Stuffed if we do - stuffed if we don't. Seven changes is always unlikely to win a game. Yet, based on today's gutless effort - seven is not enough.

It's not as if 7 or more changes will upset the team balance; there is none to begin with.

Out: Rodan Pederson Gillies Byrne Sellar Nicho Jamar Tapscott

Lucky: Watts Dunn Jordie Sylvia and only because they're younger and may have some upside yet.

I would never play Rodan Pederson Byrne or Gillies again because there is simply no point, none are any better than some of the spuds we already have.

If Neeld can't see the problem and if he had to ask the journos then it appears he can't, then he should walk; the problem is you can't recruit players that are no good and have been delisted or should be then be surprised when they turn out to be useless.

I would venture to say that even Martin Morton Petterd and Gysberts would be better options, we've traded copper for tin.

IMO the Senior side should be composed of this group which ever are fit...

start with our hardest heads in the side first, then as we gain confidence, introduce some more skill to the side.

31 Jack Grimes

9 Jack Trengove
2 Nathan Jones

11 Mitch Clark

6 Chris Dawes
8 James Frawley

40 Mark Jamar
13 Jordie McKenzie

10 Shannon Byrnes
7 Jack Viney
25 Tom McDonald

12 Colin Sylvia
15 David Rodan
28 Joel MacDonald

38 Jeremy Howe
34 Dean Kent
39 Neville Jetta
44 Rohan Bail
20 Colin Garland
19 James Strauss
45 Matt Jones
46 Dean Terlich

32 Michael Evans

& we might add Magner
------------------------------------

the rest can work their butts off with Casey & earn a spot.

4 Jack Watts
5 Jimmy Toumpas
14 Lynden Dunn
17 Sam Blease
21 Cameron Pedersen
26 Daniel Nicholson
27 Tom Gillies
30 James Sellar
33 Dom Barry
35 Luke Tapscott
36 Aaron Davey
37 Max Gawn
41 Troy Davis
42 Jake Spencer
43 Rory Taggert
46 Josh Tynan
48 Jack Fitzpatrick

Edited March 31, 201312 yr by dee-luded

Sam Blease to play for Casey.... Seriously.

Sam Blease to play for Casey.... Seriously.

Yes, as I said, the hardest & most mature heads first in the ones.

and as the side finds its feet, then add some more skilled types.

We have way too much inexperience,,, and that causes panic & a lack of trust amongst the team.

the side needs to be able to settle now, & then the kids with a few games to their names can have a crack.

James Strauss hard and Mature? You also have a few players yet to play an AFL game on your top list, how do you judge them?

Yes, as I said, the hardest & most mature heads first in the ones.

and as the side finds its feet, then add some more skilled types.

We have way too much inexperience,,, and that causes panic & a lack of trust amongst the team.

the side needs to be able to settle now, & then the kids with a few games to their names can have a crack.

What inexperience - Viney and Toumpas. Well from my seat Viney, inexperienced but Demons BOG and Toumpas inexperienced but certainly at least put in. The other newcomers were all experienced players but unfortunately some were/are duds.

What inexperience - Viney and Toumpas. Well from my seat Viney, inexperienced but Demons BOG and Toumpas inexperienced but certainly at least put in. The other newcomers were all experienced players but unfortunately some were/are duds.

... the teams inexperience (http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-03-29/new-look-dees-team-for-season-opener) some first gamers & other MFC fist gamers.

this adds up to a lot of change for one team in one AFL game... the collective debutantes were too many changes in one hit. and the lack of cohesion showed...

its only a couple of days back, they were saying that Clarke was looking forward to playing alongside Dawes for the first time?

This team is as green as playing together.

#edit: duds, you can tell our depth players are duds after 2.5 hrs?

No, I think not.

