What concerns me is that, after so much blind faith being expressed in Bailey, you'd think we'd be "once bitten twice shy" about showing blind faith in a coach until the performances are there.

The reason for a lot of the blind faith in Bailey was the "he's not coaching now, he's coaching for the future" line. We should take great care with the same line about another coach, before the performance is there to justify it.

The fact is, we still don't know whether Neeld can coach or not. We hope he can, but we don't know for sure.

You make a very good point. It is folly to assume the same approach will bear anything other than the same results. The only thing I might say to allay your fears is that the way Neeld is teaching us to play is different than the way Bailey taught us to play. Although we may have similar performance records, the statistics show that we are a significantly better contested football side than we ever were in Bailey's tenure. It is commonly understood that winning contested ball is a vital part of winning finals, and that in finals, kicking skills typically fall away considerably as the pressure mounts.

While I'm concerned that our kicking is very poor, I'm comforted by the fact that the one aspect of the game that is held to be most vital (contested ball) is being well-looked after under Neeld's regime. Only further evidence will be able to tell whether we will continue to develop in the areas we need to.

I have no intention of insulting you, Macca. I'd seriously consider insulting Hardnut and tonatopia, though. Their opinions are awfully thought out, if at all.

But don't play the martyr card. If you offer an opinion then you offer it to be challenged.

Just in the same way that you challenged my offering that your binary approach was too simplistic. If you are wanting to offer opinions that go unchallenged, then Demonland is not the place - try writing your own blog. There are people whose opinions I find to be ridiculous and laughable, but they probably find my opinions to be the same. If I post something then I expect it to be challenged.

"See the oppression inherent in the system!!"

Why don't you try 'Axis of Bob' - or could it be our opinions are too well thought out for you to challenge? A poor post.

Next stop,,, 9thMond!!!

Sadly they've been bumped down to 10th now with the Saints winning.

Oh well... they can shoot for ninth next week.

Who's responsible for our [censored] disposal? Is it the players or the coaches? Either way I don't think you can blame Neeld for the amount of turnovers caused by kicks that go out of bounds on the full, and handballs that miss targets or go to players under direct pressure.

Why are our skills so [censored]? Is it a confidence thing, or are we just a bunch of spuds? Who taught Davey to kick? Why can't he teach the rest of the squad.

So many questions. Do we have to fix our coaches or our players. Have we stuffed up at the drafting table or in development, or both? Or do we have dud coaches? What is the problem with my team?

I think I have made the point a number of times - the buck stops with the coach. That's not a simplistic insult to you Sloonie - it's a fundamental basis of leadership in any field.

You know what happens 'Hardnut' ? People like you and I who 'Dare' to question the Coach in any shape or form end up being shouted down and insulted .

The people who take us to task end up winning because we're way less prone to say anything in the future .

Not sure why you would quote the post where Hardnut was responding to my comment and talk about being 'shouted down' and 'insulted'. I thought it was a healthy debate in good spirits. Seems you are a little touchy Macca, light some inscents and find a happy place.

I have no intention of insulting you, Macca. I'd seriously consider insulting Hardnut and tonatopia, though. Their opinions are awfully thought out, if at all.

But don't play the martyr card. If you offer an opinion then you offer it to be challenged.

Just in the same way that you challenged my offering that your binary approach was too simplistic. If you are wanting to offer opinions that go unchallenged, then Demonland is not the place - try writing your own blog. There are people whose opinions I find to be ridiculous and laughable, but they probably find my opinions to be the same. If I post something then I expect it to be challenged.

"See the oppression inherent in the system!!"

Mate , I don't mind being taken to task at all . In fact , I wouldn't post if that were the case .

I tend to only post to challenge conventional thinking . So , I nearly always will get challenged and that's fine with me . But .....it can be exhausting work so I bide my time between those challenging posts !

Most of the time , my posts tend to be 'Different' . And don't worry , I'm well aware of that and am usually well armed . I'm always prepared to be educated though and don't mind being wrong .

Not sure why you would quote the post where Hardnut was responding to my comment and talk about being 'shouted down' and 'insulted'. I thought it was a healthy debate in good spirits. Seems you are a little touchy Macca, light some incense and find a happy place.

I was probably referring more to 'Hardnut' than me . I should have made that clearer . He's copped it a bit unfairly in the past (not necessarily tonight) . All for speaking his mind in a non insulting or demeaning way .

I'm a big boy . Not much bothers me except the right to free speech .

I'm always prepared to be educated though and don't mind being wrong .

Which is why I don't feel like insulting you!

And I definitely agree that posting can been exhausting. I tend to post in waves, generally when I'm in the mood.

Why don't you try 'Axis of Bob' - or could it be our opinions are too well thought out for you to challenge?

Try what? Insulting you?

I don't think I need to.

Sadly they've been bumped down to 10th now with the Saints winning.

Oh well... they can shoot for ninth next week.

Hmmn, well, that didn't last long did it.

Hmmn, well, that didn't last long did it.

And coincidentally Bruce Woodley (of the Seekers) had an excellent footballer as a son who was a keen Melbourne supporter if I recall correctly.

Which is why I don't feel like insulting you!

And I definitely agree that posting can been exhausting. I tend to post in waves, generally when I'm in the mood.

Try what? Insulting you?

I don't think I need to.

I'm glad you don't really believe in insulting comments as that would be contrary to the posting rules.

How about throwing out a challenging view though - I'm happy to cop opposing viewpoints and criticism.

And coincidentally Bruce Woodley (of the Seekers) had an excellent footballer as a son who was a keen Melbourne supporter if I recall correctly.

well as season 2012 will wind its way to its end there will be a number at Melbourne for whom the Carnival will be Over !!

