Don't mention the kick-ins!!!

It's considered to be a trivial point on this forum, and not worthy of consideration, suggestion , or debate.

The footy dept. has used the same lack of tactics since Steve Febey retired, and By God, we're NOT going to alter it!!!

When the kick-ins work a treat and we go coast to coast occassionally, they're heroes. When it doesn't work out, every person within the FD is a neanderthal and there are calls for a review or immediate replacement. Am I right JJC ?

Maybe ?! Don't sit on the fence now. I'll take it as a yes.

So if I state that we got totally outclassed by a superior midfield which led to some heavy bleeding down back through sheer dominance, yet I still recognise our kick-ins need work, our young players need more games and conditioning and perhaps our FD needs to be tweaked at year's end. But all-in-all I'm therefore still recognised in your eyes as someone who represents and defends the club with an agenda, am I right ?

FMD.

No need to get precious. I'm well aware our midfield got spanked yesterday. How about the coaches try a spare man down back and try leaving a forward such as Jurrah one out in our forward 50. We're getting spanked to a large extent because collingwood are far better. However we're also getting spanked because we're being completely out coached. As for your comments about being heroes going coast to coast. That doesn't excuse the 99 other times we kick it to the identical spot allowing the opposition to score heavily from our kick ins. Our players are flat footed and reactive. We can't even run and spread well. I'm well aware of our limitations but I'm mostly aware of our coaching panels limitations. And no I don't think you have an agenda.

It could also be said that you have an agenda with your constant negativity, do you want to undermine the club and raise the level of discontent amongst the supporters to a high level?

Are you really Jason Akermanis, and you just like the sound of your own keyboard, if you don't like what you read, simple don't read it

Bailey probably sent a message out saying "FFS give Rivers some help", or words to that affect, the players didn't, fact not an excuse

What is forward press, it is opposition players standing next to or near our players, making it difficult to execute a kick to them, and opposition players hurrying to another spot should a kick be successful, this has been happening for years, it just has a name now

Davis is a bloody good player and has been given a new lease of life by moving to defence, he is in form, we just didn't cover him well enough, we all saw it, but we are not excusing it.

I personally am not defending the club, but analysing, in my opinion, what went wrong yesterday, and posting my opinions in certain topics on the board today.

As I have said if you don't like the opinions, don't read them and don't reply, that way any posters who want to have a discussion and listen to others opinions can get on with it without being denigrated accused or flamed by your good self....what is your opunion of that?

Thanks

e

Read my posts over the last few years. I am by no means constantly negative. You're right the press has been happening for years which is another reason we should be able to do it and limit it's effectiveness. Thanks for proving my point.

Sure Davis is in good form. The coaches should have known this. They payed him little respect and he cleaned up.

Your analysis seems very protective of the club.

I will read them that's what the forum's for. I'm hardly flaming you just wondering why you and others keep defending what I see as indefensible.

My opinion of that is very little as I think you're struggling to see what should be plainly obvious after 4 years.

No need to get precious. I'm well aware our midfield got spanked yesterday. How about the coaches try a spare man down back and try leaving a forward such as Jurrah one out in our forward 50. We're getting spanked to a large extent because collingwood are far better. However we're also getting spanked because we're being completely out coached. As for your comments about being heroes going coast to coast. That doesn't excuse the 99 other times we kick it to the identical spot allowing the opposition to score heavily from our kick ins. Our players are flat footed and reactive. We can't even run and spread well. I'm well aware of our limitations but I'm mostly aware of our coaching panels limitations. And no I don't think you have an agenda.

Agreed - we are totally stagnant from kick-ins and when we lose, we often fail to spread.

If you watch the first 10 mins of the game again, I think you'll see Melbourne had some semblence of a strategy to beat Collingwoods press that worked briefly to produce the first two goals. Unfortunately Collingwood were quickly able to counter it and then went for the kill.

