Dean Bailey, I hope you're watching

[Guest Artie Bucco]

Yes, categorically denied, absolutely.

[Rogue 585]

'I did not have sexual relations with that coach'.

[Cards13 9,117]

Ha I love this place sometimes!

[Slartibartfast 16,900]

Just a word of warning people.

A persons identity is irrelevant to the point they debate. It is not made legitimate or otherwise based on who they are or what other name, if any, they have posted under.

Stick to the topic.

Thanks

[Roost It 1,434]

Hey Artie. I think the other problem many of us have with Bailey beyond his lack of press is the fact we play run and spread without actually running hard or spreading well. Add to this our lack of intensity for the contest and that's a recipe for what we are serving up at the moment. One other thing on injuries. It's long proven that those that do the hitting and crunching are alot less likely to get injured than those that cop the hits and crunches. Interesting that Melbourne and Brisbane wallow at the bottom with broken lists whilst Geelong, Collingwood and Hawthorn sit up the top with short injury lists. I realise we're young but that doesn't mean we can't play to a sound plan and hit the contest with vigour.

Do you think we'd play this way if Roos was our coach.

[Deeview 0]

I didn't mind the extension as I'm pretty damn sure it was his payment for the dirty job he did to get us those draft picks, but it is becoming pretty clear that he and his assistants are just not quite up to it.

Agree. Are the contracts of his coaching assistants, especially Mahoney and Royal, due to finish this year?

Edited May 31, 2011 by Deeview

[Axis of Bob 11,217]

TimD:

Perhaps you’re right. Does the quality of midfield have a bearing on which half of the field you play the game in?

Interesting stats from that Adelaide game – Maric had 31 disposals playing as a high half forward. Aside from that the most he’s had this year was 18. Does this suggest that the Adelaide game was played closer to our forward line?

Also in that game we had big games from our midfielders. Moloney had 31, Sylvia 25, Trengove 28, Green 24, Davey 23, Gysberts 24, Bail 23 and Jones 28.

We dominated the midfield and were then able to play our game plan properly. When we have struggled in the midfield we have been unable to implement the gameplan properly because we have never had control of the football.

To borrow the thread title of another thread .... “It’s the midfield, stupid!”

Hannabal:

You seem to be holding on to Viney’s quote for everything. You have the quote, but I’m not sure that you know how to use it.

You said yourself that West Coast’s structure took 2 years to put into place properly. They couldn’t play the style properly until this year and everyone called them a rabble with no direction, no gameplan and appalling footskills. Suddenly now they are a disciplined unit. What has happened?

And if it took a far more experienced side like West Coast 2 years to play a style properly, why do you give Bailey only one preseason to have it properly implemented? Especially given that the bodies are smaller, there is a lack of influential senior players and he has to do it with a third world midfield?

You say that it cannot be turned on and off like a tap. So why, then, do you think that we changed game styles for the Adelaide game? Clearly we have been trying to do that all year, but have been unable to implement it as well as we did against Adelaide.

I have not said that Bailey is definitely the man for us. But I haven’t yet seen anything that conclusively tells me that he is not. I don’t think you have either, based on your arguments.

I do believe, however, that the hardest thing to do is create the machine. Once you create the machine then any monkey can operate it. I think that Bailey is assembling a very good machine. If Bailey proves that he is incapable of operating it then I’ll hope that we replace him. But if he doesn’t prove he is wrong for job then I hope that he continues because, as I said, he appears to be building a good machine.

You obviously don’t know me very well, based on your questions. This is probably why you find it so hard to debate with me. It’s easier when you try to see the debate from different perspectives, rather than try to simplify it to a point where you can understand. The beauty lies in the complexities, although it can be thankless arguing with those who wish everything to be simple.

[Hannabal 4]

I'm "E34", "KS", "Yze Magic", the devil and Dean Bailey's secret gay lover.

"Hannabal", you seem to revel in MFC's current struggles, and in my opinion you add nothing of value to any of the arguments.

You seem to like kicking people when they are down.

And I can't take your opinion seriously when you admit to ignoring the most pertinent facts - youth & injuries.

I'm now adding you to my "ignore user" list, so don't expect a reply in future.

I'm not overly concerned by your sexual orientation and I only enquired if you were E (whatever no.), not YM, or anybody else.

And no, I don't enjoy following a soft footy club. And I won't be an apologist for the club. I'll call it as I see it - good and bad. You call it kicking, I call it observing. I hate spin.

[timD 994]

I don't claim to be a great (or even average) footy thinker, Bob. I guess it just struck me that WCE were crap and then they got their midfield back and whammo!

