Irrelevant. The point is they each had rabid fans and journalists after them and basically learned, developed a list and made their teams a hell of a lot better.

The point is those teams go better, however gradually, we have gone backwards at a steady rate.

Think our talls let us down today mostly to be honest.

Frawley, Jamar, Seller, Garland....

Our KPPs got killed by the likes of Kennedy , Darling and Cox.

We need this fixed asap, I think our mids like Grimes, Joneses, Viney ect tried hard and it would've been a real tight match if our talls put in more damn effort.

I don't disagree RE: backline needs to improve, but there was a guy called Priddis who was this week's Heppell. He ran around seemingly by himself, which allowed other Eagles players first use and usually made it very difficult for the defenders. Essentially, the midfield didn't do our defenders any favours.

Edited April 13, 201312 yr by AdamFarr

I don't disagree RE: backline needs to improve, but there was a guy called Priddis who was this week's Heppell. He ran around seemingly by himself, which allowed other Eagles players first use and usually made it very difficult for the defenders. Essentially, the midfield didn't do our defenders any favours.

Guys like heppell and priddis would uually get the bail, bartram, mckenzie tag.

Unfortunatly one haa left the club, ones on the verge of early retirement and the other has a mystery injury.

Guys like heppell and priddis would uually get the bail, bartram, mckenzie tag.

Unfortunatly one haa left the club, ones on the verge of early retirement and the other has a mystery injury.

Good point. McKenzie is perhaps a big out. Still, he's a very limited player. But so was Ling to an extent.

Neeld's hard line talk is all very well but it seems to me that his ego gets in the way. If he is challenged by a journo he puts them down with a sarcastic comment. he does the same to Robbo in his little interviews. I have suspected that he does this to players as well. if i was a player it would not make me want to play for him. If he is to change the culture he needs to emphasise more positives. Players like Viney and Nathan Jones will give their all for any coach, and for their teammates. Its the only way they know. But there are other talented players on the list who don't seem to be playing for him. Neeld just seems to get rid of any players he can't get through to rather than finding a way of best utilising the personnel he has got.

yes. when he was returning from Sorrento and journalists approached, one with a microphone, Neeld fended them away warning "if you stick that thing in my face..." He didn't complete the threat but he might as well have done so, because his attitude was clear enough: Neeld's own personal comfort zone and his own agenda were not to be violated. He spoke and acted without tolerance or understanding, offering the violence card before making the show of reining himself in. Tough guy, hey? Would young athletes choose to bleed for this man?

Edited April 13, 201312 yr by robbiefrom13

Jaded, you're observations are spot on but imo your draw the wrong conclusions.

You highlight that only some of the players can compete for the whole game. We saw in the first half that the players can if they want to, but in the second they weren't interested.

In 2013, after the season we've had and the pressure on the players, if they don't have enough motivation to play four quarters, then that should rest with the players.

The first half showed me that the coaching staff have prepared the players sufficiently, unless Neeld tried to change things significantly at half time this all lies with the players.

My opinion is that bad luck and poor umpiring in the first 10:30 of q3 robbed us of momentum and confidence. Good teams, successful teams, teams with confidence would have come back, lifted their heads and turned it around. After the last two weeks, once wce had kicked 4 or 5 we lost all confidence on field where Neeld couldn't help.

Rate Neeld on the first half today where he was able to motivate players after the lady two weeks. Judge Neeld on how we respond next week, but he could do nothing about the on field loss of confidence today.

No, I think it is you drawing the wrong conclusions. You are right about where we lost it all - but that collapse was what Deemotivated called "mental fragility" (post #143). Is the coach not responsible for managing/building mental resilience? (Or in our case, perhaps undermining it?)

yes. when he was returning from Sorrento and journalists approached, one with a microphone, Neeld fended them away warning "if you stick that thing in my face..." He didn't complete the threat but he might as well have done so, because his attitude was clear enough: Neeld's own personal comfort zone and his own agenda were not to be violated. He spoke and acted without tolerance or understanding, offering the violence card before making the show of reining himself in. Tough guy, hey? Would young athletes choose to bleed for this man?

So you're using his response to being accosted by a journalist as a guide to how he behaves towards his players? Isn't that a bit of a leap?

Gillies, Pederson, Sellar, Byrnes, Rodan.

Cook, Morton, Gysberts, Lawrence, Campbell.

It goes both ways and the 5 I've mentioned cost us a lot more then the 5 you mentioned.