However,the midfield was where the game was won and Collingwood's work at the stoppages and in general play was so well drilled and so well executed you could almost see in unfold before it even happened. The positioning of players and their ability to spread to the right locations and read the play was very impressive. In particular when a player would spread goal side of the stoppage and move forward to receive the ball to make an un-pressured forward entry.

We just haven't reached that level of discipline and application yet and that can only realistically be achieved consistently through experience and a settled lineup I would have thought. We are still experimenting with players in different positions and roles to see what they can do rather than each player knowing their specific (and largely unchanged) role each week. This is a separate issue to a lack of consistent effort (i.e. contested possessions) but I think it goes some way to explaining to apparent lack of an effective gameplan.

It took until the 3rd quarter for Melbourne to kick to the left from a kick-in. This was the FIRST TIME IN 3 WEEKS!!!!

Does anyone seriously think that the Collingwood coaches didn't know this before the game? Sure makes the press easy to execute.

Also gives a good idea of how much work we are putting into our planning.

Inconsistency because of young players...RUBBISH

Have a look at the stats for Sylvia, Green, Bennell, Moloney for each quarter. Up and down or non-existent in the case of Green. It's not our young ones who are inconsistent.

It's the opinion "but should in the future" that bears discussion. There will be a whole spectrum of points of view on that. None right or wrong, at this stage. Who knows? Looking back in 5 years time, the answer will be as plain as the nose on your face. It either worked, or didn't. No amount of crystal ball gazing can answer it now.

But it's good to form our views, and express our fears (and hopes).

Clearly it was good for Clarkson to persevere with his zone defence. Clearly too it was brilliant strategy for Mark Thompson to persevere with his running handball game in 2006 when he had so many critics calling for his scalp. If he'd lost nerve at that point, it's possible Geelong would still be premiership-less like us since the 1960's.

But the other side of the coin is, how many coaching strategies and experiments have been tried and never made the grade? we tend to remember the (probably relatively small percentage) of breathtaking successes.

Incidentally, what will we call Bailey's gameplan and systems, if he turns out to be the amazing genius we all would hope?

I agree - whether it should succeed in the future or not is the point of contention.

I don't even have an opinion on this myself.

But the rolling Bailey has employed does work at times.

It's been proven very effective against teams that are in similar positions to us (adelaide, essendon).

We don't know how it would go against the more advanced teams when we are ourselves more advanced.

At the moment a collection of kids and second stringers wouldn't be able to implement any gameplan.

No idea what to call it, but there is a heavy focus on the rolling aspect.

That doesn't encompass the whole philosophy, but I'm sure someone will come up with something.

Isn't it possible that the reigning premier is purely and simply a lot better than a team that finished outside the finals last year..?

No, surely not.

We need to search for scapegoats!

There's no need to search for apologists, they're in plain sight.

But the rolling Bailey has employed does work at times.

It's been proven very effective against teams that are in similar positions to us (adelaide, essendon).

Ummm Hello? West Coast? North Melbourne?

Ummm Hello? West Coast? North Melbourne?

I left out the word "some". I didnt say "all".

West Coast doesn't count though.

Do you really think we're in a position to beat every single team that we "should"?

I left out the word "some". I didnt say "all".

West Coast doesn't count though.

Do you really think we're in a position to beat every single team that we "should"?

Wait... What? 50% is effective is it? West Coast doesn't count why?! Pretty sure they still got 4 points for it...

As I've said in many other threads, I'm not disappointed with our win/loss record, it's not far off what I expected at this stage, but the gap between our best and worst football has stayed the same when it should have shortened considerably this year.

Maybe ?! Don't sit on the fence now. I'll take it as a yes.

So if I state that we got totally outclassed by a superior midfield which led to some heavy bleeding down back through sheer dominance, yet I still recognise our kick-ins need work, our young players need more games and conditioning and perhaps our FD needs to be tweaked at year's end. But all-in-all I'm therefore still recognised in your eyes as someone who represents and defends the club with an agenda, am I right ?

FMD.

