On 06/05/2013 at 11:54, Axis of Bob said:

So you can't explain it either?

As for the second point, you would say that letting one of the assistant coaches act as interim coach would provide us with wins and better skills? We'd hit targets because we changed coach, eh? I have some magic beans for you here if you want them - I think you'll find that my price is very reasonable.

Bob, I appreciate that you need to look like the modern equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition, but calm down, read and think - Oh, and yes, we would do better with a change of coach!

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:03, Hardnut said:

Bob, I appreciate that you need to look like the modern equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition, but calm down, read and think - Oh, and yes, we would do better with a change of coach!

I asked a simple question and nobody has been able to properly answer it.

What is the 'irreparable damage' that Neeld is causing that everyone keeps repeating?

If the question was as simple to answer as everyone has been saying then why has nobody done it? I know why Hardnut can't, but surely someone else is capable.

  On 06/05/2013 at 11:27, Axis of Bob said:

I appreciate that you feel you need to look tough, but you still haven't answered the question. Although there are many others around here that do patronising better than you do. But don't worry, you'll get better with practice.

Your articulated answer to why he is doing more harm is simply "the longer we get flogged .... the more damage the club suffers". Forgive me if I don't take your complex analysis of the situation as seriously as you would like me to, but I actually would like you to detail the specific harm that it's causing. The sort of harm that every week of him being in charge is making 'irreparably worse'.

Secondly, I would like you to quantify how much improvement you expect a new coach to make. What would an interim coach (who is already being employed as an assistant coach at the club) do to improve the team and what level of performance do you think this current MFC assistant coach will achieve that will stop this 'irreparable damage'.

In case it has slipped your attention our Brand is worthless at the moment and part of the reason for that is we are getting flogged week after week and our club is, a joke.

Now when a club loses credibility it loses members and sponsors, attendance's fall and our draw is compromised; we lose all chance of getting a draw that will attract supporters the following year.

I'm not sure if it's escaped your attention but we are unable to get our hands on the ball in matches and our skills are abysmal, so I guess the coach has to accept some responsibility for this. We are worse this year than last, despite the coach saying at the commencement dinner that we will improve and much quicker than anyone thinks. We are worse despite his money ball idea of recruiting players from other clubs to show the other players the way on the field and at training, three of the four he recruited are now playing at Casey and they look like they'll be there for a while. The coach admits publicly after the first game, we never saw that coming; wtf why didn't he, he's the coach he should have known what we have at the club.

In over 50 years of watching this club play I would say this is one of the worst sides I ever seen, and this is a side and a list that Neeld has said is his.

What do I expect of a new coach; let's start with more competitive side, it couldn't get much worse. I'd like team that could not only take the field but could actually get a kick or handball and preferably when they did, the ball would finish up in one of our players hands, not the oppositions. I'd like a coach that didn't ask the media at his press conference what they suggest he does, I'd like to think we would get one that had a bit more nous than that. I'd like a coach that had a bit of credibility and could walk in and immediately gain the respect of the playing group. I'd like a coach that would reconcile the playing group so we wouldn't have to worry about losing any player with 8 years or more experience. I'd like a coach that knew what positions to play his men.

Unlike you I'm not too keen on seeing the team get flogged every week just so we can keep the coach happy and in the vain hope that he will eventually get the idea how to coach an AFL team.

Now what about you tell me what you expect from Neeld and how it's working out for you at the moment. What do you expect for the remainder of the season, how many wins do you think it will take to satisfy you that he's done a good job, and how many wins do you expect him to the get next year.

Finally you obviously don't think or performance on the field is doing us any harm so how many losses in a row and how low does our % have to go before you do?

He identified a soft culture at the club.

Did he? Let's say a few young players did not attack the ball as he would have liked, was this representative of a culture within the club? There are 40 odd on the list. Overall I felt comfortable with the list in 2010/11. I acknowledge the terrible loss in 2011 but I again point out that Sheedy lost a match by 160 odd points in his 2nd or 3 rd year. So I was cross when Bailey was sacked, just as I was [censored] off when Daniher was sacked mid season.

