An insider's POV - Comments from Russell Robertson

[rjay 24,030]

My impression from Neeld last night was that the outcomes of the two surveys was such that they couldn't split the two Jacks. They did mention some categories but sorry I can't remember them. Maybe one of the other participants can remember. My feeling now that we have been through annus horribilis x 1 1/2 I would have had Jack G as Captain and Jack T as Vice.

Just as an aside re Jack G - Jack's father has been into the Club to work with the Volunteers as a Volunteer to make calls to reluctant non financial members; Jack G has sent messages of encouragement and thanks to the Volunteers for the time they were spending supporting the Club.

One thing Nate said last night that because of the team's disappointing performances that both Jacks have had to spend an inordinate amount of time supporting their team mates.

I really wish that all of Demonland could have been there last night. It was a real revelation to listen to the three of them talk so passionately about the Club. Despite this I still believe that the Coaching of the Club should be looked at again at the end of the season once we get Clark and Grimes back and boys like Toumpas and Viney have had more game time. We don't have the luxury of other teams to have significant back up players when we have injuries. We need all our players on the field and once that happens if there is no improvement then revisit the coaching.

I think this is a problem that someone else mentioned. A good coach is across the art as well as the science of football, Neeld and Craig seem a bit too enamoured with the science. Surveys and all are great but in the end you take that in have a look at the situation in front of you and make a decision based on what you think works not some number crunching tells you.

[Strafford 182]

main thing I learnt is that what might have happened and is happening within the club might be totally different to what the media and the online community thinks.totally different.

If they do proceed with Neeld a few more players will still have to be moved on. All clubs have their cliques, but I can't see how there couldn't still be a fracture with some of the senior players still at the club. The press for all that we like to believe they do, don't generally just make things up. They generally do have at least one source. The problem of course is if they aren't getting a balanced view due to talking to the disgruntled. I did say generally though lol At least with the better ones anyway.

[spirit of norm smith 13,337]

finally some straight answers as much as possible.

neeld still talks in riddles.

Moloney left Demons after 'snub' over captaincy

Moloney cracked the sads because he wasn't captain.

Sylvia will re-sign.

Rodan has had a bigger impact than we see on field.

Stef Martin was moved on for good reason.

Other senior players were old enough to be moved on.

Peter Jackson has given some truths to the club, there will be changes, but we will improve.

Great article and interview from ex player Russell Robertson, which touches on some issues we haven't heard about but have discussed ad nauseam. Maybe there is some method to all the madness even if there are some things that are not perfect?

[stuie 7,374]

Robbo works in the marketing dept of MFC and used the terms "reality bus", "picked up Rodan for nothing", "You don't know what it is like inside AAMI Park and we need guys that have been around a little while – we have just got kids", "it is going to take two or three years"... etc etc.. I'm surprised none of you saw Neeld's lips moving.

[Guest]

Just a question for you on the Rivers thing. If the players voted on the leadership group and the captains and Rivers was identified because of the outcomes of that vote, is Neeld really the one who dropped Riv from the leadership group, or just the one that trusted in their process and acted based on the outcomes of that process?

You make it sound like it was solely Neeld that lead to Rivers being dropped from the leadership group, which from everything that has been said, would appear false.

However, I agree completely about how Rivers was fantastic last year despite losing his spot on the leadership team. Showed more on-field leadership than Moloney, that's for sure.

I always go with Stalin's comments about a democracy: 'It's not how many that vote that counts, it's who counts the votes.' Was the vote straight up and down? Or was it decided on a set of 'questions' that were slanted against certain members of the group? I would like to know.

[Kenny Powers 90]

I think as supporters we are all over the talk about the behind the scenes going ons, we just want results on the field

[stuie 7,374]

main thing I learnt is that what might have happened and is happening within the club might be totally different to what the media and the online community thinks.totally different.

What's happening on the ground indicates otherwise though...

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

I think this is a problem that someone else mentioned. A good coach is across the art as well as the science of football, Neeld and Craig seem a bit too enamoured with the science. Surveys and all are great but in the end you take that in have a look at the situation in front of you and make a decision based on what you think works not some number crunching tells you.