If we were outclassed by a superior midfield as you say, then we are in serious trouble, that's supposed to be one of our strengths. We have Scully, Trengove, Beamer, Gyberts, Jordie, Jones all of whom are supposed to be the future of the club, so if we were outclassed in that area, where they had a couple out, we are in more strife than I had expected. We also won the majority of the hit outs and that makes it worse.

.....

This isn't about a loyalty to him.

I'd give any other coach that was in charge the benefit of the doubt until I saw what I deemed as conclusive evidence that he needs to be moved on.

...........

And what do you consider conclusive evidence?

Wait... What? 50% is effective is it? West Coast doesn't count why?! Pretty sure they still got 4 points for it...

As I've said in many other threads, I'm not disappointed with our win/loss record, it's not far off what I expected at this stage, but the gap between our best and worst football has stayed the same when it should have shortened considerably this year.

We have deficiencies.

The teams we've played that are about the same stage as us, where we can overcome those deficiencies, we have beaten soundly.

West Coast doesn't count because they are way ahead of where we are.

If you don't understand that, it's your problem.

We have deficiencies.

The teams we've played that are about the same stage as us, where we can overcome those deficiencies, we have beaten soundly.

West Coast doesn't count because they are way ahead of where we are.

If you don't understand that, it's your problem.

You think West Coast are way ahead of us and I'm the one with the problem?

So what you're saying about our deficiencies is when we play well we win and when we don't we lose... Genius

We have deficiencies.

The teams we've played that are about the same stage as us, where we can overcome those deficiencies, we have beaten soundly.

West Coast doesn't count because they are way ahead of where we are.

If you don't understand that, it's your problem.

You do know that Wet Coast finished last last year, don't you?

Sitting in the stands yesterday, the last quarter turned to the how bad are we conversation. Then it was suggested that if two or three forwards stayed inside our forward 50m arc instead of pushing up on the wing specially if we had the footy on HBF, the defenders would be at least mindful of these men and maybe not press so high and if we get through the press it would be a certain goal as we have a couple of loose players up forward. Yesterday we had several occasions we beat the press to look up into our forward half and have no one there, it forces you to stop short kick hand ball turn over and a goal to Collingwood.

Round 1, 2007.

With due respect, people must be dreaming if they think WCE with a full fit list are cellar dwellers.

Cox, Kerr, Embley, La Cras, Priddis, Rosa, Glass make a fair top six/seven. Add when you add the maturing skill of Kennedy, Shuey and Hurn they are a fair outfit when fit.

And if posters dont realise....WCE had 800 more games of experience and 2 yrs of age of MFC on Saturday... They are further along the evolutionary cycle than are with proven premiership champions in their senior list.

Some people obviousy understand it.

Unfortunately too few...

If we were outclassed by a superior midfield as you say, then we are in serious trouble, that's supposed to be one of our strengths. We have Scully, Trengove, Beamer, Gyberts, Jordie, Jones all of whom are supposed to be the future of the club ...

First of all, "supposed to be one of our strengths" is relative, both within our team, and against other teams. Up against a Premiership-winning midfield, even with the players they had out, it was always going to be tough - your list includes 4 players with a grand total of 87 games. Which is less than half (in total) than Luke Ball. Someone mentioned that they had 1400 games more experience than us ... and it showed.

Secondly, out of your list, only 2 completed a full pre-season. Gysberts, Scully and Jordie all had injuries, and Jones was coming off his broken back and had a delayed start. In fact, from what I can recall, neither Scully nor Gysberts have yet to complete a pre-season at all. So what happened in the last quarter, where the depth of fitness, built up from years of pre-seasons (not to mention trips to Arizona) came into play? They ran all over us, primarily in the midfield. Surprise surprise.

Give the guys a few seasons, not to mention a few pre-seasons, then we can start talking about our midfield being a strength. Until then .... well, you just can't buy experience, and Collingwood saw this as a danger game, took it seriously, prepared accordingly and the rest, as they say, is history. Time to move on - though none of the above is going to be helped by a 6 day turnaround.

