You know you've reached rock bottom when your delusional coach is happy to lose by 5 goal to a bottom team with heaps of injuries.

I don't even know anymore what to say. Each week he surprises me again with his complete lunacy pre, during and post match.

It is crap actually. You made a point and it was plain wrong,

Do you want to try explaining why? Twice now you've not tried.

You're a complete and utter moron who is incapable of having an argument/discussion with anyone, as you spend each back-and-forth simply re-stating your position, not listening to anyone else, not comprehending other arguments.

You're just like stuie:

Seriously, you can't be that silly.

Brisbane kicked poorly for goal, and missed A LOT of easy shots.

You need to have the ball to kick goals, they had it 118 more times than us.

We got smashed in clearances.

Now, given Clark and Dawes wouldn't make them miss more shots, and given they don't play in the midfield, I really don't understand how you can think they would have made a difference to the result when it's in the MIDFIELD where we were beaten.

You're just as bad as jnr. You don't acknowledge other arguments.

I understand, and agree with, what you're saying. We didn't lose because we didn't have Clark/Dawes. We got tonked in the middle and that is a predominant reason for our loss, not our forward line.

What I said was that the lack of Clark and Dawes made things worse. We lost by 28 with no forward line. We didn't score from all our inside 50s. With a forward line, it's reasonable to say we'd have scored more from those inside 50s. Given the margin was 28, my overall contention was that if we'd had a forward line, the score could have been closer, and the closer the scores, maybe people wouldn't be so depressed right now.

OK? Does that make sense? Would you like to at least acknowledge the argument? You don't have to agree with it, I know you don't.

You know you've reached rock bottom when your delusional coach is happy to lose by 5 goal to a bottom team with heaps of injuries.

I don't even know anymore what to say. Each week he surprises me again with his complete lunacy pre, during and post match.

Getting utterly ridiculous around here. Neeld didn't say he was happy to lose. By 5 goals, or any amount of goals. If you want a quote to sum up his attitude to losing, try this one:

"But eventually, honourable losses, you get sick of them.”

^{I'm a bit tired of hearing about culture this and culture that, I wanna win a game of footy.}

It's so infuriating to see you guys arguing back and forth with each other. It's like kicking your dog when you have an argument with your boss.

It's misguided anger at the state of our footy club.

All I can say is that I totally understand how we all feel. I'm pretty tired of 'honourable losses' that are in fact embarrassing and wouldn't be accepted by any other club in professional sport. GWS and GC have helped give us a context regarding youth and inexperience, but the argument fails to recognise our 150 year history. We are only here because the club accepts that we should be without accepting its decisions to get here.

The rebuild that's being rebuilt again has all been over seen by the same board and CEO. CS is gone, but half the board needs to go and we really need outside help. Port got rid of almost everyone and it looks to have done wonders for them. It may not be even 50% Neelds fault but keeping him is accepting defeat. He'll go at years end. I just hope the club is already looking for a big name. We need the Ross Lyon coup of 2013.

I have to agree with c&b. He's not saying it was great but it was certainly better than the first couple of weeks.

Yeah, let's just tell them they're useless and not getting anywhere week after week. That'll get the spirits up.

They are trying, they just aren't good enough - drumming that into them is only going to make things worse.

Do you want to try explaining why? Twice now you've not tried.

You're a complete and utter moron who is incapable of having an argument/discussion with anyone, as you spend each back-and-forth simply re-stating your position, not listening to anyone else, not comprehending other arguments.

You're just like stuie:

You're just as bad as jnr. You don't acknowledge other arguments.

I understand, and agree with, what you're saying. We didn't lose because we didn't have Clark/Dawes. We got tonked in the middle and that is a predominant reason for our loss, not our forward line.

What I said was that the lack of Clark and Dawes made things worse. We lost by 28 with no forward line. We didn't score from all our inside 50s. With a forward line, it's reasonable to say we'd have scored more from those inside 50s. Given the margin was 28, my overall contention was that if we'd had a forward line, the score could have been closer, and the closer the scores, maybe people wouldn't be so depressed right now.

OK? Does that make sense? Would you like to at least acknowledge the argument? You don't have to agree with it, I know you don't.

And if they'd kicked straight the margin might have been greater... And if Viney was playing it may have been a draw... And if we had picked Wines we would be undefeated... How many "what ifs" do you want to talk about? We lost. Simple.

Every time I hear comments like Neelds from the weekend, or his address before the Bombers game, I think back to Sheedys address to his GWS players before their first game last year, where he talked about "not letting anyone or any team dominate you", and wonder what messages we are sending our players. Is it different behind closed doors?

Firstly, if you have arguments with a certain poster take it up with them, it's no one elses responsibility to step in. I've not said anything about average games.

Brisbane missed easy shots, and we kicked 3 goals in junk time when the Lions had stopped, so the margin was flattering to us. If you don't understand this then you have no idea about football. None.