So why do I feel that Neeld must go now? I deplore his miserable treatment of senior players right from the beginning. His criticism of the previous regime. His absurd suggestion that those doing further education could be compelled to abandon their courses for a year. I deplore the absence of a gameplan suitable for Melbourne's list.. His abandonment of the good features of Bailey's gameplan. His nonsensical sale of players who MAY have a future to be replaced by 28 yo has beens . His pathetic claim that our pre season results were ok when they were poor.

I would like a bloke to COACH kids. Take the maligned Morton. He had 90 odd disposals in his first 3 games. A no- hoper? I don't think so. Or Moloney. A flawed type in some respects, yet he can play. Sort out the problem, don't give up on him. Is Michael Voss a softy?

The season is not yet shot. I favour Craig as a replacement. He had success at Adelaide. I doubt that an outsider can be got in immediately. I'm absolutely certain that a change now would produce not only immediate but also long term benefits.

Hardnut - the point you're making with me by highlighting Scott's successfully taking up coaching at Geelong is that if you have a great and experienced list the coach can do little to screw it up, as it's the players who win or lose the game. The coaches impact takes longer to be evident.

Similarly, or rather conversely, if you have a weak and inexperienced list the coach can do little to improve it, as it 's the players who win or lose the game. The coaches impact takes longer to be evident.

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:09, Axis of Bob said:

I asked a simple question and nobody has been able to properly answer it.

What is the 'irreparable damage' that Neeld is causing that everyone keeps repeating?

If the question was as simple to answer as everyone has been saying then why has nobody done it? I know why Hardnut can't, but surely someone else is capable.

Please tell me why I can't answer your simple question Bob - it's your comment - back it up!

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:11, PaulRB said:

Similarly, or rather conversely, if you have a weak and inexperienced list the coach can do little to improve it, as it 's the players who win or lose the game. The coaches impact takes longer to be evident.

actually i dont really buy this. I would have thought 'weak' and 'inexperienced" players would be the most mouldable, the most impressionable and easiest to change. Granted only an opinion.

I would have thought the team with little real leadership and guidance might be the one most craving it.

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:11, PaulRB said:

Hardnut - the point you're making with me by highlighting Scott's successfully taking up coaching at Geelong is that if you have a great and experienced list the coach can do little to screw it up, as it's the players who win or lose the game. The coaches impact takes longer to be evident.

Similarly, or rather conversely, if you have a weak and inexperienced list the coach can do little to improve it, as it 's the players who win or lose the game. The coaches impact takes longer to be evident.

On the contrary PaulRB, a new coach with a successful team has everything to lose - players with an attitude of we know best because we are winners and if it all goes wrong, it's the coach's fault. On the other hand, a new coach with a poorly performing list has nothing to lose and everything to gain by trying whatever he thinks will be successful.

The glass is half-full!

  On 06/05/2013 at 11:54, Axis of Bob said:

So you can't explain it either?

As for the second point, you would say that letting one of the assistant coaches act as interim coach would provide us with wins and better skills? We'd hit targets because we changed coach, eh? I have some magic beans for you here if you want them - I think you'll find that my price is very reasonable.

Do you think that Craig would do a worse job than Neeld? Can you tell me just one area where we have improved, just one, not a big ask?

Are you that delusional that you don't think getting beaten by an average of, what is it, 70 Points each week, is not doing our club any harm?

If you were a sponsor would you be looking at a get out clause or would be happy to see your brand associated with a bunch of losers?

If you were a ten year old who'd been barracking for Melbourne because his old man did, would you continue if this keeps up?

Think beyond the square pants bob.

Interestingly, all of the recent premiers Coaches had been there a long time or transitioned up as their coach "amicably" moved on. I.e. Longmire, Scott, Malthouse, Thompson.