Edited March 31, 201312 yr by dee-luded

... the teams inexperience (http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-03-29/new-look-dees-team-for-season-opener) some first gamers & other MFC fist gamers.

this adds up to a lot of change for one team in one AFL game... the collective debutantes were too many changes in one hit. and the lack of cohesion showed...

its only a couple of days back, they were saying that Clarke was looking forward to playing alongside Dawes for the first time?

This team is as green as playing together.

#edit: duds, you can tell our depth players are duds after 2.5 hrs?

No, I think not.

The Power had about as many new players as us today, and were younger than us on average. So you can forget the "senior hardest heads", how about we play whoever gave an effort and drop whoever didn't, regardless of seniority?! 2 of our 3 best players today were "young heads" in Viney and M.Jones.

James Strauss hard and Mature? You also have a few players yet to play an AFL game on your top list, how do you judge them?

By the looks of his list, they get judged on how they went today. If they weren't amongst the worst today, they make the grade as first choice until further notice

Blease goes to Casey because he came on as the sub, so wasn't on long enough to be judged.

After a day when our best player BY FAR was an 18 year old, he wants to go with an oldest players first approach. Joel MacDonald ahead of Blease.

Seriously no words.

Edited March 31, 201312 yr by P_Man

... the teams inexperience (http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2013-03-29/new-look-dees-team-for-season-opener) some first gamers & other MFC fist gamers.

this adds up to a lot of change for one team in one AFL game... the collective debutantes were too many changes in one hit. and the lack of cohesion showed...

its only a couple of days back, they were saying that Clarke was looking forward to playing alongside Dawes for the first time?

This team is as green as playing together.

#edit: duds, you can tell our depth players are duds after 2.5 hrs?

No, I think not.

Do you consider Gillies, Pedersen depth players because if you do there is no hope. I consider them experienced in the number of games they have played not as in experienced MFC players. Today they showed nothing. Today they were duds.

Who seriously thinks more than 10% of our team can play. We will be flogged against Essendon. Jones, M. Jones, Viney and thats it!

By the looks of his list, they get judged on how they went today. If they weren't amongst the worst today, they make the grade as first choice until further notice

Blease goes to Casey because he came on as the sub, so wasn't on long enough to be judged.

After a day when our best player BY FAR was an 18 year old, he wants to go with an oldest players first approach. Joel MacDonald ahead of Blease.

Seriously no words.

Blease had as many, if not more, possies in less than a quarter than many did for the game. He stays.

Blease had as many, if not more, possies in less than a quarter than many did for the game. He stays.

I completely agree.

By the looks of his list, they get judged on how they went today. If they weren't amongst the worst today, they make the grade as first choice until further notice

Blease goes to Casey because he came on as the sub, so wasn't on long enough to be judged.

After a day when our best player BY FAR was an 18 year old, he wants to go with an oldest players first approach. Joel MacDonald ahead of Blease.

Seriously no words.

Its more about years in the system, & in their bodies. also the older we get the more composed under pressure usually.

youngsters have a habit of panic & deviating from the plans... we have recruited some experienced heads to help shift the culture & to reinstate some maturity to the list, as a temporary measure, as our youngsters develop as they should, by playing/learning in lower pressure games with Casey.

* this is why the Cats were so composed. big bodies that could confidently take a tackle whilst with the ball & feed off to a good target. mature bodies & heads that play regularly together.

What inexperience - Viney and Toumpas. Well from my seat Viney, inexperienced but Demons BOG and Toumpas inexperienced but certainly at least put in. The other newcomers were all experienced players but unfortunately some were/are duds.

you may notice that Viney is on that list, he's hard headed, & has already one year experience in our system, & has grown up with AFL as his environment.

Hahahaha looks like gillies is the new whipping boy. Not one person thinks he should be in next week

Hahahaha looks like gillies is the new whipping boy. Not one person thinks he should be in next week

And with good reason.

Its more about years in the system, & in their bodies. also the older we get the more composed under pressure usually.

youngsters have a habit of panic & deviating from the plans... we have recruited some experienced heads to help shift the culture & to reinstate some maturity to the list, as a temporary measure, as our youngsters develop as they should, by playing/learning in lower pressure games with Casey.