94

Were 10 points down at half time so we lost the 2nd half by 84 which is what was being stated.

yes. when he was returning from Sorrento and journalists approached, one with a microphone, Neeld fended them away warning "if you stick that thing in my face..." He didn't complete the threat but he might as well have done so, because his attitude was clear enough: Neeld's own personal comfort zone and his own agenda were not to be violated. He spoke and acted without tolerance or understanding, offering the violence card before making the show of reining himself in. Tough guy, hey? Would young athletes choose to bleed for this man?

I think that reaction was due to the constant barrage he has copped from them. He's allowed to be sick of those parasites without it having any bearing on his interactions with his players.

How exciting was it to see Sylvia play some great football in the first half. That was great. I think it showed yesterday if the ball is going forward we can score, and as strange as it sounds our backs hold up fairly well with the amount of ball going in there. Wasn't great but with the amount of ball going in there I don't blame them. Shows our midfield is just shocking in regards to getting the ball going our way

I would take Brett Ratten in a heart beat.

Ratten piszzed Melbourne off when we gave him his coaching start. Didn't like the way he did it nor the way the poached McLean (altho happy they did) or the way the offered Mark Riley a job while he was coaching at Melbourne. I have grave misgivings about his role in the Kruezer Cup.

Ratten can F off. His own club don't want him and neither do I

I guess here is as good a place to comment on coaches, or more importantly our football department. Here is the problem the club faces. Our development of our younger players has been a disaster. The high draft picks we have had have not improved in the time they have been with this club. While many posters are happy to call them spuds, the truth is that they were all highly regarded as under age footballers. For the better clubs in the league, they develop the young players to be better. MFC, do not seem to be able to do this.

So what happens, gus like Toumpas, Hogan, Barry, Watts, Trengrove never reach their full potential at Melbourne and cannot get out of the place quick enough.

This is the area the club needs to look at and establish why player development has been so bad and rectify this. Even as a Melbourne supporter, I am not sure I would want my son playing for the club with this history of failing the kids.

Like it or not, the AFL and football clubs owe it to the kids playing the game to ensure they flourish. Melbourne owe it to their players t allow them to flourish.

So, take action to get this side right. Become a club that future champions want to p,ay for not a club they are forced to go to through the draft.

I don't disagree RE: backline needs to improve, but there was a guy called Priddis who was this week's Heppell. He ran around seemingly by himself, which allowed other Eagles players first use and usually made it very difficult for the defenders. Essentially, the midfield didn't do our defenders any favours.

Substitute any name you like. We are INCAPABLE of shutting down a hot player. Have been for years.

I guess here is as good a place to comment on coaches, or more importantly our football department. Here is the problem the club faces. Our development of our younger players has been a disaster. The high draft picks we have had have not improved in the time they have been with this club. While many posters are happy to call them spuds, the truth is that they were all highly regarded as under age footballers. For the better clubs in the league, they develop the young players to be better. MFC, do not seem to be able to do this.

So what happens, gus like Toumpas, Hogan, Barry, Watts, Trengrove never reach their full potential at Melbourne and cannot get out of the place quick enough.

This is the area the club needs to look at and establish why player development has been so bad and rectify this. Even as a Melbourne supporter, I am not sure I would want my son playing for the club with this history of failing the kids.

Like it or not, the AFL and football clubs owe it to the kids playing the game to ensure they flourish. Melbourne owe it to their players t allow them to flourish.

So, take action to get this side right. Become a club that future champions want to p,ay for not a club they are forced to go to through the draft.

Maybe our own VFL side might help....

At least there is stuff to discuss this week that is not entirely doom and gloom.

Evans showed us some dash. M Jones and Terlich add something (and don't go bagging Terlich's decision making just yet since his work is mostly under pressure).

Sylvia was good, Tapscott better, N Jones admirable as always, Clark effective although cheated by lousy umpiring, Viney not only strong but willing to hit blokes for the sake of it - just wish he upended the little cheat Hams - and the entire group had a crack for more than a half of football (I'm counting the final quarter here).

Our pressure in the first term and willingness to hunt in numbers was a vast improvement.

While plenty went wrong in the third, including some appalling umpiring, the key for me was the way in both the first and second quarters we lead by more than a goal with five minutes to go only for WC to score twice before the quarter ended. It seems fitness is coming in to play and while we have heard plenty of talk about this from Misson and Neeld, those two fadeouts yesterday said it more clearly than ever. This is something we can fix in time.

I now have some hope of a win next week but our mental fragility - lack of real confidence or whatever you call it - could be our biggest hurdle.

