those bagging petterd - its pretty hard to do anything as a forward when the entire team is inside the defensive 50m arc.

I was interested in the criticism of the recruiting. Gysbert, Scully, Trengrove, Bail, Tapscott have all hit the ground running. Evans had just a good debut. Even recruiting yet another mid-size halfback flanker Joel Macdonald seems to have added something when we are firing.

The lessons that I draw from the 1997 and 2007 seasons is that if you sack the coach, you can sink very, very low. The stand-in is also marked as a failure for life.

What MFC needs to realise is that the buck stops with the Board. The Board offered to look after club for us members and we took them up on their offer.

The Board needs to satisfy themselves that the football department has identified what needs to be done and can demonstrate progress against those objectives. For example, handpasses become more bullet-like and well directed, certain players chase opponents out of the forward line. Just looking at whether we win games is too blunt an instrument to do the job.

It is incorrect, pointless and a bit weak to blame the players unless they are sworn to a secret conspiracy possibly involving aliens and Leonardo Da Vinci’s picture of The Last Supper.

Like Daniher, Bailey isn’t the Messiah and we are very, very naughty boys for thinking so. It is irresponsible to just leave it to the coach to fix the on-field and then turn on him after years of childlike adoration.

along with Dean Bailey you can remove the entire coaching and development staff as well. Am I wrong in believing that Brian Royal worked for MFC before and wasn't he crap then? and he is back to take over from Sean Wellman, no wonder we are hopeless this year. Questions about the the player conditioning must seriously be asked and don't try and tell me that all these injuries are bad luck, more like bad management, there is no built in durability. Sure a few injuries can't be avoided but this is ridiculous!!

How can you soar like an Eagle when you fly with turkeys?

We must find the best available coaching staff and lock them in to contracts and get some continuity to the development side of things, we have some of the best talent about but you have to bring that talent out and that we certainly aren't doing!!

Far too many assistants just use teams as stepping stones, there is no loyalty there!!

Its like a restaurant with a fantastic chef, it gets awarded chefs hats because its great, chef buggers off because some other restaurant takes he/she away and your restaurant goes down the dunny.

Our coaching mob are just not hacking it!!! So annoyed!!!

Malthouse, Thompson, Clarkson, Roos, Worsfold, Matthews... - premiership winning coaches of the past ten years

How many of these came in halfway through the build of these premiership teams to replace an ousted coach? Maybe Clarkson?

It seems in the weekly angst/blame the coach session we are all failing to contemplate that most of the successful clubs of the past decade DIDN'T sack their coach.

Prior to breaking through Thompson, Clarkson, Roos all faced criticism and scrutiny, but those clubs were ultimately successful because they stuck fat with the coach.

Food for thought.

Another prespective is, how many times in the past 45 years has changing the coach at Melbourne led to us winning a flag?

Edited May 30, 201114 yr by PaulRB

Another prespective is, how many times in the past 45 years has changing the coach at Melbourne led to us winning a flag?

Approximately the same number of times as not changing the coach (give or take a little)

Read this quote on the Melbourne Website,

"At times, Melbourne went ultra-defensive, pushing back Jack Watts as a loose man in defence, but Bailey said the plan had to been to create more drive out of the defensive half.

The plan had not worked because of the team's volume of turnovers, he said"

Normally after a loss he comes out with "the players didn't play to the game plan".

How do you think the players feel reading this? Each week they are forced to play to a flawed game plan, and the coach continues to blame them without taking responsibility. If I was a player I would be starting to get sick of this. I can't see them putting up with it much longer, I think the push could come from within.

This I don't like.

Why do we seem to be the only club that requires more numbers behind the ball to 'create drive'? The other 16 clubs do not need to send their mids and forward into defence to get the ball out. But we do.

As I have been for three years, I am unconvinced that the best way for us to win a premiership is to put numbers behind the ball and work it out that way. I'm even more unconvinced now that the rest of the competition uses a forward press, which is in many ways the opposite to what we use, and plays right into their hands.

This I don't like.