We do not have a great midfield and in every game that jamar/moloney dominated, we did well...and when moloney fell off, so did we. Against adeliade, we were excellent. I remember seeing the defenders yelling at each other about who/where they were covering - I remember our forwards doing the same thing. They couldn't do it unless they were training to do it and getting it right on the day.

I also don't think that it is just midfield - Bate and Watts have run around to good places and been fu..ki........ignored. Driving me bonkers. This might well be poor coaching or just a failure to have the group playing together long enough to get good at things. So, there's more to it than just midfield, but I think that midfield has the bulk of the responsibility for it.

Age, inexperience etc play their roles in everything, too.

[Axis of Bob 11,217]

My take on the whole thing, Tim, is that the midfield is what is going to get us from being a rubbish team to a really good team. When Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, McKenzie etc get to a point where they are among the top midfielders in the league then we will be a really good team. You can be a really good team with major holes in your structure provided that your midfield is good enough.

But really good teams don't win premierships. You need to be the best. In order to be the best you need the extra quality everywhere else. Plus the cohesion that comes with playing together, as you mentioned.

For example, Carlton is a really good side because they have a really good midfield. But are they a premiership side? No way.

[Hannabal 4]

They've made a mistake and it's a mistake that will probably cost Bailey his job. It's one thing to focus on player development, but no player's development is helped by the scrutiny the club is now under. Or perhaps you think that a club that's devoid of confidence actually helps the development of its young players ?

Everyone knows that we have a young group and have been cruelled by injuries, but it's not a crutch I'm prepared to give Bailey. We were poor before many of these injuries and we weren't prepared for the style of footy that was going to be played in 2011. There's plenty of fine balances in footy and Bailey has got this balance wrong. We have a run and spread gameplan that hasn't been focussed nearly enough on defence. Bailey carries the can for that.

Bump.

It's a thread worth revisiting. Some of us were concerned about the lack of defence in Bailey's gameplan and some wanted to constantly make excuses, or simply didn't have a great grasp on all things football. I suspect a bit of both.

This article confirms the views of some of us and may embarrass others.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/demons-build-on-defensive-tactics/story-e6frf9jf-1226118364174

"TODD Viney doesn't shy from the fact his short-term plan for the Demons is diametrically opposed to that chosen by Dean Bailey."

No-one said that there was no defence under Bailey, or that we weren't trying to implement a press, but that the focus on attack (run and spread) and defence didn't nearly have the right balance. It was mentioned that Bailey got "caught with his pants down over summer". Naturally, most of you at the time disagreed. Clearly many at the club didn't.

Of course there's not much talk about it now. Funny about that. Yes, yes, we're now focused on other things.

[rpfc 28,052]

Wow, this thread was not the greatest thread in the world...

[Hannabal 4]

The Bailey apologists are a fascinating case study. What do they actually like about Bailey and his coaching ?

He gets credit for clearing out the dead wood on the list. Big deal. Everyone knew it had to be done.

He's remained remarkably calm and assure in the face of adversity and for that I give him credit. But it doesn't mean he's an astute coach.

He came to the club as a very good development, or teaching coach. It was the right appointment at the time as we were going to build a team based on youth and quality draft picks. But four years on there's no right of passage to continue. There's no doubt that some players have improved during Bailey's tenure, but that's a bare mininum prerequisite, not a flag waving foot stomping unequivocal endorsement.

Preseason Todd Viney admitted that not a lot of time had gone into the 'gameplan', instead more time had been spent on player development. And doesn't it show ? We're behind the competition when it comes to forward pressure and a frontal press. Bailey was caught with his pants down and is now trying to instill a gameplan that takes at least 6 months to grasp. Skinny Lappin is an assistant coach at Collingwood. He'd previously been an assistant at Carlton. He couldn't believe the difference in emphasis on defence at Collingwood when compared to Carlton. At Carlton they focussed 80% on attack and at Collingwood it was the reverse. Flags are built around defence. Lord knows what Lappin would make of the Melbourne gameplan. Dean loves run and spread, but unfortunately it's been at the expense of quality defensive structures.

Yes the team is young and yes there are lots of injuries. But that in itself doesn't excuse insipid half hearted performances and a disorganised gameplan.

The apologists like to rattle off two good games against Collingwood and a mauling of the Swans. In reality that's about all they can cling to. Do you reckon Matty Knights had a few of those type of performances ? Into his 4th year Bailey's players give up without a whimper. They have no mettle when the going gets tough. Too often they don't have a crack. He's had 75 games to stamp his authority on the playing group and yet no-one in the footy world thinks that Melbourne players like to get their hands dirty. What a fantastic legacy Dean.

