***Newsflash*** Season 2012 for the Melbourne Football Club has been terrible. Ok, so I'm not telling you anything that you didn't already know. But this Saturday, we finally get to play the final game of our season, and can then look forward to what is hopefully going to be an active trade period, followed by the draft.

But, before we look to far ahead, we have got 1 game to go against a finals contender. Now, before I start, I'm not saying we stand any chance whatsoever, and will predict a 50+ point loss.

For the 2nd part of this season, it was made quite clear that a number of players are playing for their career, and as such, these players have been getting a fair run at the top level. I would imagine by now that the decision on those careers has been made.

Early this year in one of The Coach's Office segments on the MFC website, Mark Neeld made comment about the different style that he is getting us to play this season, being the more defencive style, and learning some of those simple fundamentals of the game. The comment Neeld made was along the lines of "We've said to the players that the attacking part of our game is very good and we do it very, very well, but it's this defencive side that we are going to focus on this season". He told the players "Don't worry about our strength (the attacking side) at the moment, we'll come back to that, we just want to get some of these basics right first".

Well, as this is Round 23, and as we the suporters have put up with probably one of the worst seasons I can remember in over 3 decades, can I ask for Neeld to give us something this game to bring us back next year? Can he please "release that shackles" off our players and just let them play an attacking style of footy, one that they can do well, and let's see some enjoyment on the faces of our players. I'm not saying that they shouldn't defend, but let's give us a glimpse of what 2013 could look like. Let's see Watts play at CHF. Let's see Jack Fitzpatrick play at FF. Let's see if Tommy McDonald can go with Pav (if he plays) for a whole game. Don't play Rivers or Garland up forward, they are defenders and that's where they should be played. Give Gysberts a recall and play him in the guts.

What harm will it do? As I said, by now the FD will know who's going to get their contract renewed. "Freeing up" our players for the last game of the season won't undo all the hard work Neeld has put in to get these defencive structures right. If we have a bad result, which is on the cards anyway, it's not going to kick the confidence of the playing group. I want to see an unpredictable Melbourne outfit.

The problem with some of my changes, etc is the fact that Casey are still playing, and we have 8 players eligible to play finals. They need Fitzy, especially given the form he is in at the moment. They would need Gysberts getting the clearances. But to be honest, and not meaning to be disrespectful, fcuk Casey, this is about the MFC. We need members, sponsors, etc, and based on 2012, it wouldn't surpise if these areas drop in 2013. Will the result in Perth this Saturday make a difference for 2013? Probably not. But for 1 week of this season I would just love to see our players playing with some sparkle in their eyes and enjoying the game that most of us dream we can play at that level.

Edit - tidying up!

Edited August 28, 201213 yr by billy2803

I disagree. The group needs to be drilled and drilled and drilled on hard, boring, defensive footy. No respite.

Once they've mastered it, then they earn the right to have the shackles released.

Neeld should not take his foot off their throats until playing accountable, disciplined footy comes second nature to them.

I disagree. The group needs to be drilled and drilled and drilled on hard, boring, defensive footy. No respite.

Once they've mastered it, then they earn the right to have the shackles released.

Neeld should not take his foot off their throats until playing accountable, disciplined footy comes second nature to them.

I can see your point, and I'm sure some will agree while others don't. And I would imagine Neeld is of the same opinion as you.

I said months ago that Neeld will go down as the man that led Melbourne to their 13th premiership, or he will go down as the last coach of the Melbourne Football Club. His ruthless ways will lead to one or the other.

Ahh, I just realised why you disagree with my post Rangey, it's because I said we should play Watts at CHF. How could I forget that he is nothing if not a hlaf back flank, and even then we don't want him playing there. Keep your Watts conversation to the relevant thread.

Slap cook on this week and tell him if he dosnt kick 5 goals he ll be delisted, in fact say that to half the team

I can see your point, and I'm sure some will agree while others don't. And I would imagine Neeld is of the same opinion as you.

I said months ago that Neeld will go down as the man that led Melbourne to their 13th premiership, or he will go down as the last coach of the Melbourne Football Club. His ruthless ways will lead to one or the other.