* this is why the Cats were so composed. big bodies that could confidently take a tackle whilst with the ball & feed off to a good target. mature bodies & heads that play regularly together.

These players today squibbed it under pressure:

Nicholson, 22

Sellar, 24

Pederson, 26

Jamar, 29

Watts, 22

Frawley, 24

Garland, 24

These didn't:

Viney, 18

M.Jones, 25

I think you're "senior heads" theory is rubbish.

Play whoever played well, that's how you develop a list.

Assuming that going with a "mature bodies and heads first" is the right approach, why do you have Kent and Strauss ahead of Dunn and Sellar? Kent is yet to play a single game and Strauss has been off the park for donkeys. Why is M Jones up there? He's played 1 game. Because he was good today?

You choose the BEST team, not the oldest team, even your own selections comply with that theory.

edit: I agree that Kent and M Jones should be in the team next week, but your theory has major flaws and you yourself are not sticking to it.

Edited March 31, 201312 yr by P_Man

Obviously Blease stays but the point about [unfashionable] Davey and MacDonald coming back into the side along with Jetta is well-made. I was disapponted today with Nicho and as for Sellar dropping those two easy marks in front of goals in the first half it was unforgivable and kept us out of the game. Let us bring Terlich and Dawes in next week as well [and never move Gillies to full-forward again]. I cannot believe the demonlanders who said over the last two days that he was better for us than Rivers!

James Strauss hard and Mature? You also have a few players yet to play an AFL game on your top list, how do you judge them?

Michael Evans has been in our system for some years, & from the things I've seen of him, he has a lot of composure & stability.

Strauss is a solid footballer who is ready top come good, is very coachable, & is in the area we need help. off halfback.

Tom McDonald's efforts speak for themselves.

Matt Jones has the body & maturity that comes with a 25 Yr old & has solid form.

Dean Terlich has also the body & maturity that comes with a 23 Yr old & has solid form.

Neville Jetta has been around the system now for some time & is ready to take the next step. He is not the type to pull up.

& Dean Kent, has a maturity ahead of his years.

all these types listed in the post above are all solid styled footballers. none a flashy types, so IMO would be a good start to get the side away into solid form. solid form isn't about a win. It's about strong play & earning respect, & giving no quarter.

the others can bide their time.

Watts hung around near full back whenever we were kicking out (unless he did the kicking) - he must have been under instructions to occupy this pointless position, or else the runner would certainly have been out to tell him to make himself useful - "get out there, and present!" Not having an effective centre half back left Watts in no-man's-land most of the game. Plus, didn't he miss the final training session? Maybe he was not 100%, too. In any case, if he can be usefully deployed next week, he's definitely a first 18 for mine. (But, for all his faults, I shake my head at how MFC have used him, ever since he arrived, and certainly again today.)

We played negative, not defensive, once we were losing. It's different - negative is to go slow, look for the boundary, go backwards, act like you are scared of being told off for transgressing a team rule about "defence" [read negativity], rather than trying to achieve something good that might turn things around. Viney, Toumpas, Blease the exceptions. Too young or new to have gotten on the programme, I suppose. Defence of course has always begun with manning up and denying them easy possessions. I can't get away from thinking the coach is at least part of this....

It is the uncontested/unhurried possessions we give the opposition that plays them, one team after another, into confidence, and arrogance - and with no Melbourne runner going out to demand accountability, I can only conclude the coach is not upset by this absurd tactic of "guarding empty space" (Wake up Mark, it's not soccer: they just kick it over our heads...). Watts wasted his day guarding empty space - is that his choice, I wonder?

There will always be somebody lacking confidence, but when about 18 out of 22 play without confidence, why wouldn't questions be asked about the way they are being coached?

Michael Evans has been in our system for some years, & from the things I've seen of him, he has a lot of composure & stability.

Strauss is a solid footballer who is ready top come good, is very coachable, & is in the area we need help. off halfback.

