He made two mistakes bagging two of our players in ten seconds for doing something they were not .

I disagree.

more latin - this place is going places!

In veritas Gluteus Maximux status quo

In veritas Gluteus Maximux status quo

Et tu Biffen.

Et tu Biffen.

How many did you eat, tu?

yeah, he did say that the players were well looked after by the coaching staff, but that he was having his private time with Davey... my question when I heard that wasn, how did that start up? who asked who? It'd probably say a lot about the relationships at the club, and whether Malthouse has a keen eye down there, or if Neeld hooked them up together, or if Davey was looking for someone. yeah.... interesting.

But I definitely agree, I enjoyed his commentating. Whoever said he knows the common game, spot on. He knows what the fans see, and isn't afraid after how ever many years to say what he's actually thinking.

Interestingly, some Geelong supporters I know thought he was terrible. I think we only liked him because he spoke a lot about Melbourne. The Geelong supporters though he was crap because he wasn't ejaculating over "Stevie Jay" every ten seconds like the rest of the commentators.

But to be honest, I have no idea why he's relegated to that Mickey Mouse Saturday "Arvo" group. It really is a team of dunces that he's stuck with over there.

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by Chook

1000BC I don't think so. I don't think history is your strong suite.

LOL, I meant 1000 AD, or the year 1000... my maximus mistakeus!

Anyway it is a little perculilar that Malthouse is on nickname terms with the players.

Agree entirely with the sentiment of the OP. I thought Malthouse was great on Saturday. He stuck to tactics, coaching, player mindsets, and the game. He did not act like a know-it-all, arrogant, egotistical, Collingwood [censored], as he has done previously.

I enjoyed his commentary. He certainly was insightful, but I'm also weary of the fact he was quite pro-MFC, hence perhaps a little biased our way.

LOL, I meant 1000 AD, or the year 1000... my maximus mistakeus!

Anyway it is a little perculilar that Malthouse is on nickname terms with the players.

Still wrong, buddy...

You're quite right. But the point was valid. For the last 4 years I've been watching two Melbourne players tackle one opponent leaving the second opponent free for the hand off. For those who didn't hear Mick Malthouse on the weekend, he said this was a 'trust' issue, meaning that at the moment Melbourne players don't trust their team mates to effect a proper tackle so go in to help. This just allows the opposition a free player. When players start to 'trust' each other, Mick says this won't happen. When Malthouse uses the word 'trust' he's not talking about honesty but effectiveness and I thought he made the point clearly and appropriately.

And when Neeld talks about building foundations I now understand better what he means.

It's BELIEF....more than trust IMO. Maybe trust in the back line but across the rest of the field it's a belief that your player will generally win most one on one contests and/or dispose of it effectively (ie., generally to our advantage....not the oppositions) once they do.

Given the way we butcher the ball in close quarters (or any quarters) at this point, it's no wonder that they're all running to the contest. Could also be a survival instinct as most players probably feel like they're being watched minute to minute with regard to their long term place in the team under the new regime. No one wants to be the receiver who has to break away/find another player in the clear and deliver ....potentially the next error as their general ball handling skills are pretty woeful atm and players up the field or around the ground might not be putting themselves into the correct areas as trained/creating space in the right areas etc. The skill factor lays at the coach's feet (plural) though IMO. What were we drilling into them all summer? And please, don't tell me drills are a thing of the past. It's scientifically proven (in sport) that if you repeat a drill enough times (in the thousands) it eventually becomes instinctive and very natural and improvements result in most cases.

Once more of the boys start 'believing' in each other and the level they're able to play at improves (in particular clean QUICK ball handling and more accurate disposal by foot, currently the worst disposal efficiency % in the league) .....we'll stay more true to our structures when the ball's in dispute....and run and spread more instinctively when we believe we're likely to win the contest or do win it.

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by Rusty Nails

You're quite right. But the point was valid. For the last 4 years I've been watching two Melbourne players tackle one opponent leaving the second opponent free for the hand off. For those who didn't hear Mick Malthouse on the weekend, he said this was a 'trust' issue, meaning that at the moment Melbourne players don't trust their team mates to effect a proper tackle so go in to help. This just allows the opposition a free player. When players start to 'trust' each other, Mick says this won't happen. When Malthouse uses the word 'trust' he's not talking about honesty but effectiveness and I thought he made the point clearly and appropriately.

And when Neeld talks about building foundations I now understand better what he means.

Lack of trust or confidence really accounts for our failure to hit the scoreboard more than the opposition.

When you have faith in your team-mate to win a contest, then you will react quicker to be in a position to provide an option. It also partially accounts for our low possession count and our poor disposal efficiency.

We now have begun to develop a "contested" mindset, but we need to temper our "defensive" mindset and be quicker to attack and run forward.

Once we consistently win contests more that the opposition then the trust will grow.

On Footy Classified last night Garry Lyon pointed out the same thing. He showed as an example footage of McKenzie and Sellar leaving their men (Chapman and West, respectively) to go in and help at a contest. Why they decided to do so was baffling given there were already 5 other Melbourne players at the contest. In the end, Geelong got the ball out of the contest and surprise, surprise it was handballed to Chapman who passed it on to West and Geelong was away.

This has been going on for years and it will take the coaching staff quite a bit of teaching/re-training to ensure players understand the importance of positioning and structure.

On Footy Classified last night Garry Lyon pointed out the same thing. He showed as an example footage of McKenzie and Sellar leaving their men (Chapman and West, respectively) to go in and help at a contest. Why they decided to do so was baffling given there were already 5 other Melbourne players at the contest. In the end, Geelong got the ball out of the contest and surprise, surprise it was handballed to Chapman who passed it on to West and Geelong was away.

