turnovers. They tagged our best runners (who the hell runs two hard tags - on Davey & Sylvia - in a praccy match?)

We didn't expect to come across a team playing with such intensity in the second round of the NAB Cup.

Yet we were only 10 points down early in the last quarter. We were missing some of our most "intense" players - Scully, McKenzie, Frawley, Wona (who adds a lot of forward pressure). It's not the end of the world.

But it did show up beautifully all our problem areas where we'll have to improve, especially against that sort of intensity. It's always the clubs who play against us with that extra 10% of intensity that make us look ordinary, the main examples being North & Carlton every year, West Coast last year. Our advantages in skill won't be enough to be competitive against sides playing with that level of intensity, unless we can match that intensity.

Here endeth the lesson.

We lost because they killed us for intensity. Words are being used like "desperation", "forward pressure"; they laid 80 tackles (who lays 80 tackles in a praccy match? that would equate to 100+ tackles in a full-length match) & got 10 of their goals from turnovers. They tagged our best runners (who the hell runs two hard tags - on Davey & Sylvia - in a praccy match?)

We didn't expect to come across a team playing with such intensity in the second round of the NAB Cup.

Yet we were only 10 points down early in the last quarter. We were missing some of our most "intense" players - Scully, McKenzie, Frawley, Wona (who adds a lot of forward pressure). It's not the end of the world.

But it did show up beautifully all our problem areas where we'll have to improve, especially against that sort of intensity. It's always the clubs who play against us with that extra 10% of intensity that make us look ordinary, the main examples being North & Carlton every year, West Coast last year. Our advantages in skill won't be enough to be competitive against sides playing with that level of intensity, unless we can match that intensity.

Here endeth the lesson.

spot on

We lost because they killed us for intensity. Words are being used like "desperation", "forward pressure"; they laid 80 tackles (who lays 80 tackles in a praccy match? that would equate to 100+ tackles in a full-length match) & got 10 of their goals from turnovers. They tagged our best runners (who the hell runs two hard tags - on Davey & Sylvia - in a praccy match?)

We didn't expect to come across a team playing with such intensity in the second round of the NAB Cup.

Yet we were only 10 points down early in the last quarter. We were missing some of our most "intense" players - Scully, McKenzie, Frawley, Wona (who adds a lot of forward pressure). It's not the end of the world.

But it did show up beautifully all our problem areas where we'll have to improve, especially against that sort of intensity. It's always the clubs who play against us with that extra 10% of intensity that make us look ordinary, the main examples being North & Carlton every year, West Coast last year. Our advantages in skill won't be enough to be competitive against sides playing with that level of intensity, unless we can match that intensity.

Here endeth the lesson.

They certainly had the intensity. Essendon had much more to prove than us at this time of year. But I wonder how we would have approached the game if we were playing the filth instead?

Freo occupied 3-4th spot for most of last year.

Essendon won't .

You sure?

Last year people were saying exactly the same about "pathetic" Freo.

(I'm sure, but I'm making a point)

Freo occupied 3-4th spot for most of last year.

Essendon won't .

Where Freo ended up last year - not many were predicting that kind of improvement either based on 2009's performances. Saying Essendon won't is naive at least given last nights showing.

Dissappointing.... thats all it is really.

I don't think the sky is falling and I hope it functions as a little wake up call to the things we can do better.

However as a fan who really would have liked to see us advance further in the NAB cup (if only to drum up a little bit of positive press in the midst of the Scully thing) it was a very dissappointing effort, particularly as it is against a team that no one rates who played their kids.

oh well... bring on the real thing

edit: I'd also make a case that it's easier for Hird to plan for Bailey, having been able to observe his gameplan and setup for a few years now.

Bailey had little idea of what to expect from Essendon.

Having Wellman in the Essendon box would not have hurt either.

Without doubt.

The big bonus is we got smashed in all facets of the game but we had our chance to win until the Ryder Goal midway through the last quarter, we went inside the 50m arc 35 times to 60 yet they only had 8 more scoring shots. I think the players thought like most fans when we got to 10 points down that we would just run over the top of Essendon but we self destructed.

Where Freo ended up last year - not many were predicting that kind of improvement either based on 2009's performances. Saying Essendon won't is naive at least given last nights showing.

Come on HT. They'll be bottom 4 and we'll all be loving it.

The big bonus is we got smashed in all facets of the game but we had our chance to win until the Ryder Goal midway through the last quarter, we went inside the 50m arc 35 times to 60 yet they only had 8 more scoring shots. I think the players thought like most fans when we got to 10 points down that we would just run over the top of Essendon but we self destructed.

And they showed us what to expect when we meet them when it actually matters. For a start. we have a much clearer idea of who to select where against them. They showed us everything last night, right down to how they make sure they get the soft frees.

We lost because they killed us for intensity.

Here endeth the lesson.

Spot on X 2

We lost because they killed us for intensity. ..... We didn't expect to come across a team playing with such intensity in the second round of the NAB Cup.

Won't quote the entirety, but another Spot On.

Grimes's remarks are also worth noting - we didn't take enough risks.

Won't quote the entirety, but another Spot On.

Grimes's remarks are also worth noting - we didn't take enough risks.

Depends on what you describe as "risk". Personally, kicking backwards to a defender standing at full back who stands there for several seconds allowing his opponent to close in on him and then stand like a rabbit in the glare of a spotlight, lose possession and watch the ball sail through their goals might be called taking a risk too - especially if he had a man on by himself 40 metres downfield.

Those who don't want to even read the words of the article are simply in denial. It was a pathetic effort last night and a definite step backwards for a team that hasn't played a match of this sort in front of its own fans in Melbourne for about five years. Truly pathetic and if we want to get better, we have to accept this.