So the short term bloody Coach turnover strategy advocated by some has not delivered a premiership for a club within 5 years. The only new coaches to deliver flags were amicably brought in to continue building on the good work of their predecessor...

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:09, Axis of Bob said:

I asked a simple question and nobody has been able to properly answer it.

What is the 'irreparable damage' that Neeld is causing that everyone keeps repeating?

If the question was as simple to answer as everyone has been saying then why has nobody done it? I know why Hardnut can't, but surely someone else is capable.

One other thing Bob the coach is like a sales manager and when sales go down it's is responsibility; it's his job to make sure his salesmen hit their targets each week/month and if they don't he has failed in his job. Neeld's salesmen can't hit their targets.

Ever run a business Bob; what would you do with the sales manager particularly if you found that it was causing the business to founder?

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:25, PaulRB said:

Interestingly, all of the recent premiers Coaches had been there a long time or transitioned up as their coach "amicably" moved on. I.e. Longmire, Scott, Malthouse, Thompson.

So the short term bloody Coach turnover strategy advocated by some has not delivered a premiership for a club within 5 years. The only new coaches to deliver flags were amicably brought in to continue building on the good work of their predecessor...

First, we are not talking about a coach taking over a successful team at MFC, in fact, quite the reverse.

Second, correct me if I am wrong, but only Scott took over a truly successful club (and I think you are a little confused with who took over what).

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:25, PaulRB said:

Interestingly, all of the recent premiers Coaches had been there a long time or transitioned up as their coach "amicably" moved on. I.e. Longmire, Scott, Malthouse, Thompson.

So the short term bloody Coach turnover strategy advocated by some has not delivered a premiership for a club within 5 years. The only new coaches to deliver flags were amicably brought in to continue building on the good work of their predecessor...

But who did Roos/Longmire replace, who did Thompson replace, who did Malthouse replace?

And who did Mathews replace?

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:25, PaulRB said:

Interestingly, all of the recent premiers Coaches had been there a long time or transitioned up as their coach "amicably" moved on. I.e. Longmire, Scott, Malthouse, Thompson.

So the short term bloody Coach turnover strategy advocated by some has not delivered a premiership for a club within 5 years. The only new coaches to deliver flags were amicably brought in to continue building on the good work of their predecessor...

So what you're saying is, if Bailey took us to a flag then Neeld would have been a good coach....?

Just went back and read some of the threads when Mark Neeld was appointed, Mick Malthouse after strongly endorsing Neeld as a potential senior coach quoted " Melbourne will make the finals next year (2012) with the right coach"

well....

Scott pendelbury and dale Thomas both credited alot of their rise as players to Mark Neeld

It really makes you ask yourself what has gone so wrong between then and now to see us in this position.

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:10, RobbieF said:

In case it has slipped your attention our Brand is worthless at the moment and part of the reason for that is we are getting flogged week after week and our club is, a joke.

Now when a club loses credibility it loses members and sponsors, attendance's fall and our draw is compromised; we lose all chance of getting a draw that will attract supporters the following year.

I'm not sure if it's escaped your attention but we are unable to get our hands on the ball in matches and our skills are abysmal, so I guess the coach has to accept some responsibility for this. We are worse this year than last, despite the coach saying at the commencement dinner that we will improve and much quicker than anyone thinks. We are worse despite his money ball idea of recruiting players from other clubs to show the other players the way on the field and at training, three of the four he recruited are now playing at Casey and they look like they'll be there for a while. The coach admits publicly after the first game, we never saw that coming; wtf why didn't he, he's the coach he should have known what we have at the club.

In over 50 years of watching this club play I would say this is one of the worst sides I ever seen, and this is a side and a list that Neeld has said is his.

What do I expect of a new coach; let's start with more competitive side, it couldn't get much worse. I'd like team that could not only take the field but could actually get a kick or handball and preferably when they did, the ball would finish up in one of our players hands, not the oppositions. I'd like a coach that didn't ask the media at his press conference what they suggest he does, I'd like to think we would get one that had a bit more nous than that. I'd like a coach that had a bit of credibility and could walk in and immediately gain the respect of the playing group. I'd like a coach that would reconcile the playing group so we wouldn't have to worry about losing any player with 8 years or more experience. I'd like a coach that knew what positions to play his men.

