Such a dumb and pathetic footballer.. cannot believe we gave him a two year contract

Just doesn't perform under pressure. To be fair he's got plenty of team mates

Yep Dunn tries to [censored] opposition players off yet has that many turnovers which is killing. Daniel Nicholson must get the arse at seasons end this bloke constantly gets beaten by his opponent and and poor turnovers

Gee another HATE thread... what a surprise!!

Wonder what the new CEO thinks?

Wonder what the new CEO thinks?

Probably whether to jump with or without a parachute...

I don't mind Dunn - much rather have him on the list than a Sellar, Nicho, Pederson etc.

Is tall, strong, versitile and a good kick

I don't mind Dunn - much rather have him on the list than a Sellar, Nicho, Pederson etc.

Is tall, strong, versitile and a good kick

None of that is true. He's weak, squibs contests, pretends to be aggressive, can't play anywhere properly, and isn't really that good of a kick.

Nonetheless, at a time like this threads about individual players aren't really fair or appropriate.

My only comment would be that twice now his best footy seems to have been right before the contract offer...

wow. we were singing his praises a few weeks ago.

Dunn's scared.

Should not have re-signed him. He's a good kick but cannot make a position his own after years on the list.

Like Watts , another forward they are trying to turn into a backman.

Wonder what the new CEO thinks?

I am presiding over the worst list of lazy footballers in AFL history.

Like Watts , another forward they are trying to turn into a backman.

Thats an insult into forwards. Dunn was no better as a forward, actually he was worse.

Done?

Is Dnn our real issue?

He's not first in line. I thought he was coming on as a defender but yeah like most of our team he just isnt that good at footy.

Oh well

Just doesn't perform under pressure. To be fair he's got plenty of team mates

Yes, and sometimes they just don't perform even when under little to no pressure. Poorly skilled in general and little to no confidence in their disposal skills means little run in the whole team and a lazy appearance because very few are confident that they'll be able to find a player once they receive. They look for the easy layoff backwards or lateral just so ithey don't have to be responsible. Most are playing like rabbits in a headlight.

Most AFL teams are able to work their way through congestion and out of it, and get the run/overlap happening with good use of handball (2 or 3 in quick succession along with short passing). Our handball skills are shyzenhousen around congestion and our players use it alot less than other clubs. We mostly just bang the ball onto the boot forward if we get into any space. Opposition teams, or at least the decent ones, push a defensive player and/or a mid a short kick or so on the offensive side of the pack/congestion waiting for the quick panick kick and back it comes over our heads into our backline, again, usually with pricision and a shot on goal results. Look at the marks i50 differential vs other teams. It's massive! Someone at the club has recognised this massive defficiency in our style (Neeld/Craig pointing it out to Neeld or someone) and they're trying to rectify it with more emphasis on clearing congestion with quick handball in and around the contest. I believe this emphasis (on skills) started in the week prior to the game against the Tigers or maybe the one prior to GCS.

So Neeld's upped the ante in the last few weeks on this, but it's probably too little too late. Most of the players confidence and belief is already shot to pieces to be able to recoup and put into place anything learned on the training track in the last few weeks under match day pressure. Although there was some evidence of it in small patches of last week's game against the Tigers. I didn't see todays match so i can't comment. Maybe after another 10 to 12 weeks of practice we might start to see something take shape from this hard work on the training track! Where have i heard that before! That's in a normal AFL team though. Longer at the MFC probably.

I don't mind Dunn - much rather have him on the list than a Sellar, Nicho, Pederson etc.

Is tall, strong, versitile and a good kick

He's ok at playing a similar sized player (ie., clunky and a tad slow) fairly close in defense. His long kicking is impressive, particularly for goal. His kicking in open play when under little or no pressure is average to poor at best, particularly his short passing attempts (ie., under about 30 meters).

Should not have re-signed him. He's a good kick but cannot make a position his own after years on the list.

As above re kicking but i agree, hasn't been able to hold down and impact in any position for more than the odd occasional game.

Like Watts , another forward they are trying to turn into a backman.

At best he's a decoy forward coming off the bench. Like many of our backs he has poor disposal skills in close or when attempting to hit up targets on a short pass. Best to play him forward to avoid this or alternatively have someone run past for the hand off whenever he marks to run off and deliver up the field like Davey or Terlich.

Thats an insult into forwards. Dunn was no better as a forward, actually he was worse.

I wouldn't say he's worse as a forward. See notes above. Maybe a 50/50 proposition either forward or back. Possibly just in favour of being a decoy forward. Why? .... Less ability to turn the ball over in that role (via attempts to short pass where he often turns it over and/or playing on blindly into pressure without assessing the situation after marking in the back line.....this after 100+ games!!) and can score from anywhere inside 55 meters. One of the few players in the team that can do this atm. Howe the other from i50.Clark when fit. Can fill a role as decoy and take the heat off Dawes and Howe (when Howe's going there). I believe Dunn could also be used to fill Chip's role at FB without much of downside, provided Dunn is instructed to play to his strengths (ie., long kicking only, like Chip!!, and doesn't play on as soon as he marks in defence with a resultant attempt at a dud short pass). Ideally he shouldn't be in our 22 at this point but there isn't much pushing up from Casey to take his place unfortunately.

Chip to be moved up forward until Clark returns. TIme for a change up and to try and freshen Chip up/give him a different perspective/role.....at least for the next 6 weeks or so to see what he might offer. Chip looks flat as a tack atm and has virtually no impact on the contest anymore.

Edited May 26, 201312 yr by Rusty Nails

In a day of extreme lows, I thought Dunn's performance was commendable. Wish we had a few more like him yesterday.

Such a dumb and pathetic footballer.. cannot believe we gave him a two year contract

Pee

Is Dnn our real issue?

Symptomatic.

Dunn gets a game because we a slop.

Like Watts , another forward they are trying to turn into a backman.

dunn started ducking his head & dropping easy marks in the forwardline from his first game,,, & hasn't stopped it.

His first game was a night game that I remember @ the 'G' against the old cats side. before they were good.

imo, watts is better than that, & may turn out OK? if he doesn't take shortcuts. running away isn't the answer.

He had a shocker, but he is normally much better than that.

Lets see if he bounces back this week. I think he will.

Is Dunn our real issue?

No he isn't.

He is a NQR trying to be a role player and he is being shown up unlike his equivalent at other clubs because there is nowhere to hide at Melbourne, no-one's coattails to ride, no wave to ride the crest of.

Attacking individual players is pointless.

We should be lamenting those that which we do not have - 4 or 5 dependable midfielders to shoulder the burden of getting the footy out of the middle and across the ground.

Hannebery, Goodes, O'Keefe, McVeigh, and Jack combined for 91 uncontested possessions on Friday night (Malceski added 24 too...)

Melbourne had 158 the week before against the Tigers at the same ground...