Why do we seem to be the only club that requires more numbers behind the ball to 'create drive'? The other 16 clubs do not need to send their mids and forward into defence to get the ball out. But we do.

As I have been for three years, I am unconvinced that the best way for us to win a premiership is to put numbers behind the ball and work it out that way. I'm even more unconvinced now that the rest of the competition uses a forward press, which is in many ways the opposite to what we use, and plays right into their hands.

I remember old55, Rhino Richards and alike arguing for this tactic a few years ago. They seem very quiet about it now.

It was more that we need quality disposal for that drive, and the players in the backline at the moment have suspect kicking ability.

Frawley would easily be the best.

The rest are decidedly average.

We really miss Garland, Tapscott & Grimes.

Been specifically avoiding commenting, but now I think I will.

- Many of you recall I was calling for Bailey's head after the West Coast game. Last night was still better than that pile of dross. Yes, it was still poor football. Yes, it left a lot to be desired. But, and here's the thing, you can't deny that injury/suspension list. Injuries can be an excuse after a point. Yes, everyone comes out and says 'hurr everyone has injuries durr' but let's take the Blues - remove from that lineup (along with their already-removed rucks and Curnow) Gibbs, Murphy, Yarran, Waite, Betts, Walker and Carrazzo, plus a number of their backups (such as Hampson). No side can cop that sort of injury/suspension list and not struggle. We are actually at a point where it is an excuse unfortunately. In 3-4 weeks time it won't be, but right now it is.

- Injuries also have their toll on the rest of the side. For example, Moloney functions much better with Trengove, Scully et al around him because the opposition is forced to worry about them. There's only an absolute elite few who can have astounding games at the centre of a terrible midfield, and Beamer isn't one of them. He's copping their best tags for the length of the game and while he's still certainly giving it a crack it's a hell of a task he's been facing.

- That said, there were a lot of passengers Friday night. In particular, Morton, Newton, Petterd and Bate all should be looked at being dropped. While I'm aware Juice will probably stay (and possibly Bate too), Morton needs a long spell at Casey and Petterd just didn't offer a thing.

- The games Bailey will be judged on will be the Collingwood, Fremantle and Richmond games. If we go into the bye having won two of those, he'll see the season out. If we don't have another win I'll be shocked if we come back from the bye with him as coach.

I am sort of betwixt and between. We cannot function with the amount of cattle we have missing - by the same token i expect more from the playeres we do have playing.

I will ask on this post - your first two points makes allowances for the injuries which I agree with - but then your last comment say he will be judged on Collingwood game etc that is two weeks away and the injury list will be just as bad. We will have trenners and maybe Scully - in the meantime we have lost Davey for 8 weeks. So which one is - injuries no excuse or they are an excuse ?

So it seems to me that every time we have a poor run there's a temptation for someone to open a thread calling for Dean Bailey to be sacked and then, after a while, we reach the stage where the debate rolls on aimlessly for a few days. In the end, the decision on the coach will be made by others and we don't really have much influence on the outcome.

It's Monday night now folks. We've got a new game in four day's time. Surely we would be better off leaving last Friday and start discussing the next game instead of throwing up the same tired old complaints about what DB did on Friday night?

I vote we close all Sack Bailey threads at midnight and move on!

Interesting.

There has now been a full review of the FD, so if that is a problem, I would hope it has been picked up.

I think it's unfair how people are putting it all on Bailey. It seems to me that we would have the worst assistant coaches in the league. We lost Wellman, who was our best. I've heard average things about West, and Royal isn't a forward coach.

You're right, he's the defensive coach.

In the end, the decision on the coach will be made by others and we don't really have much influence on the outcome.

Indeed.

I'm not sure how many times posters here can have the same debates with the same people tossing out the same lines, but it seems to be at least 10 weeks' worth so far

Been specifically avoiding commenting, but now I think I will.