Unlike you I'm not too keen on seeing the team get flogged every week just so we can keep the coach happy and in the vain hope that he will eventually get the idea how to coach an AFL team.

Now what about you tell me what you expect from Neeld and how it's working out for you at the moment. What do you expect for the remainder of the season, how many wins do you think it will take to satisfy you that he's done a good job, and how many wins do you expect him to the get next year.

Finally you obviously don't think or performance on the field is doing us any harm so how many losses in a row and how low does our % have to go before you do?

So your argument is that the 'irreparable damage' that he's causing is to the credibility of the club. I don't see how the club can be sullied any more in the next 16 rounds than it has over the last 5 years. I don't see that damage as being 'irreparable'.

If Neeld is not the right man for the job, then he will find himself without a job in the future. However I don't think, after a season and a bit, we can judge whether or not he is the right man for the job. What we do know is that he came into a culture that stank and it has been his main focus to turn that around. If Neeld doesn't turn out to be the right man for the job then I would say that he has left the club in a better state than he found it. Therefore I disagree that his presence as coach is something that needs to be snuffed out ASAP.

Should we bring in Craig (who won't coach) or one of the assistants, they will coach in a very similar way to Neeld. Why? Because you can't teach a new style of play during the season when they have been training in a different style.

The only thing that would happen if we replace a coach less than half way through his contract (!), is we make ourselves an even less desirable place to both coach and play. We will be seen like Richmond of the late 80s who couldn't get anyone of note, nor any success, because coaches were sacked at the first sign of trouble.

Neeld is a very process driven coach. He has set in place a plan that he has proposed will take him through his first contract. To sack him now would be like leaving Splash Mountain because you didn't like the singing.

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:14, Hardnut said:

Please tell me why I can't answer your simple question Bob - it's your comment - back it up!

I answered it in the post you quoted.

  On 06/05/2013 at 12:24, RobbieF said:

Do you think that Craig would do a worse job than Neeld? Can you tell me just one area where we have improved, just one, not a big ask?

Are you that delusional that you don't think getting beaten by an average of, what is it, 70 Points each week, is not doing our club any harm?

If you were a sponsor would you be looking at a get out clause or would be happy to see your brand associated with a bunch of losers?

If you were a ten year old who'd been barracking for Melbourne because his old man did, would you continue if this keeps up?

Think beyond the square pants bob.

Your argument isn't from a football perspective, it's from a supporter perspective. That's where we are differing and that's why I asked you to explain yourself.

You are also making the 'magic bullet' assumption, that an interim coach will magically make the side better. Neil Craig (who won't coach) will simply follow the same path as Neeld is, because Craig was one of the main people who put this plan into place! Craig would be as invested in the plan as Neeld is, so you'll have the same message from a different person (who now needs to have his previous role filled). Craig spoke to several clubs, but after speaking with Neeld he decided to join us.

It is an easy out to denigrate a proposition by asking a furphy merely to put a poster on the back foot.

I am with AoB here - nothing I have read on here these past few weeks has convinced me that letting Neeld have until at least July/August of this season is such a disaster.

Caretaker is beyond worthless. If you worry about playing under a 'lame duck' then a caretaker only confirms it.

He isn't half way through his contract and we have a 5 day old CEO on an interim basis.

It's a big decision and one that looks like a fait accompli right now but that we don't need to happen tomorrow.

I am sorry, but this just does not need to happen tomorrow.

  On 06/05/2013 at 13:11, rpfc said:

I am with AoB here - nothing I have read on here these past few weeks has convinced me that letting Neeld have until at least July/August of this season is such a disaster.

Caretaker is beyond worthless. If you worry about playing under a 'lame duck' then a caretaker only confirms it.