Tom McDonald's efforts speak for themselves.

Matt Jones has the body & maturity that comes with a 25 Yr old & has solid form.

Dean Terlich has also the body & maturity that comes with a 23 Yr old & has solid form.

Neville Jetta has been around the system now for some time & is ready to take the next step. He is not the type to pull up.

& Dean Kent, has a maturity ahead of his years.

all these types listed in the post above are all solid styled footballers. none a flashy types, so IMO would be a good start to get the side away into solid form. solid form isn't about a win. It's about strong play & earning respect, & giving no quarter.

the others can bide their time.

So in other words there are exceptions to your rule. Maturity which is not necessarily attached to age, ala Kent (how you've come to this judgement based on a couple of NAB Cup games I have no idea).

I would question how a 1 gamer has a mature head in AFL terms (Jones). Mature body yes.

Your system is confused. Just pick the best performed players. Reward effort. Don't confuse it.

Watts hung around near full back whenever we were kicking out (unless he did the kicking) - he must have been under instructions to occupy this pointless position, or else the runner would certainly have been out to tell him to make himself useful - "get out there, and present!" Not having an effective centre half back left Watts in no-man's-land most of the game. Plus, didn't he miss the final training session? Maybe he was not 100%, too. In any case, if he can be usefully deployed next week, he's definitely a first 18 for mine. (But, for all his faults, I shake my head at how MFC have used him, ever since he arrived, and certainly again today.)

We played negative, not defensive, once we were losing. It's different - negative is to go slow, look for the boundary, go backwards, act like you are scared of being told off for transgressing a team rule about "defence" [read negativity], rather than trying to achieve something good that might turn things around. Viney, Toumpas, Blease the exceptions. Too young or new to have gotten on the programme, I suppose. Defence of course has always begun with manning up and denying them easy possessions. I can't get away from thinking the coach is at least part of this....

It is the uncontested/unhurried possessions we give the opposition that plays them, one team after another, into confidence, and arrogance - and with no Melbourne runner going out to demand accountability, I can only conclude the coach is not upset by this absurd tactic of "guarding empty space" (Wake up Mark, it's not soccer: they just kick it over our heads...). Watts wasted his day guarding empty space - is that his choice, I wonder?

There will always be somebody lacking confidence, but when about 18 out of 22 play without confidence, why wouldn't questions be asked about the way they are being coached?

spot on. They don't know whether to attack the ball carrier or just watch.

Watts hung around near full back whenever we were kicking out (unless he did the kicking) - he must have been under instructions to occupy this pointless position, or else the runner would certainly have been out to tell him to make himself useful - "get out there, and present!" Not having an effective centre half back left Watts in no-man's-land most of the game. Plus, didn't he miss the final training session? Maybe he was not 100%, too. In any case, if he can be usefully deployed next week, he's definitely a first 18 for mine. (But, for all his faults, I shake my head at how MFC have used him, ever since he arrived, and certainly again today.)

We played negative, not defensive, once we were losing. It's different - negative is to go slow, look for the boundary, go backwards, act like you are scared of being told off for transgressing a team rule about "defence" [read negativity], rather than trying to achieve something good that might turn things around. Viney, Toumpas, Blease the exceptions. Too young or new to have gotten on the programme, I suppose. Defence of course has always begun with manning up and denying them easy possessions. I can't get away from thinking the coach is at least part of this....

It is the uncontested/unhurried possessions we give the opposition that plays them, one team after another, into confidence, and arrogance - and with no Melbourne runner going out to demand accountability, I can only conclude the coach is not upset by this absurd tactic of "guarding empty space" (Wake up Mark, it's not soccer: they just kick it over our heads...). Watts wasted his day guarding empty space - is that his choice, I wonder?

There will always be somebody lacking confidence, but when about 18 out of 22 play without confidence, why wouldn't questions be asked about the way they are being coached?

spot on. They don't know whether to attack the ball carrier or just watch.