Memo Dees: listen to Mick, surprise us all

IMO He's on the money. Very cool article! Also interested in the views of the "people that know". Things can turn.

Go Dees! Kick the Blues A__

Memo Dees: listen to Mick, surprise us all

IMO He's on the money. Very cool article! Also interested in the views of the "people that know". Things can turn.

Go Dees! Kick the Blues A__

I like Martin Flanagan but there are more than a few agendas flying around in this article.

The passing over of Moloney.

Bringing up Sheedy's relationship with indigenous players.

And then there's the backhander to Neeld ...

"There is footage of the Melbourne box when the Howe mark was taken. Mark Neeld's face is creased with anxiety. The mark brings him no joy. Howe's botched handball after he hits the ground causes an explosion of angst."

He's entitled to his opinion but Flanagan can at times get too carried away with sentimentality and a nostalgia for yesteryear.

I personally like the fact that Neeld was more concerned with Howe's sh1tty handball.

Edited May 26, 201213 yr by Range Rover

I have to say, I was very surprised by Moloney's omission from the leadership group at the time. For me, those concerns continue to linger.

I have to say, I was very surprised by Moloney's omission from the leadership group at the time. For me, those concerns continue to linger.

Supposedly the players voted on the leadership group. Are you concerned that the players didn't rate Moloney's leadership traits, or that Moloney didn't lead by deed and example ?

Considering that our group is still very young perhaps it's pleasing to note that we have a group of young players that can already recognise those that aren't deserving of such honours. Perhaps Moloney's omission is the first tangible example that this club is steering the right path.

I thought that the article was pretty poor. Big on 'feelings', low on critical thinking.

Supposedly the players voted on the leadership group. Are you concerned that the players didn't rate Moloney's leadership traits, or that Moloney didn't lead by deed and example ?

Considering that our group is still very young perhaps it's pleasing to note that we have a group of young players that can already recognise those that aren't deserving of such honours. Perhaps Moloney's omission is the first tangible example that this club is steering the right path.

I vividly remember Brad Green saying that Neeld pulled him aside at the start of pre season and told him he wouldnt be captain. Contradicts the clubs version of events that the players had the sole decision of voting in the captains.

I decided long ago that Flanagan's articles were often a feel-good read, but low on substance.

It came pretty much after an article all about how Russell Robertson as great for the club, when all I could see was red as he sat on his backside after another missed mark and watching his opponent run the ball out fo the backline.

If he thinks footy is all about crowd enjoyment of the flashy things and not sacrifice to get success, then I don't really want to know his opinion on football.

If you're searching for alternate reasons to ultimate success to keep supporting your team, you've given up.

I vividly remember Brad Green saying that Neeld pulled him aside at the start of pre season and told him he wouldnt be captain. Contradicts the clubs version of events that the players had the sole decision of voting in the captains.

Your vivid recollection is incorrect.

Brad had a "5 minute" meeting just before the captaincy was announced to the footy world. Brad appreciated that Neeld gave him no BS.

I vividly remember Brad Green saying that Neeld pulled him aside at the start of pre season and told him he wouldnt be captain. Contradicts the clubs version of events that the players had the sole decision of voting in the captains.

When was this?

Source?

I recall something of this sort, but it was just before the captains were announced, when the decision had been made.

..........If he thinks footy is all about crowd enjoyment of the flashy things and not sacrifice to get success, then I don't really want to know his opinion on football.

If you're searching for alternate reasons to ultimate success to keep supporting your team, you've given up.

I would take the Swans mid past decade years of consistent, tough, uncompromising team orientated grind far ahead of the odd flashy feelgood big win of the Bailey years. I hope and believe that is what Neeld is working on.

We need a team, not a group of flashy selfish individuals, and the sooner he weeds out those who play for themselves and not the team the better.

When was this?

Source?

I recall something of this sort, but it was just before the captains were announced, when the decision had been made.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/tabid/7415/default.aspx?newsid=128871

I would take the Swans mid past decade years of consistent, tough, uncompromising team orientated grind far ahead of the odd flashy feelgood big win of the Bailey years. I hope and believe that is what Neeld is working on.

We need a team, not a group of flashy selfish individuals, and the sooner he weeds out those who play for themselves and not the team the better.

Interesting then that one of those who appears to have fallen by the wayside is nicknamed "Flash".

http://www.melbourne...x?newsid=128871

Yeah, so it wasn't before preseason or before the decision had been voted on by the players.

More peddling of rubbish.

Can't we just deal in facts?

Article was a good read until he mentions he would have made Moloney skipper. Then any substance in it was lost.

NB: I was ecstatic that Neeld was more concerned about what Howe did with the ball after taking that mark than the mark itself.