How about throwing out a challenging view though - I'm happy to cop opposing viewpoints and criticism.

I have stated my position.

And engaging your views would only give validity to your position, regardless of who wins the debate.

And I'm glad that you don't think that I insulted you.

And coincidentally Bruce Woodley (of the Seekers) had an excellent footballer as a son who was a keen Melbourne supporter if I recall correctly.

Hmmn, A Class act in they're day.

Judith Durham,,, hmmn.

I think I have made the point a number of times - the buck stops with the coach. That's not a simplistic insult to you Sloonie - it's a fundamental basis of leadership in any field.

You will have to excuse me for not wanting to read through 7 pages of our post-mortem.

I think blaming the coach is a simplistic view. And "the buck stops with.." is just a cliched saying that glosses over underlying problems. Like I said, it's the players that take the field and they are the ones creating turnovers/displaying sub-par skills.

Now that's not to say that the coach is totally exempt, but we aren't involved with training/team meetings, we aren't in the inner sanctum of the club- so how can we blame the coach when we have no [censored] idea what is going on down there?

FWIW I think our players are [censored] and we have had no quality players for our youngsters to learn off, "on the worksite" so to speak..

Hmmn, A Class act in they're day.

Judith Durham,,, hmmn.

Perhaps the Seekers featuring MFC Trumpeter is a possibility at our next pre-match?

That's gotta be a crowd puller.

You will have to excuse me for not wanting to read through 7 pages of our post-mortem.

I think blaming the coach is a simplistic view. And "the buck stops with.." is just a cliched saying that glosses over underlying problems. Like I said, it's the players that take the field and they are the ones creating turnovers/displaying sub-par skills.

Now that's not to say that the coach is totally exempt, but we aren't involved with training/team meetings, we aren't in the inner sanctum of the club- so how can we blame the coach when we have no [censored] idea what is going on down there?

FWIW I think our players are [censored] and we have had no quality players for our youngsters to learn off, "on the worksite" so to speak..

So the club has fed us rubbish for over 5 years...and you wonder why i get p!ssed off!!

You are correct by the way. Today was a disgrace. Should have lost by 15. Ninthmond are not that good.

I have stated my position.

And engaging your views would only give validity to your position, regardless of who wins the debate.

And I'm glad that you don't think that I insulted you.

It's not a question of winning or losing a debate Bob - events in the future will give all of us satisfaction or otherwise - but to fear someone's view because it will give it validity is to fear any debate itself. Are you that unsure of your own beliefs? I would hope not, and I would hope that you would respect opposing viewpoints and be willing to debate them. "I disagree with what you say, sir, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.' - ring a bell?

You will have to excuse me for not wanting to read through 7 pages of our post-mortem.

I think blaming the coach is a simplistic view. And "the buck stops with.." is just a cliched saying that glosses over underlying problems. Like I said, it's the players that take the field and they are the ones creating turnovers/displaying sub-par skills.

Now that's not to say that the coach is totally exempt, but we aren't involved with training/team meetings, we aren't in the inner sanctum of the club- so how can we blame the coach when we have no [censored] idea what is going on down there?

FWIW I think our players are [censored] and we have had no quality players for our youngsters to learn off, "on the worksite" so to speak..

I think your view on the players is harsh Sloonie, and you seem to forget that they are trained by the coaching staff - I guess we agree to disagree.

Perhaps the Seekers featuring MFC Trumpeter is a possibility at our next pre-match?

That's gotta be a crowd puller.

crowd puller, maybe the bugle boy could just do a strip & streak his way off the arena. That IMO would draw Wild applause, after he's finished. B)

crowd puller, maybe the bugle boy could just do a strip & streak his way off the arena. That IMO would draw Wild applause, after he's finished.

Good point.. which raises another question.

Just about every game in Melboune this week had a pitch invasion except for our game today. Perhaps the trumpeter needs to knock it up a notch.

Neeld has had 11 players missing every week. The skills (71% DE cf Richmond's 69%) were bad but are actually improving. I notice the Neeld knockers run and hide their thoughts on the odd winning occasion. When this team is going places in 2 - 3 years you'll all be clambouring on Neeld's wagon. Richmond have had 4 years of Hardwick and still aren't much. We'll be better after 4 years of MN.

Collingwood had 10 years under MM, and Buck's hasn't changed the way they play much. 4 years ago everyone said WCE were rubbish and the chemist should be sacked.

I'm glad none of you weak (censored) weren't around me 40 years ago backing me up.

Im glad im not near you now.

I think your view on the players is harsh Sloonie, and you seem to forget that they are trained by the coaching staff - I guess we agree to disagree.

I could say your view on the coach is harsh also. And it goes without saying I don't think all our players are [censored], just most of the midfield and a couple in the backline.

I don't forget who trains them. Sometimes you can't polish a turd.

And FWIW I actually don't think today was as bad as some people are going on about. We were always going to struggle to kick a winning score with no forward line- we are playing with two backmen in the forward line- so we are two regulars down-down back, we are missing Macdonald who has been terrific, and our midfield will always struggle with the lack of speed.

See how good we do next year when we inject some midfield class into the team. Will the buck still stop with Neeld when we have some quality, or will it be the players who make us better?

From the MFC website:

The Demons did not score in the opening 26 minutes as the Tigers took hold of the game early.

In that period Melbourne's players did not follow the plan set out for them during the week and could not withstand the early Richmond onslaught.

Says it all really.

Neither could Adelaide last week.

I guess their coach is no good either.. oh wait..