Ahh, I just realised why you disagree with my post Rangey, it's because I said we should play Watts at CHF. How could I forget that he is nothing if not a hlaf back flank, and even then we don't want him playing there. Keep your Watts conversation to the relevant thread.

Haha I promise I won't mention the No.4 in this thread.

I do agree with your "Neeld or bust" forecast, though.

Personally I think he has what it takes to become the second coming of Norm Smith. Just something about him isn't there.

Haha I promise I won't mention the No.4 in this thread.

I do agree with your "Neeld or bust" forecast, though.

Personally I think he has what it takes to become the second coming of Norm Smith. Just something about him isn't there.

Yeah, he does have that "something". I just hope the players see it though, otherwise it'll mean nothing. That was sort of the angle I was taking with this weekend. If the players can see that Neeld has that flexibility when required, that it may help them while they are thinking about things during the offseason. The problem in the past is that when we have given players a bit "freedom", they abuse it. Just could see this weekend as a perfect opportunity to see who will still do the right thing when let off the leash (looking for players who will still ensure they do those basics right that they have been working on all year, but still taking the game on).

I think that's why Sam Blease has caught the eye of us in the latter part of this year, and given us some excitement. I just want to see 21 players doing it, just for this game, especially after the season from hell!

Disagree.

By "releasing the shackles" is a sign that they're not "elite". Being ruthless in what they are trying to achieve is the only way.

It would be more detrimental that good in my opinion.

But for 1 week of this season I would just love to see our players playing with some sparkle in their eyes and enjoying the game that most of us dream we can play at that level

AGREE AGREE AGREE

We need to love the game style. Neeld's style is slow and boundary riding. Corridor ?? What corridor? We handball to others under pressure, we kick sideways and backwards x4 any other side.

Aggressive. Play on style. Watch the Crows - 218 kicks to 108 handballs. Demons 188 kicks to 168 handballs.

Disagree.

By "releasing the shackles" is a sign that they're not "elite". Being ruthless in what they are trying to achieve is the only way.

It would be more detrimental that good in my opinion.

In a nothing game at the end of a tough year for members, sponsors, coaching staff, admin staff and players?

Regardless of the result, this game will have no bearing on what has been achieved this year. It will not undo any hard work the FD have done over the past 12 months.

Slap cook on this week and tell him if he dosnt kick 5 goals he ll be delisted, in fact say that to half the team

That is effectively saying you are out the door before the game.

So why bother.

What it would do is generate another 186

I'm not sure that planting Fitzpatrick at FF is going to help us an awful lot.

The problem is, our players don't seem to have the running capacity to play both defensively and attacking at the same time. We're obviously concentrating on making sure we track back when we turn the ball over, and all the other energy draining aspects of defensive play like hard tackling, spoiling, second, third and forth efforts, etc...

By the time we get the ball, because of all the defensive running & effort, we don't seem to have the legs to get out into space and provide those sort of attacking options that we saw under Bailey. At this stage, it's either one or the other. We either spend a lot of effort defensively, or we spend that effort on attacking hard. We can't do both yet.

I fear that if we were to go on the front foot against Freo, we will lose by 100+ points because at this stage they are more talented, more experienced and they have a massive home ground advantage..

Stick a fork in this idea, and thank your deity of choice.

If we'd actually reverted properly to Baileyball, I shudder to think what I'd do.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/146067/default.aspx

Neeld said the Demons would use the game as another opportunity to develop the style of play being implemented.

"We'll try a couple of different things perhaps, but we're fairly keen to keep a similar structure forward of the ball and teach our inexperienced midfield a certain way to play," Neeld said.

"I don't think the right thing to do is stick 17 people in the back 50 and just leave it in there and create an arm-wrestle with mass numbers."

"Look boys, I know we spent all preseason trying to instill in you a work ethic and game-plan that will ultimately stand up in finals. I know we spent a lot of times on defensive zones and making your 'press' better. I know we've spent a lot of time getting you to concentrate on the defensive aspect of your play and teaching you to run hard both ways. I know we've spent a lot of time focussing on contested footy. But I want to change all that for this last game of the year. I want you to pretend Dean is once again your coach. Go out, be merry and have some fun."

I feel sick.

Let's just hope they actually remember how to play an attacking brand of footy..

We'd lose by 100+ against a team that would only score 135.