What the coaches said was:

Don't over handball

Don't turnover in the middle of the park

Don't leave either Cloke or Dawes in a 1 on 1

Don't allow easy clearances

Don't kick backwards

Don't leave spaces in the forward 50 to lead into

Don't stop talking

Don;t stop trying

The players let the coaching staff down....again....you are only as good as the consistent cattle you have, unfortunately if a team gets on a roll against us at the moment, we fall to bits........you don't coach that, not falling to bits comes with games and experience...yes I am getting a bit motion sick with the rollercoaster as well...but at least Morton is starting to hit form again, and Watts and Howe showed something...maybe next week everybody will...who knows?

To build a team from scratch, which is what Bailey has had to do takes a minimum of five years, we are three to four years in.......you need an average of about 80-90 games played minimum....we have nowhere near that yet

And maybe a bit of the old John Kennedy rhetoric..... Just do,do do do do do do.. A Coach with a different attitude eh

First of all, "supposed to be one of our strengths" is relative, both within our team, and against other teams. Up against a Premiership-winning midfield, even with the players they had out, it was always going to be tough - your list includes 4 players with a grand total of 87 games. Which is less than half (in total) than Luke Ball. Someone mentioned that they had 1400 games more experience than us ... and it showed.

Secondly, out of your list, only 2 completed a full pre-season. Gysberts, Scully and Jordie all had injuries, and Jones was coming off his broken back and had a delayed start. In fact, from what I can recall, neither Scully nor Gysberts have yet to complete a pre-season at all. So what happened in the last quarter, where the depth of fitness, built up from years of pre-seasons (not to mention trips to Arizona) came into play? They ran all over us, primarily in the midfield. Surprise surprise.

Give the guys a few seasons, not to mention a few pre-seasons, then we can start talking about our midfield being a strength. Until then .... well, you just can't buy experience, and Collingwood saw this as a danger game, took it seriously, prepared accordingly and the rest, as they say, is history. Time to move on - though none of the above is going to be helped by a 6 day turnaround.

Again with the games and the excuses, 1400 more experience than us, so what?

You mention Luke Ball well what about Beamer and who were the other midfielders in their side, how many games did they have?

I was merely responding to a post that said our midfield was outclassed and I ask outclassed by whom?

Game plan is Bailey's archillies heal.

We and the media argue over it every week.

Irrespective of what we each think. The next two months are crunch time. The club has to make a decision based on what we know now, not maybes. The decision may be confusing, but decision must be made on what we assess from the last four years of Bailey. The next three years are crucial. I call them platform years and will determine how well we set ourselves up. Then come the 1st window years, the 7th to 10th years of Bailey. Do we give Bailey three more years to see and if we then decide know, get a new coach as our window years open up. The next two months are big months for our club as we have to make a decision now based on the information we have now. Right or Wrong, the board must decide now. CRUNCH TIME

Again with the games and the excuses, 1400 more experience than us, so what?

You mention Luke Ball well what about Beamer and who were the other midfielders in their side, how many games did they have?

I was merely responding to a post that said our midfield was outclassed and I ask outclassed by whom?

Robbie... Honestly, comments like this make it hard to take you seriously.

Many people bring it up as an excuse because... shock horror... it is a legitimate excuse.

I left out the word "some". I didnt say "all".

West Coast doesn't count though.

Do you really think we're in a position to beat every single team that we "should"?

That's a massive change to what you originally wrote

With due respect, people must be dreaming if they think WCE with a full fit list are cellar dwellers.

Cox, Kerr, Embley, La Cras, Priddis, Rosa, Glass make a fair top six/seven. Add when you add the maturing skill of Kennedy, Shuey and Hurn they are a fair outfit when fit.

And if posters dont realise....WCE had 800 more games of experience and 2 yrs of age of MFC on Saturday... They are further along the evolutionary cycle than are with proven premiership champions in their senior list.

One of the reasons that Melbourne have so few games experience across the team is because Petterd, Warnock, Bate, Newton and Dunn are playing at Casey, and Miller is at Richmond.

Three years ago they were seen as the future of the club. Part of the reason that they have not progressed may be bad recruiting, but part must be the development by the club.