I just feel that there is a lack of real aggression by our players and that we are incapable of playing what has been called unsociable football. We had Rioli who dominated, knock down Jones with no heavy treatment returned and a similar effort by Hodge came and went. Then we had a player who walked out on us not given any close checking or aggressive play, especially early on in the game. When the Hawks got on top unlike what would happen to us in a similar position, we stood back and watched.

I know it will be argued that we have a lot of youngsters but we also have some senior players as well and they should lead the way. I am not advocating a king hit but rather heavy aggressive tackling when the other side starts to get on top. We gave away plenty of 50's for a side step, I would rather get them for a heavy tackle a la Guerra and Hodge etc.

I think the other clubs regard us as nice guys and we therefore don't intimidate other clubs. There are plenty of players who can be put off their game by aggressive play but we never seem to be the ones in the positive position.

Lastly I am not saying we lost yesterday because of this but rather it is a general observation of our mindset.

I just feel that there is a lack of real aggression by our players and that we are incapable of playing what has been called unsociable football. We had Rioli who dominated, knock down Jones with no heavy treatment returned and a similar effort by Hodge came and went. Then we had a player who walked out on us not given any close checking or aggressive play, especially early on in the game. When the Hawks got on top unlike what would happen to us in a similar position, we stood back and watched.

I know it will be argued that we have a lot of youngsters but we also have some senior players as well and they should lead the way. I am not advocating a king hit but rather heavy aggressive tackling when the other side starts to get on top. We gave away plenty of 50's for a side step, I would rather get them for a heavy tackle a la Guerra and Hodge etc.

I think the other clubs regard us as nice guys and we therefore don't intimidate other clubs. There are plenty of players who can be put off their game by aggressive play but we never seem to be the ones in the positive position.

Lastly I am not saying we lost yesterday because of this but rather it is a general observation of our mindset.

I agree with you Redleg it is one of the reasons why we have struggled against the Hawks and Roos for years and I said it last week.

When the going gets tough they scare us out of the contest with agression.

We are "nice boys" no one is frightened of us.

This is where I think the leadership was lacking yesterday. But not just the "negative" things like a bit of agro or standing up for a player who's copped a cheap shot etc, but also the "positive" things like getting around a player after doing something good, I very rarely saw a Green, Moloney, Sylvia, Davey, etc make an effort to encourage the young blokes even in the first half.

To me it feels like the missing ingredient is unity, something just doesn't seem to be gelling with the leadership group right now, big test for Green and Bailey.

I just feel that there is a lack of real aggression by our players and that we are incapable of playing what has been called unsociable football. We had Rioli who dominated, knock down Jones with no heavy treatment returned and a similar effort by Hodge came and went. Then we had a player who walked out on us not given any close checking or aggressive play, especially early on in the game. When the Hawks got on top unlike what would happen to us in a similar position, we stood back and watched.

I know it will be argued that we have a lot of youngsters but we also have some senior players as well and they should lead the way. I am not advocating a king hit but rather heavy aggressive tackling when the other side starts to get on top. We gave away plenty of 50's for a side step, I would rather get them for a heavy tackle a la Guerra and Hodge etc.

I think the other clubs regard us as nice guys and we therefore don't intimidate other clubs. There are plenty of players who can be put off their game by aggressive play but we never seem to be the ones in the positive position.

Lastly I am not saying we lost yesterday because of this but rather it is a general observation of our mindset.

Totally agree. This instruction and tone has to come from the top.

Clarkson expects it. Malthouse expects it.

Why don't we?

What?

Did no one see Tapscott hit Shaw in Round 1?

Has none of you seen the way Lynden Dunn gets under opponents' skins?

I still struggle with seeing what the link is with being thugs and playing good football.

Good point.

What?

Did no one see Tapscott hit Shaw in Round 1?

Has none of you seen the way Lynden Dunn gets under opponents' skins?

3 or 4 of them isn't enough E25. That number needs to be around 13 or 14.

I still struggle with seeing what the link is with being thugs and playing good football.

Heavy, aggressive tackling equals thuggery?

Heavy, aggressive tackling equals thuggery?

No, you are twisting it.

The topic is unsociable football, and I don't think we necessarily lack players who are heavy and tackle aggressively.

Even worse we come out in the press and pump up Hawthorn, we accept rubbish performances because they are better than us. Come out and say we had them on toast but we lost the match because we lost the plot. Don't come out and pump up Hawthorn no wonder they dominate us.

Even worse we come out in the press and pump up Hawthorn, we accept rubbish performances because they are better than us. Come out and say we had them on toast but we lost the match because we lost the plot. Don't come out and pump up Hawthorn no wonder they dominate us.

Would you be happy with anything we said in the media?

Saying "we had them on toast, but we lost the plot" would reek of misguided arrogance and lead to more scrutiny.

Not only that, it'd be a bald-faced lie.

We were comprehensively beaten all day, save for a few short runs.

The only reason we were still in the match at quarter time was because the Hawks kicking for goal is abysmal.

What i am waiting for is Brad Green to come out of his shell as Captain.

I am a huge fan of Green-But i am yet to be convinced whether he is The Leader we need on the field.