"Release the shackles" against a Freo team that seem to have adopted Lyons "defence first" mentality so well.

Perhaps we could ask Sandilands to tap it to Jones to give us a chance to actually get the ball in space so we could "release the shackles".

Our only chance of beating Freo is to "ropa dope" them to keep the score low. We don't have a forward line capable of going toe to toe with them...

Edited August 29, 201213 yr by PaulRB

By the time we get the ball, because of all the defensive running & effort, we don't seem to have the legs to get out into space and provide those sort of attacking options that we saw under Bailey. At this stage, it's either one or the other. We either spend a lot of effort defensively, or we spend that effort on attacking hard. We can't do both yet.

I agree, and i believe that this is why we've seen a decrease in posessions and awful set shots from Trengove where he can't make the distance from 35m.

He's just too stuffed from all his defensive efforts to run 100% both ways. At the moment he's 100% defensive and 40% attacking.

It has been reported that internally Trengove is right up there in defensive efforts etc.

Edited August 29, 201213 yr by Bingo

"Look boys, I know we spent all preseason trying to instill in you a work ethic and game-plan that will ultimately stand up in finals. I know we spent a lot of times on defensive zones and making your 'press' better. I know we've spent a lot of time getting you to concentrate on the defensive aspect of your play and teaching you to run hard both ways. I know we've spent a lot of time focussing on contested footy. But I want to change all that for this last game of the year. I want you to pretend Dean is once again your coach. Go out, be merry and have some fun."

I feel sick.

Then go away and vomit somewhere else rather than all that verbal spew that you've just come up with.

Let's just hope they actually remember how to play an attacking brand of footy..

i don't think there's any doubt about this P_Man

You only need to look at the first quarter against Adelaide last week to see that we have the ability to move the ball quickly and efficiently.

There have been flashes of it throughout the season and I think once the side is fitter and stronger they will be able to sustain this style of play - while fulfilling their defensive duties too - for longer periods.

I agree, and i believe that this is why we've seen a decrease in posessions and awful set shots from Trengove where he can't make the distance from 35m.

He's just too stuffed from all his defensive efforts to run 100% both ways. At the moment he's 100% defensive and 40% attacking.

It has been reported that internally Trengove is right up there in defensive efforts etc.

Yeah, particularly in uncontested possessions. Obviously having a high uncontested possession count indicates you're spreading well on the rebound and at stoppages, and finding space. We've basically bottomed out from an UC possession count perspective. I agree RE: Trengove...

The shackles that saw us have the same number of inside 50's as Adelaide?

We have no forward line.

IF we had Clark, if we had Jurrah, if Green wasn't past it, if Howe didn't have to spend so much time being a midfielder, if Watts could be a forward.... we'd have been a lot closer on the scoreboard in quite a few games. If only.

Shackles Shmackles

I disagree. The group needs to be drilled and drilled and drilled on hard, boring, defensive footy. No respite.

Once they've mastered it, then they earn the right to have the shackles released.

Neeld should not take his foot off their throats until playing accountable, disciplined footy comes second nature to them.

Agree, they can realease the shackles next Monday.

Slap cook on this week and tell him if he dosnt kick 5 goals he ll be delisted, in fact say that to half the team

why would you delist half the team if Cook doesn't kick 5 goals? Very unfair

The shackles that saw us have the same number of inside 50's as Adelaide?

We have no forward line.

IF we had Clark, if we had Jurrah, if Green wasn't past it, if Howe didn't have to spend so much time being a midfielder, if Watts could be a forward.... we'd have been a lot closer on the scoreboard in quite a few games. If only.

Shackles Shmackles

We did pretty much break even for inside 50's. It was just that our entries were generally haphazard, and theirs were executed through precise and rapid ball movement..

Clark would've had his work cut out for him.

Clark would've had his work cut out for him.

He always did, and usually made short work of it. Bless that man.

He always did, and usually made short work of it. Bless that man.

Very true! The Geelong game at Simmonds earlier this year for example... He's just a colossus.

He needs some assistance though, and there's only so much you can make out of 'hit-and-hope' forward entries. A fitter midfield that can be more effective on the counter attack would help. Having another viable tall target and some crumbing goal sneaks would help too..

Edited August 29, 201213 yr by King Cuthbertson