You yourself said there was around 5 shots they should have kicked.

Wouldn't bother arguing about free kicks, we got a pretty good run there yesterday.

By your own account, Brisbane kicked a higher score than average, what does that tell you?

Now, if you want to talk about not answering things, then answer what I have said to you countless times here:

What difference would Clark and Dawes make when we were smashed in the midfield? 118 less possessions, and a third less clearances. If you can't get it to your forwards, and get it to them well, then it doesn't matter who is there.

EVERYONE but you recognizes that the midfield is where our problems are.

Again, you keep saying we lost by 3 goals, but 28 points is closer to 5 than 3, and if we use your conservative measure of adding the 5 more goals they should have kicked then the loss was closer to a 10 goal loss, which IF YOU WATCHED THE GAME you would realize was more reflective of the game.

you are reaching, that's the first time you have mentioned junk time. Maybe that's because nobody, even the commentary team that loathes us intensely, have described our last 3 goals in this manner. I haven't even read any of the other jellyfish here put that one out of their backside.

somebody else answered it for you already

it is pretty straightforward, even if you dont get it in there much, having 2 key forwards down there is going to maximise your return on those entries. Did I really just have to write that?

i am done arguing with you, all your kind are the same 'You yourself said there was around 5 shots they should have kicked' yeah i said that in amongst a whole heap of other comments AND YOU DAMN WELL KNOW IT

but instead of having a genuine discussion you have to wriggle around and backpedal and quote out of context and blahblahblah effing blah

what sort of 'supporter' goes to such lengths to deliberately exaggerate the crappiness of his own club, in all honesty, you make me sick

i've had it with this joint

you are reaching, that's the first time you have mentioned junk time. Maybe that's because nobody, even the commentary team that loathes us intensely, have described our last 3 goals in this manner. I haven't even read any of the other jellyfish here put that one out of their backside.

somebody else answered it for you already

it is pretty straightforward, even if you dont get it in there much, having 2 key forwards down there is going to maximise your return on those entries. Did I really just have to write that?

i am done arguing with you, all your kind are the same 'You yourself said there was around 5 shots they should have kicked' yeah i said that in amongst a whole heap of other comments AND YOU DAMN WELL KNOW IT

but instead of having a genuine discussion you have to wriggle around and backpedal and quote out of context and blahblahblah effing blah

what sort of 'supporter' goes to such lengths to deliberately exaggerate the crappiness of his own club, in all honesty, you make me sick

i've had it with this joint

You've always been happy to have an argument with someone, provided they agree with you. Nothing has changed you just go on and on till you wear the other side out.

you are reaching, that's the first time you have mentioned junk time. Maybe that's because nobody, even the commentary team that loathes us intensely, have described our last 3 goals in this manner. I haven't even read any of the other jellyfish here put that one out of their backside.

somebody else answered it for you already

it is pretty straightforward, even if you dont get it in there much, having 2 key forwards down there is going to maximise your return on those entries. Did I really just have to write that?

i am done arguing with you, all your kind are the same 'You yourself said there was around 5 shots they should have kicked' yeah i said that in amongst a whole heap of other comments AND YOU DAMN WELL KNOW IT

but instead of having a genuine discussion you have to wriggle around and backpedal and quote out of context and blahblahblah effing blah

what sort of 'supporter' goes to such lengths to deliberately exaggerate the crappiness of his own club, in all honesty, you make me sick

i've had it with this joint

Firstly, I'm exposing the crappiness of your posts, not the club.

Secondly, they had 16 more inside 50s than us, so we maximized our forward entries already, or did Brisbane miss lots of easy shots? Hmmm... either way, you're wrong.

Thirdly, I directly quoted you and your excuse is it was "amongst a whole heap of other comments"?! Does that mean we should only selectively read your posts seeing only a select few comments are actually intended?

Fourthly, I have not back pedaled at all. I have stated the same thing from the start, which is:

THEY BEAT US IN THE MIDFIELD. CLARK AND DAWES WOULD NOT HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE TO THE RESULT.

Fifthly, if you want to talk media quotes, then here's some:

"Brisbane largely dominated - shown by their 100 more possessions at three-quarter time - but goalkicking inaccuracy kept Melbourne in the contest until midway through the final quarter."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/teams/brisbane-lions-flicked-the-switch-to-beat-melbourne-at-the-gabba/story-e6frf9mf-1226631099349

"They were spanked in nearly every key category: disposals (418 to 302); contested possessions (64-43); inside 50s (63-47); clearances (41-30). Only the home side's inaccuracy saving them from another real hiding."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/only-way-is-up-for-dees-20130428-2imjx.html#ixzz2RqS9lOq8

"Praising his side for losing to the Lions by less than five goals when his side had 13 less scoring shots is certainly taking a glass half-full view of things"

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/afl/afl-news/brisbane-makes-a-point-20130428-2imtn.html#ixzz2RqSV5sEh