So I ask you ? Why do the apologists argue so passionately for Dean's retention ? What has he shown them that delivers this unwavering belief ? What motivates them ? They are either so steadfast in towing the company line that it wouldn't matter who was in charge they'd back them to the hilt, or they have a vested/personal interest. I won't out him, but I know that one of the apologists on here works part-time down at the club, so it's sort of understandable, but for the life of me I can't understand the others.

After 4 years and 75 games why does Bailey command a contract extension ? Has he shown that he's the right man to lead this group to finals and that he has the tactical nous to win finals ? There are plenty of questions but no definitive answers. And after 4 years that's enough reason to look elsewhere.

Yes it's self-indulgent.

Call me self-indulgent.

[Damo 3,254]

Yes it's self-indulgent.

Call me self-indulgent.

I thought you were a Pig. Or a Wolf. Now the cannibal is back. No pressing need to describe yourself as self-indulgent. Lucky you are only responding to yourself.

Its getting dicey working out where the black runs are.

[Hannabal 4]

I thought you were a Pig. Or a Wolf. Now the cannibal is back. No pressing need to describe yourself as self-indulgent. Lucky you are only responding to yourself.

Its getting dicey working out where the black runs are.

Follow your senses, Frankieboy.

[rpfc 28,052]

Follow your senses, Frankieboy.

Sense of smell?

[Guest Thomo]

Viney sounds like he must have been pretty frustrated with Baileys obvious incompetence. He said exactly what most knew, but I don't think I have heard a caretaker coach be that critical of his predecessors ability before. I wonder if the assistant coaches breathed a sign of relief when the end of Bailey came, it must have been hard working under him knowing how poor he was at his job.

[daisycutter 29,341]

Viney sounds like he must have been pretty frustrated with Baileys obvious incompetence. He said exactly what most knew, but I don't think I have heard a caretaker coach be that critical of his predecessors ability before. I wonder if the assistant coaches breathed a sign of relief when the end of Bailey came, it must have been hard working under him knowing how poor he was at his job.

What exactly did Viney say? I must have missed it

[old dee 23,503]

What exactly did Viney say? I must have missed it

I have missed it as well.

Been sulking the last 20 hours after what looks like our worst year since 2007

[H_T 3,032]

I have missed it as well.

Been sulking the last 20 hours after what looks like our worst year since 2007

2008-09 were good years for you then ?

[old dee 23,503]

2008-09 were good years for you then ?

No 186 point losses in those year from memory and we have more 9+ goal losses this year than in either of those years.

We had excuses in 2008/9 we were bottom out and re building

What does it take to admit we are very ordinary!

Edited August 22, 2011 by old dee

[H_T 3,032]

We had excuses in 2008/9 we were bottom out and re building

So I gather there is no excuses this year for you ? Nor any acknowledgement that 2011 is a development year ?

[old dee 23,503]

So I gather there is no excuses this year for you ? Nor any acknowledgement that 2011 is a development year ?

but we are developing backwards.

I have little interest now in excuses the MFC is littered with them.

Whatever way you want to look at it 2011 is a major reversal from last year.

[Guest Thomo]

What exactly did Viney say? I must have missed it

Quotes from the article

"For me, it's been a concentration on the fundamentals we have been poor at all year," Viney said.

" 'Bails' has been good at teaching them offensively, but when we have lost games defensively, we have been going over the wall.

"From my experience at Hawthorn and Adelaide, it's more defensive structures (that win games), so the defensive intent has been a focus on trying to get the ball back.

"We don't want to be counter-attacking from the defensive 50,

because the game has progressed now."

He said that Bailey has not taught the players how to play defensively, and when he was at two other clubs the coaches had a much better understanding of how to win games. Viney also says that they have to change the game plan because the game has progressed, and MFC have not moved with the rest of the competition . That's about as much of a shot at Baileys coaching as he could do.

What I don’t understand is that this was so obvious to everyone (aliases of e45 excluded), including Viney, but Bailey could not see it.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/demons-build-on-defensive-tactics/story-e6frf9jf-1226118364174

[old55 22,842]

Quotes from the article

"For me, it's been a concentration on the fundamentals we have been poor at all year," Viney said.

" 'Bails' has been good at teaching them offensively, but when we have lost games defensively, we have been going over the wall.

"From my experience at Hawthorn and Adelaide, it's more defensive structures (that win games), so the defensive intent has been a focus on trying to get the ball back.

"We don't want to be counter-attacking from the defensive 50,because the game has progressed now."

That's pretty unequivocal - seems that Schwab and Connolly weren't the only ones with concerns.