We need to understand where we went wrong and try not to repeat the dose.

While I feel the original post is a tad dramatic, Akum hits the nail on the head regarding how we need to improve when the intensity rises against us. Yes, it was a preseason game and yes, the whole Hird bandwagon carries a lot of momentum - but I for one was a little concerned about how many of our 'experienced' players went missing last night. Keen to see what happens next week.

Conclusions from last night:

- TOO MUCH TALKING UP THE POTENTIAL, WE HAVE GOT TOO FAR AHEAD OF OURSELVES

I agree. When Cam Bruce left on the top of James Macd, I thought we would be struggling to win more than 8 games this year. I still think that.

Who will be playing in the afl longer, buckley at cfc, macdonald at mfc, bruce at hfc

- NEED SOMETHING MORE THAN JUST GAME TIME FOR YOUNGER PLAYERS AND HOPING IT WILL HAPPEN

- BAILEY STILL HAS SOME WORK TO DO WITH SOME QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED

Anything less than 8 wins and he is under pressure. Would Malthouse come? Essendon have a very impressive coaching panel although it was good to see Todd Viney out there.

I am happy to have Royal back at the club. He has come close to senior coach at times, but he says he has never coached backline before. Is that professional?

PLAYERS WHO ARE SUSPECT:

- WARNOCK (ALTHOUGH FRAWLEY WILL REPLACE HIM)

Warnock is the ‘new’ Miller. The backline was awful. Slow, ponderous and poor decision making, Grimes excepted. You just cannot have Warnock and Rivers in the same team as they run up and down on the spot. Garland is highly overrated and coughs the ball up too much both from kicks and handballs.

- NATHAN JONES, AN HONEST TRIER BUT TOO SLOW (WE HAVE MALONEY AS THE BULLOCKING PLAYER ANYWAY)

Prepared to give Nathan bit of slack as it was his first game after a very bad back injury. Definitely we need more leg speed and Scully is a must to keep because of his dash and breakaway from the packs which we do not have an abundance of.

I think most of us like Nat but pace inhibits his good skills. In hindsight pick10?

- BARTRAM, ANOTHER HONEST TRIER BUT DISPOSAL POOR

It must be in the game plan for him to kick backwards! As Geoff has been saying about Bartram, I just don’t know how you can play at this level when you cannot kick and cannot make quick decisions to move the ball on.

His courage at times is great, what a great mark he took , but while his good is good his inadequacies are horribly under the necessary for a top team.

- JOEL MCDONALD, CAN BE BRILLIANT BUT TOO RISKY AND HAS BRAIN EXPLOSIONS

At his best he is very good but he has got to curb his temper. Last night he seemed to be frustrated by the umpires and the poor quality of backmen around him, Grimes excepted.

Don’t blame him about umpires, what was it 14 to 2 or 12 to 4 in the last quarter. The umpires had lost perspective

GOOD SIGNS:

- GRIMES

- MARIC

Totally agree. A fit Jurrah is a big bonus and Watts will continue to improve although quiet last night. I think he will be very good.

PLAYERS TO COME BACK (ONBALLERS WITH RUN ARE CRITICAL):

- SCULLY

- GYSBERTS

- MORTON

- PETTARD

- FRAWLEY

These are the very big pluses. We really missed Morton last night. Other positives, I think Strauss is going to be good and because of his very good kicking should replace Bartram and we must get Tapscott and Blease to this level asap. I like to look of Evans and Howe. Both are goers. So there are some good signs but I just do not think it is going to happen this year. It is still too early.

I hold a lot of hope for Fitzpatrick. Great mobility for a guy his size. With Cook now vying for the CHF Fitz may be an option down back.

I WOULD CONSIDER PLAYING GREEN MORE DOWN BACK THIS SEASON, NEED SOME STABILITY AND GOOD DECISION MAKING, WE HAVE ENOUGH FIRE POWER UP FORWARD (DUNN, JURRAH, WATTS, MARIC)

Agree but we need pace coming out of the back line and I think Bennell will stay down there with Maric up forward.

I’d like to see Bailey give Martin a run on the backline at times, particularly when their forwards are out marking us which happened on Thursday

Also need some support for Jamar, Spencer isn’t ready and Martin has not quite come on (will he make it?)

The jury is out on Martin. I don’t think he has enough AFL skills. I would give Spencer another year or two and I liked his tap work against Ryder. He is a very impressive bulked up guy now and I think we need that in the team.

Gawn is the longer term hope, but by the time he comes on Jamar will have gone

COMFORTING THOUGHT – IT’S ONLY THE NAB CUP AND IT DOESN’T COUNT, BETTER TO HAVE THIS REALITY CHECK NOW!

A big reality check.

Conclusions from last night ... A big reality check.

The pendulum theory.

Supporters to hot initially on the Optomistic. >>> Then we get a perspective check, & we want to swing back Too Hard...... IT Will take /Three Years to be a power!!! No shortcuts,,, just Physical, Interlectual, & Emotional growth.

It's too soon to say, our existing regular players are this, or their that, other than what we know, they have Been.

IMO, our Forwards are OK for the future, until proven otherwise. Nothings proven yet, except a few little hints.

Our Mids are in the Midst of a Major upheaval.

Our defence needs to transform from a competent mature defence, to a restructured young defence, led by the father figures of Rivers & Frawley.

Add Garland & Grimes,,, then find the rest. We may have them on our list? *Rivers is our Max Hudghton!

I'd like to see us, some time through this season, switch Grimes and Trengove, moving grimes into the Mids & well, Trengove back? Thoughts?