I have to say, I was very surprised by Moloney's omission from the leadership group at the time. For me, those concerns continue to linger.

You might not be if you were standing next to him at a bar, in the early hours of the morning one day last year, where he demonstrated that he was not a club leader.

NB: I was ecstatic that Neeld was more concerned about what Howe did with the ball after taking that mark than the mark itself.

I wasn't ecstatic, but I agree with your sentiment. He was focussing solely on the big picture, team improvement, not individual highlights.

And then there's the backhander to Neeld ...

"There is footage of the Melbourne box when the Howe mark was taken. Mark Neeld's face is creased with anxiety. The mark brings him no joy. Howe's botched handball after he hits the ground causes an explosion of angst."

He's entitled to his opinion but Flanagan can at times get too carried away with sentimentality and a nostalgia for yesteryear.

I personally like the fact that Neeld was more concerned with Howe's sh1tty handball.

I like Martin Flanagan. But I'd prefer to read what he's good at, rather than football specifics.

I have no doubt in my mind that Neeld was just as [censored] off with Cale Morton calling for the ball from Howe, rather than Howe handballing to a call. Morton should have had his wits about him as to the surrounding or closing in opposition players. It sh!ts me no end to see players calling for the ball on the overlap with no nous or knowledge to those close by or the "heat" they are about to encounter. Cale is a culprit of this time and again, McKenzie, Moloney, Trengove and Jones are others. The best thing Howe could have done is get up, compose himself and hit up someone efficiently. I understand the needs to move on quickly, but Howe was very unaware on who or what numbers were around after that mark, he trusted the call by Morton.

It's no wonder our players have trust issues. They lack nous. And sometimes this comes from continuity of games with one another.

Supposedly the players voted on the leadership group. Are you concerned that the players didn't rate Moloney's leadership traits, or that Moloney didn't lead by deed and example ?

Considering that our group is still very young perhaps it's pleasing to note that we have a group of young players that can already recognise those that aren't deserving of such honours. Perhaps Moloney's omission is the first tangible example that this club is steering the right path.

Hindsight is 20/20, but maybe that caused the problem. The fact that your fellow players didnt vote you into the group may have harbored some resentment.

Article was a good read until he mentions he would have made Moloney skipper. Then any substance in it was lost.

NB: I was ecstatic that Neeld was more concerned about what Howe did with the ball after taking that mark than the mark itself.

Same. Good to see he isnt going to be impressed with one highlight on a dismal day. All about structure and tactics. I think Neeld is the man.

I like Martin Flanagan. But I'd prefer to read what he's good at, rather than football specifics.

I have no doubt in my mind that Neeld was just as [censored] off with Cale Morton calling for the ball from Howe, rather than Howe handballing to a call. Morton should have had his wits about him as to the surrounding or closing in opposition players. It sh!ts me no end to see players calling for the ball on the overlap with no nous or knowledge to those close by or the "heat" they are about to encounter. Cale is a culprit of this time and again, McKenzie, Moloney, Trengove and Jones are others. The best thing Howe could have done is get up, compose himself and hit up someone efficiently. I understand the needs to move on quickly, but Howe was very unaware on who or what numbers were around after that mark, he trusted the call by Morton.

It's no wonder our players have trust issues. They lack nous. And sometimes this comes from continuity of games with one another.

So true! Melbourne constantly do this and Ive often wondered whether its more about getting an easy stat than actually being in a position to play on to advantage.

The other thing that has always annoyed me about melbourne is that when a player marks in the forward 50 on a shocker of an angle, none of our other forwards run to space to give him a centering option. They usually just stand around next to their opponent catching their breath. This is why Robbo got so good at kicking them from the pocket - he bl00dy had to!

Edited May 27, 201213 yr by Norm Smith's Curse

So true! Melbourne constantly do this and Ive often wondered whether its more about getting an easy stat than actually being in a position to play on to advantage.

The other thing that has always annoyed me about melbourne is that when a player marks in the forward 50 on a shocker of an angle, none of our other forwards run to space to give him a centering option. They usually just stand around next to their opponent catching their breath. This is why Robbo got so good at kicking them from the pocket - he bl00dy had to!

Robbo was also a master at 'feigning' give offs until opposition defenders arrived to close down any remaining holes in the forward 50. Ie. He made it look like his teammates were just standing around - a classic selfish forward's tactic!

You might not be if you were standing next to him at a bar, in the early hours of the morning one day last year, where he demonstrated that he was not a club leader.

Or if like me, you've actually slung someone's arm over your shoulder and carried them out of a bar.

Some people can't hold their drink and need to accept it!