This is not having a go at Brad. Neita, Lyon, & Junior all led by example pretty well over the last 15-20 years.

Brad Green was superb last year, without the Captaincy-can he reproduce that form as Numero Uno.

I want him to, but i didn't see too much last night.

What are the thoughts of others, do you regard Brad as a natural leader or more of a Top Bloke?, as i know he is.

A great Captain is so important IMO

No, you are twisting it.

The topic is unsociable football, and I don't think we necessarily lack players who are heavy and tackle aggressively.

Not twisting it at all. Nasher equated Redleg's initial comment about heavy aggressive tackling with 'thuggery' when that clearly isn't what he was on about.

Not twisting it at all. Nasher equated Redleg's initial comment about heavy aggressive tackling with 'thuggery' when that clearly isn't what he was on about.

What do you think 'unsociable football' is then?

It's physical intimidation of the opposition, openly attempting to hurt opponents and plain arrogance.

It was a hallmark of theirs in 2008, but some mistake commonality with causality.

What?

Did no one see Tapscott hit Shaw in Round 1?

Has none of you seen the way Lynden Dunn gets under opponents' skins?

Tapscott, yes so far.

Dunn's one of our softest. He's happy to have a little snap here and there and throw a few jumper punches but he does not have eyes only for the ball. When he played back I lost count of the number of times he failed to put himself in harms way whilst giving the impression he was doing exactly that. Don't be fooled by false bravado.

What do you think 'unsociable football' is then?

It's physical intimidation of the opposition, openly attempting to hurt opponents and plain arrogance.

It was a hallmark of theirs in 2008, but some mistake commonality with causality.

For me it's unflinching aggression at the ball and, when the opportunity arises, at the man.

It's having a 'soft' opposition player mentally beaten before he even arrives at the contest.

Not every player can adopt this attitude. It's flat out impossible for some. But it CAN be developed and I don't see enough of this attitude prevalent among our players, particularly the senior ones.

I still struggle with seeing what the link is with being thugs and playing good football.

Nasher you are better than that. I said hard aggressive football, not thuggery. I am not advocating thuggery.

I am sick of re-inventions, starting again, rebuilding.

I am sick of hearing from mild-manered coaches, players and leaders.

I am sick of mildly going about our business like some 1950's MCC ladies auxilliary.

No, I do not want thuggery - turns me off our great game.

I reckon the last coach/leader at our club who wasn't mild was John Northey!!

I want some ticker.

I want us to play angry AND smart and not be sorry for it.

I want to see my coach using negative psychology (a good rant or spray) in the face of a player who would respond to it.

No short steps to packs, light-legged outside runners or tiny-thighed waiters dominating our team structure (yes, I know, we need some)

Sitting behind the goals on Sunday night, it was great to hear some genuine anger, grunt, abuse and hot-headed-fan ranting from Melbourne fans. Too long we have golf-clapped our way through seasons!!

Boy... I really needed to type that.

.

For me it's unflinching aggression at the ball and, when the opportunity arises, at the man.

It's having a 'soft' opposition player mentally beaten before he even arrives at the contest.

Not every player can adopt this attitude. It's flat out impossible for some. But it can be developed and I don't see enough of this attitude prevalent among our players, particularly the senior ones.

Agree.

For me it's unflinching aggression at the ball and, when the opportunity arises, at the man.

It's having a 'soft' opposition player mentally beaten before he even arrives at the contest.

Not every player can adopt this attitude. It's flat out impossible for some. But it can be developed and I don't see enough of this attitude prevalent among our players, particularly the senior ones.

That's all talk.

I'm looking for something realistic.

agro is only good if you've got the skills to back it up with. otherwise you just look pathetic.

Clone Tapscott !!

Nothing at all wrong with his hit on Shaw ... For mine it was a bit of good ol fashioned footy so rarely seen in these namby pamby days of diluted competitiveness. That wasn't thuggery in the least, it was a beautifully executed thump totally within the game. That more Melbourne players could play that way I can only dream . It was no nonsense stuff. It wasn't a hit behind play moment. I see nothing wrong with intimidation in the sense that you have your opposition concerned even before they cross the white line. There's been many a thug on a footy field but that hit wasn't one.

To describe it as such borders on literal thuggery in itself.

Were supposed to be Demons and half the team play like Angels !

You're on the money Red.

That's all talk.

I'm looking for something realistic.

You don't like action, you don't like talk... It IS football you know? Can't just toss the coin to decide who wins

What i am waiting for is Brad Green to come out of his shell as Captain.

I am a huge fan of Green-But i am yet to be convinced whether he is The Leader we need on the field.

This is not having a go at Brad. Neita, Lyon, & Junior all led by example pretty well over the last 15-20 years.

Brad Green was superb last year, without the Captaincy-can he reproduce that form as Numero Uno.

I want him to, but i didn't see too much last night.

What are the thoughts of others, do you regard Brad as a natural leader or more of a Top Bloke?, as i know he is.

A great Captain is so important IMO

Not what I'd call 'Natural'. But, competant. Nice, but competant. Sort of the Milkybar Kid, all grow'd up.