But the numbers here were quite telling.

As I said, the surveys were in various categories to do with training, preparation etc, how much a player works to get the best of himself. only 2 of the previous leadership group were in the top 15 at the club.

That tells me just how much our leadership at the time stank. Drastic changes needed to be made. Neeld talked about how nervous he was choosing these two and recalled having a conversation with Nathan Buckley who was considering Pendels as captain but wasn't sure he was experienced enough and how Neeld mentioned he had no problems compared to him, as Neeld was looking at co-captains with less than 60 games of experience. I didn't get the impression it was a decision taken lightly or decided by the numbers, but rather a decision forced upon them as they realised that they had to take drastic steps as the leadership there was not leading as they should.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Rod Grinter Riot Squad

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

finally some straight answers as much as possible.

neeld still talks in riddles.

I didn't hear him talking in riddles when fronting the members last night, rather straight up, very direct and happy to take and answer questions honestly

[McQueen 17,864]

After reading the thread from the beginning it's interesting to see how it's gone from a fluff article about some positive comments from Robbo to a strong, pro Neeld thread.

Masterstroke by the marketing department.

[robbiefrom13 877]

I hear you all, but I see the games too. Great talk, [censored] walk, I say - a plain as day naked Emperor. For me, what's happening on the field undermines any explanations and arguments you put up. So that telling me how impressed you were by listening to Neeld speak just isn't going to outweigh my impression of how the team is playing under his coaching.

You claim that good foundations are being laid - but this will of course only be verified (if it is verified) in the future; likewise, my claim that we can't afford to wait will only be verified (if it is) in the future. Where I think I have you is, what it is all about - going to the footy to watch our team. That is a present and unambiguous horror show. Missing the most basic fundamentals of manning up and tackling, spreading and shepherding - nothing to do with experience or skill. Without these things, there is no winning. I don't know how to enjoy the game when I spend three out of every four quarters groaning in frustration at the vacant centre and the 10 metre policy in minding your man. We lose every game in uncontested possession, so we focus everything on contested possession. I tell myself, this rubbish cannot be a sound foundation for the future, no matter who says what. Tell me how I'm wrong.

I'll tell you something I haven't read here yet: there is a type of belittling teacher who uses sarcasm and autocratic means to secure intense loyalty from his students; students commonly learn to embrace his every little signal, knowing that there are rewards for those who please. Compliance is his yardstick and he stands firm on "walk, don't run". It's true that a regime of discipline does bring some reward, and this teacher's students may have a degree of success (if they don't rebel). But it's also true that others taught differently will go further, both at the time, and even more so in subsequent education.

So I ask myself, when is all this buy-in going to produce results other than players (and supporters) declaring loyalty to Neeld? And when will the agenda stop being about this man and become about the team?

Edited May 31, 2013 by robbiefrom13

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

After reading the thread from the beginning it's interesting to see how it's gone from a fluff article about some positive comments from Robbo to a strong, pro Neeld thread.

Masterstroke by the marketing department.

Just for the record as haven't expressed an opinion on Mark, I really like what he has tried to do, he inherited a club with a shocking culture and has tried to fix it. He's rattled some cages and put noses out of joint.

I want him to coach until round 20, give him the free air Peter Jackson rightfully talked about, if things aren't changed by then, we would have to look at a new coach. I do think though that if we have back to back hidings over the next fortnight, I can't help but wonder if we can afford not to make a change, as we will be bleeding money from the lost gate receipts if things don't turn around soon.

[stuie 7,374]

Great talk, [censored] walk

Great post. There's some real honesty.

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

I think this is a problem that someone else mentioned. A good coach is across the art as well as the science of football, Neeld and Craig seem a bit too enamoured with the science. Surveys and all are great but in the end you take that in have a look at the situation in front of you and make a decision based on what you think works not some number crunching tells you.

So you show the players how you value their opinion by having them fill out this survey and then ignoring the results and appointing whoever you like? GREAT move.