Edited April 13, 201312 yr by pitmaster

It's a bit frustrating now I'm here in Tassie, because it is just so hard to work out the structures and tactics from the TV, because sometimes you could be cursing a bloke for stuffing up, but in reality it wasn't his fault. I'm not adjusting lol.

yes. when he was returning from Sorrento and journalists approached, one with a microphone, Neeld fended them away warning "if you stick that thing in my face..." He didn't complete the threat but he might as well have done so, because his attitude was clear enough: Neeld's own personal comfort zone and his own agenda were not to be violated. He spoke and acted without tolerance or understanding, offering the violence card before making the show of reining himself in. Tough guy, hey? Would young athletes choose to bleed for this man?

Hahaha.

That logic is like saying Collingwood trined at Goschs Paddock... Melbourne trains at Goschs Paddock. Melbourne is Collingwood.

So....... Neeld's response to a journo when he was accosted at a private camp by vultures gunning for his livelihood to be curtailed is going to be the method of judging his coaching? See if Champion Data will run that stat.

Mick Malthouse made a career of bring sarcastic, cutting, aggressive and rude to journos. You DEFINITELY wouldn't want him then.....

Neeld's hard line talk is all very well but it seems to me that his ego gets in the way. If he is challenged by a journo he puts them down with a sarcastic comment. he does the same to Robbo in his little interviews. I have suspected that he does this to players as well. if i was a player it would not make me want to play for him. If he is to change the culture he needs to emphasise more positives. Players like Viney and Nathan Jones will give their all for any coach, and for their teammates. Its the only way they know. But there are other talented players on the list who don't seem to be playing for him. Neeld just seems to get rid of any players he can't get through to rather than finding a way of best utilising the personnel he has got.

Oh that is right I keep forgetting how high the standard of journalism is and the inane questions Neeld is asked time and time ago. Remind me how nice the media has been to Melbourne

Garry Lyon just said if Melbourne lose next week he would sack Mark Neeld.

Who the hell cares what Garry says Gessus just go away mate

Before MN was appointed senior coach at MFC, can anyone tell me who else was interviewed for the job?

From memory Hardwick, Connelly and someone else..Sheedy? were last four. No idea about who else we talked to before the end process.

Also, Mitch Clark being dragged down during a marking contest - no free kick.

WCE player being paid a "mark" in the goal square after four other players had touched it.

Umpire #28 was clearly biased against us or in love with the Eagles.

Hwy how good was umpire 33 in his first game waht a poser He will go back to the seconds now clearly incompetent

No, I think it is you drawing the wrong conclusions. You are right about where we lost it all - but that collapse was what Deemotivated called "mental fragility" (post #143). Is the coach not responsible for managing/building mental resilience? (Or in our case, perhaps undermining it?)

I agree that part of the coaches role is to manage the team as a whole including motivation, confidence etc. however on the back of two comprehensive beltings my opinion is that he did that - we came out firing and played great footy for half a game.

Did Neeld make any changes at half time? Do you think anything he said caused them to lose confidence?

If the answer is no, the loss of confidence is something that occurred on field in the third quarter. It was a massacre, arguably the worst quarter of the year and when it was over we were out of the contest. Neeld wasn't or there and couldn't change or affect the players at this time.

The fragile mental state is due to the beltings, not due to his motivational speaking. The belting in round one was caused by complacency, of the players, of the coaches and probably also felt by many supporters.

yes. when he was returning from Sorrento and journalists approached, one with a microphone, Neeld fended them away warning "if you stick that thing in my face..." He didn't complete the threat but he might as well have done so, because his attitude was clear enough: Neeld's own personal comfort zone and his own agenda were not to be violated. He spoke and acted without tolerance or understanding, offering the violence card before making the show of reining himself in. Tough guy, hey? Would young athletes choose to bleed for this man?

Talk about drawing the wrong conclusions.

I am a psychologist, right, So does that mean that I should show the same attitude to my patients as I do to commodore-driving clowns that cut me off? Should I be full of non-judgmental empathy and a need for honest reflection? Or can i just tell them to get lost?

The idea that Neeld should treat everyone the same and a failure to do so indicates some negative characteristic is wrong. You won't do that in your own life; why hold an irrational standard for Neeld?

So you're using his response to being accosted by a journalist as a guide to how he behaves towards his players? Isn't that a bit of a leap?

it's a ridiculous leap, another example of people on this site taking a small piece of information and using their imagination to make all sorts of extrapolations and baseless assumptions from it. I find it very annoying.

bye bye Chip, doesn't want to be there, couldn't care less and clearly wants out. i wouldn't even put him in the casey side. Sit at home and pick flies from his beard.