He isn't half way through his contract and we have a 5 day old CEO on an interim basis.

It's a big decision and one that looks like a fait accompli right now but that we don't need to happen tomorrow.

I am sorry, but this just does not need to happen tomorrow.

I may possibly be the most known "get the Neeld out" poster here, but EVEN I say he should be around til say round 17-18. Caretakers are time wasters. let's see Neeld out for a lil while longer just to be sure, then if nothing changes we get rid of him 4-5 weeks out and get a head start on the next coach.

Of course, should we lose this weekend it may just be a simple case of enough is enough for the club.

  On 06/05/2013 at 13:22, stuie said:

I may possibly be the most known "get the Neeld out" poster here, but EVEN I say he should be around til say round 17-18. Caretakers are time wasters. let's see Neeld out for a lil while longer just to be sure, then if nothing changes we get rid of him 4-5 weeks out and get a head start on the next coach.

Of course, should we lose this weekend it may just be a simple case of enough is enough for the club.

With a interim CEO 13 days into his Act of Salvation...

Do we want to make that decision with his help? Or just do it anyway? Would it be something he can determine in 2 weeks? Is it so pressing, or is it just the pure embarrassment of being beaten by the Gold Coast? Is that a good reason for things 'to come to a head'? Do we want to be a well-run club before we make a decision on the coach? Or do we want to make one last shortly thought out decision with out the input of a new CEO and then start to run things properly? Can I continue to ask a myriad of rhetorical questions?

  On 06/05/2013 at 13:11, rpfc said:

I am with AoB here - nothing I have read on here these past few weeks has convinced me that letting Neeld have until at least July/August of this season is such a disaster.

Caretaker is beyond worthless. If you worry about playing under a 'lame duck' then a caretaker only confirms it.

He isn't half way through his contract and we have a 5 day old CEO on an interim basis.

It's a big decision and one that looks like a fait accompli right now but that we don't need to happen tomorrow.

I am sorry, but this just does not need to happen tomorrow.

not tomoroow...b ut maybe July / August ??

What on earth does that really accommplish.

btw Mark, youre a dead man walking ...not today, not tomorrow but hey check out those september travel bargains ...capische !!

cant see much point to that perssonally

  On 06/05/2013 at 13:07, Axis of Bob said:

I answered it in the post you quoted.

Your argument isn't from a football perspective, it's from a supporter perspective. That's where we are differing and that's why I asked you to explain yourself.

You are also making the 'magic bullet' assumption, that an interim coach will magically make the side better. Neil Craig (who won't coach) will simply follow the same path as Neeld is, because Craig was one of the main people who put this plan into place! Craig would be as invested in the plan as Neeld is, so you'll have the same message from a different person (who now needs to have his previous role filled). Craig spoke to several clubs, but after speaking with Neeld he decided to join us.

Do you have a comprehension issue; where did I say that Craig would be the magic bullet? I said, would Craig do a worse job. If Neeld was sacked and they asked Craig to do the job he'd take it I'd bet on that.

What about you answer the rest of my questions bob; or is it simply that you are a windbag with nothing of substance to say. How many wins bob, how many losses, how low our % before you finally get the message. You happy with the latest flogging or was that an honorable loss?

Always painful to think of how different our situation could/would be if we had signed Ross Lyon instead of Mark Neeld.

  On 06/05/2013 at 13:27, rpfc said:

With a interim CEO 13 days into his Act of Salvation...

Do we want to make that decision with his help? Or just do it anyway? Would it be something he can determine in 2 weeks? Is it so pressing, or is it just the pure embarrassment of being beaten by the Gold Coast? Is that a good reason for things 'to come to a head'? Do we want to be a well-run club before we make a decision on the coach? Or do we want to make one last shortly thought out decision with out the input of a new CEO and then start to run things properly? Can I continue to ask a myriad of rhetorical questions?

If we lose, especially badly, to Gold Coast there will be intense pressure on Neeld whether we like it or not. Just the way it is.