- Many of you recall I was calling for Bailey's head after the West Coast game. Last night was still better than that pile of dross. Yes, it was still poor football. Yes, it left a lot to be desired. But, and here's the thing, you can't deny that injury/suspension list. Injuries can be an excuse after a point. Yes, everyone comes out and says 'hurr everyone has injuries durr' but let's take the Blues - remove from that lineup (along with their already-removed rucks and Curnow) Gibbs, Murphy, Yarran, Waite, Betts, Walker and Carrazzo, plus a number of their backups (such as Hampson). No side can cop that sort of injury/suspension list and not struggle. We are actually at a point where it is an excuse unfortunately. In 3-4 weeks time it won't be, but right now it is.

- Injuries also have their toll on the rest of the side. For example, Moloney functions much better with Trengove, Scully et al around him because the opposition is forced to worry about them. There's only an absolute elite few who can have astounding games at the centre of a terrible midfield, and Beamer isn't one of them. He's copping their best tags for the length of the game and while he's still certainly giving it a crack it's a hell of a task he's been facing.

- That said, there were a lot of passengers Friday night. In particular, Morton, Newton, Petterd and Bate all should be looked at being dropped. While I'm aware Juice will probably stay (and possibly Bate too), Morton needs a long spell at Casey and Petterd just didn't offer a thing.

- The games Bailey will be judged on will be the Collingwood, Fremantle and Richmond games. If we go into the bye having won two of those, he'll see the season out. If we don't have another win I'll be shocked if we come back from the bye with him as coach.

That is actually quite a well constructed post, i agree with just about all of that. Except if we don't any of Baily will be sacked at the bye, i'll be surprised if he doesn't coach out the year.

Edited May 30, 201114 yr by Pates

Even if you don't support DB's re-appointment as coach, I don't see how sacking him mid-season will help matters. Maybe you'll argue that we need to do so to get a decent new Coach, but will we really be left hanging if we wait until the end of the season? Maybe, but I'm not convinced of that.

I remember old55, Rhino Richards and alike arguing for this tactic a few years ago. They seem very quiet about it now.

I remember those debates in here from you very well Clint and was going to ask you what you make of the forward "plan" today?

I am sort of betwixt and between. We cannot function with the amount of cattle we have missing - by the same token i expect more from the playeres we do have playing.

I will ask on this post - your first two points makes allowances for the injuries which I agree with - but then your last comment say he will be judged on Collingwood game etc that is two weeks away and the injury list will be just as bad. We will have trenners and maybe Scully - in the meantime we have lost Davey for 8 weeks. So which one is - injuries no excuse or they are an excuse ?

We will have far more back by then. This was the injury list before the Carlton game (from the Injury List Rd10 thread on here if you're wondering source), plus Davey tacked on - removed a week from each.

Clint Bartram (knee) - unknown?

Rohan Bail (knee) - 4 weeks

Colin Garland (ankle) - 4-5 weeks

Jack Grimes (foot) - season

Jack Fitzpatrick (ankle) - 5-7 weeks

Mark Jamar (knee) - 2-4 weeks

Tom Scully (knee) - test (played VFL)

Jake Spencer (knee) - season

Luke Tapscott (hamstring) - 2 weeks

Austin Woneaemirri (personal leave) - indefinite

Aaron Davey (knee) - 6-8 weeks

plus...

Trengove back from suspension

Dunn back from suspension

Couple of points. First, I think a lot of us have seriously underestimated how much Trenners gives us. He's quietly becoming a superstar. Martin's getting all the plaudits, but he thumps in and picks up huge touches and helps out Beamer and Sylvia heaps, not just through his own efforts but by simply being there because opponents recognise how dangerous he is. Instead of what is going on right now, where Beamer is getting double-teamed out of the game, we have a straight shot at it. Add Scully in there too and it adds up big-time.

Secondly, I think it's more because of the latter two games of that run-in. Freo are exposed as much as we are without their ruckman, and over here I don't doubt my chances no matter where we are on the ladder. Richmond are up and about, yes, but by that time we have Tapscott, probably Rush and certainly Scully back as well as Trenners. Frawley matches up well on Riewoldt, Bartram against Jake King and Tapscott running through Richmond forwards. Should be a ripper of a game, but I think it's still winnable.

Haven't found a weeks number for Bartram?

Edited May 31, 201114 yr by Striker475