[felixdacat 459]

I hear you all, but I see the games too. Great talk, [censored] walk, I say - a plain as day naked Emperor. For me, what's happening on the field undermines any explanations and arguments you put up. So that telling me how impressed you were by listening to Neeld speak just isn't going to outweigh my impression of how the team is playing under his coaching.

You claim that good foundations are being laid - but this will of course only be verified (if it is verified) in the future; likewise, my claim that we can't afford to wait will only be verified (if it is) in the future. Where I think I have you is, what it is all about - going to the footy to watch our team. That is a present and unambiguous horror show. Missing the most basic fundamentals of manning up and tackling, spreading and shepherding - nothing to do with experience or skill. Without these things, there is no winning. I don't know how to enjoy the game when I spend three out of every four quarters groaning in frustration at the vacant centre and the 10 metre policy in minding your man. We lose every game in uncontested possession, so we focus everything on contested possession. I tell myself, this rubbish cannot be a sound foundation for the future, no matter who says what. Tell me how I'm wrong.

I'll tell you something I haven't read here yet: there is a type of belittling teacher who uses sarcasm and autocratic means to secure intense loyalty from his students; students commonly learn to embrace his every little signal, knowing that there are rewards for those who please. Compliance is his yardstick and he stands firm on "walk, don't run". It's true that a regime of discipline does bring some reward, and this teacher's students may have a degree of success (if they don't rebel). But it's also true that others taught differently will go further, both at the time, and even more so in subsequent education.

So I ask myself, when is all this buy-in going to produce results other than players (and supporters) declaring loyalty to Neeld? And when will the agenda stop being about this man and become about the team?

Your wrong because the stuff you describe in game focuses on what the players are doing wrong at times within in a game. The team does not do those wrong things throughout the whole game. There are times when the team does all the things its supposed to do, we get confidence but when challenged the inexperienced players fall back into the wrong routines. This as Neeld has said in numerous Pressers is because the team is inexperienced. Every anti-Neeld poster hear like to blame all the team losses on MN Coaching. But we never acknowledge that the teams we lose to are much more improved then we are. for example we lost to the Bummers by a large margin, but this season they have dismantled some pretty good sides , they were an okay side last year but are further along in their development this year, Gold Coast they are a side who are full of really good young players and now that they are into their third year they are gaining some ground. Apart from Port who jumped us early (and we did not recover) we have played Brisbane (NAB Cup Winners) Carlton, Richmond, Fremantle and West Coast all who are clubs a lot further developed then us.

I like many others was buoyant at the season start thinking we would be a lot further along. I was wrong and my expectations were unrealistic. So now as I have said previously I just keep waiting for the mental aspect of the game to change with the players and how they attack the game. I am hoping to be presently surprised.

The second part of you post is conjecture, how do you know how Mark Neeld coaches his players. I see the persona you talk about in your post when he is talking to the press, but that is a reaction to the press and not necessarily how he would coach his players. If you ever hear the questions being asked by the media you can understand why you would get annoyed as an AFL coach because they are the most purile questions "how does that loss sit with you?" is probably my most favourite.

I don't think he is about discipline but more about being clear on expectations with players which other have said about him. As a coach and motivator that's what you want. Clear instructions about what is required so you can go out an get it done.

Finallly

Buy in is wonderful but execution and maintaining mental fortitude still needs to happen, it's going to take little time to learn which has been the message for a while now from the coach. The media continue to make the agenda about MN and Mark continues to ignore the them.

[stueyspencer no12 73]

Just for the record as haven't expressed an opinion on Mark, I really like what he has tried to do, he inherited a club with a shocking culture and has tried to fix it. He's rattled some cages and put noses out of joint.

I want him to coach until round 20, give him the free air Peter Jackson rightfully talked about, if things aren't changed by then, we would have to look at a new coach. I do think though that if we have back to back hidings over the next fortnight, I can't help but wonder if we can afford not to make a change, as we will be bleeding money from the lost gate receipts if things don't turn around soon.

What the hell is the evidence of a "shocking culture"

What was the evidence that at the end of 2011 we were unfit?