This has been going on for years and it will take the coaching staff quite a bit of teaching/re-training to ensure players understand the importance of positioning and structure.

I think it stems from a losing mentality unfortunately.

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by dandeeman

On Footy Classified last night Garry Lyon pointed out the same thing. He showed as an example footage of McKenzie and Sellar leaving their men (Chapman and West, respectively) to go in and help at a contest. Why they decided to do so was baffling given there were already 5 other Melbourne players at the contest. In the end, Geelong got the ball out of the contest and surprise, surprise it was handballed to Chapman who passed it on to West and Geelong was away.

This has been going on for years and it will take the coaching staff quite a bit of teaching/re-training to ensure players understand the importance of positioning and structure.

He did show it and the interesting thing was that they went half way, not into the contest but towards it. That seems to show that they were uncertain of what they should have been doing, had no confidence and just stood there spectating.

On Footy Classified last night Garry Lyon pointed out the same thing. He showed as an example footage of McKenzie and Sellar leaving their men (Chapman and West, respectively) to go in and help at a contest. Why they decided to do so was baffling given there were already 5 other Melbourne players at the contest. In the end, Geelong got the ball out of the contest and surprise, surprise it was handballed to Chapman who passed it on to West and Geelong was away.

This has been going on for years and it will take the coaching staff quite a bit of teaching/re-training to ensure players understand the importance of positioning and structure.

Yeah I saw that clip. Was insightful and no doubt players will be shown that footage over and over again. Its great to see that a simple thing of 2 metres apart on 2 men led to a goal to Geelong. That clip actually gave me confidence that it is in fact about educating our players more. It does however show how far behind our players are though.

Giving me hope for the future.

On Footy Classified last night Garry Lyon pointed out the same thing. He showed as an example footage of McKenzie and Sellar leaving their men (Chapman and West, respectively) to go in and help at a contest. Why they decided to do so was baffling given there were already 5 other Melbourne players at the contest. In the end, Geelong got the ball out of the contest and surprise, surprise it was handballed to Chapman who passed it on to West and Geelong was away.

This has been going on for years and it will take the coaching staff quite a bit of teaching/re-training to ensure players understand the importance of positioning and structure.

It's 'ball watching' but to me it's just a disturbing lack of faith. They consistently don't trust their team mates to do their job. That is the heart of it.

I hope it is as simple as learning structures better, but I think it is a little more deep-seated.

I think the players need to have a sit down and work through why they don't trust each other to do their job.

I think it stems from a losing mentality unfortunately.

Maybe.

It's a vicious cycle if that's the case.

It's park footy to crowd the ball and get sucked into every contest and that is the way we are going about it at the moment.

It's 'ball watching' but to me it's just a disturbing lack of faith.

Mark Neeld could open the review with, "I find your lack of faith disturbing"

It's a bit of a chicken/egg scenario. We don't have faith in our players to win the footy because traditionally or players have been younger, weaker, slower or not as good as thier opposition. So in essence we need to get better before we get "better". Which is exactly why this contested stuff is so important not just to the structure of the team but to the psyche of it.

If Sam Mitchell was approaching the footy and you were within distance you would be ready to make an attacking position for the good handpass or the kick hitting you on the [censored]. You've seen it before, you know that chances are he will win it and get it to you.

Edited May 7, 201213 yr by dandeeman

It's 'ball watching' but to me it's just a disturbing lack of faith. They consistently don't trust their team mates to do their job. That is the heart of it.

I hope it is as simple as learning structures better, but I think it is a little more deep-seated.

I think the players need to have a sit down and work through why they don't trust each other to do their job.

Maybe.

It's a vicious cycle if that's the case.

It's park footy to crowd the ball and get sucked into every contest and that is the way we are going about it at the moment.

And how often do we as suppporters yell, "get in there and help him", I guess we have to understand what's going on and have a bit more faith as well.

Mind you, I doubt the players hear or care about what we say.

And how often do we as suppporters yell, "get in there and help him", I guess we have to understand what's going on and have a bit more faith as well.

Mind you, I doubt the players hear or care about what we say.

Actually, I think many supporters are yelling 'don't leave your man!' It's been one of my ongoing concerns for quite some time.

Then there is Lynden Dunn who seems to do neither. He seems to be caught between the action and his man half the time. But if waving arms around was a sport he'd win gold for Australia at the Olympics.

Edit: I should add that my comments about Dunn may be in ignorance. Quite possibly he's following the coach's instructions. If he is, I'd love to know what those instructions are.

Edited May 8, 201213 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia

And how often do we as suppporters yell, "get in there and help him", I guess we have to understand what's going on and have a bit more faith as well.

Mind you, I doubt the players hear or care about what we say.

Yeah, we all say that from time to time, but we also all see opposition players by themselves that have slipped out and have essentially been 'frontrunning' and we wonder where any Demon was - they were sucked into the contest immediately preceding that.

'Frontrunning' gets a bad rap, but it only gets a bad rap from me when the player doesn't work back aswell as forward. But the instincts of a Cale Morton to get 'cheap' possies is so valuable.

It takes hard work and smarts to find the footy in space and rack them up the way Dane Swan does...

It's one thing I wish we appreciated more as fans.

Is it just me or does Mickey Mouse seem to have a more than normal interest in this club ?? There's obviously a tie of some sort back to Neeld.. but even last year he seemed very up on who and what we were and capable of.

its almost as if he thinks.. "Christ of all teams this one ought to be stepping up and capable of something ( on paper)..but wtf is going on ? "

its weird.. A former filth with a soft spot for the devil. . Bit like cousins in the hay...but hey !!

He sensing a style in Neeld that only he may know is truly developing!! Jump on board Mick I believe the train has yet to depart for contenders in 2014