These are the thrusts of the present coach and his accolades and even supporters on here. Early in 2012 we were told that the list wasn't fit enough, or strong enough. I could concede that as a young list--much younger then than it is now (thanks to th recruitment of Rodan et al) it may have lacked physical strength, but I saw no evidenced of unfitness.

Then, after downgrading all the senior players, and at least for the time being, damaging the career of 2 great young men, the coach appears to have panicked and recruited 5 older players,most of whom are no good.

Are his supporters on this site happy about a 3y contract for Pederson? We wil be paying for a bunch of Casey players over thei next 3 years.

What hasn't been mentioned on this topic is the gameplan,and the fact that as every expert fom outside he club has commented, the chosen gameplan is just unsuited to our list. At least when we were young, light, physically not as tough as opponents, we could under Bailey, turn on a brand of football which lead to a number of big wins. Not a hint of that now. Just bewilderment.

One final matter. Many of Neeld's supporters argue here that the players are responsible because they are not trying. I was recently in the company of 3 sponsors--people contributing to the finances of the club but also the well being of their sponsorees. They talked, quietly, sadly, about their "charges", about the fact that these kids are trying so hard, are gutted by the lack of success, and most worryingly, that no-one is enjoying being there. It's awfully sad and before we turn on players we should realize this

[Rod Grinter Riot Squad 5,636]

What the hell is the evidence of a "shocking culture"

No fitness guru and much of what you say is fair, except this first line. Is it serious?

[pitmaster 3,087]

Just want to make the point that those who toss around claims like "we have had a shocking culture FOR DECADES" are so wrong.

Culture is not fixed. I saw at close quarters what Neale Daniher did when he first took over and there was no bad culture there. He reinvented the place, asking the players stuff so basic as 'who do you play for?'

He encouraged them to think about things like pride, mateship, loyalty, family, supporters - all stuff you might take for granted but if you are a 20-something kid you've never thought about.

Neale IMO stayed two years too long and became too close to a handful of his senior players, but there is no way he allowed a bad culture in the way it is spoken of here.

Northey gave us a temendously gritty team that got everything possible out of itself.

So let's ease up on the 'we've been a disgrace since forever malarkey'. It is not true, and we of all people should not be talking ourselves down. Plenty of others do that.

[deanox 8,770]

What the hell is the evidence of a "shocking culture"

What was the evidence that at the end of 2011 we were unfit?

SS12, I'll try and answer as best I can.

Examples off the shocking culture includes:

-Previous "senior" player who played selfish football instead of team football including Yze, Robbo, even to an extent Moloney (great footballer but it was evident in the field he was a solider not a leader)

-A culture which was described as bruise free

-A culture which apparently encouraged T$ to leave

-A culture which hasn't win a flag in 50 years

-a culture that thought it was ok to cancel a time trial the coach had ordered

You may not agree but I think that many supporters on here and otherwise have watched this develop for 15 years. We were never going to compete with the geelongs or Sydney's of the world. Our players simply were not disciplined.

RE fitness I'm surprised that you won't take Dave Missons word, given he is well respected throughout they industry in both football and other sports.

But if you need more you could try reading the Cale Morton interview last week where he talked about how west coast was a lot fitter than us.

I can also assume the players saying "hardest preseason ever" last year is not enough independent evidence for you, buy if you saw or ability to get completely over run during the Bailey era you would understand we weren't up to it.

I'm sure you realise the significant shift in modern footy since the advent of the press, and the increase in fitness levels required to implement it. We are just catching up.

I hope some of those examples are understandable, if anyone else has any examples, please add them

[DemonFrog 1,347]

And so the buck passing continues...

My questions to the MFC President, Board and Supporters are:

1. Who built the current MFC list?
2. Who recruited so many inexperinced and untried players?
3. Who recruited key experinced players who appears to send alot of time on the injury list?
4. Why would anyone want to introduce the chance of continuing anther 2 to 5 years of sub standard on field performances (Failure)?
5. Why have a game plan the the player are not obviously suiited for?
6. How many massive losses must the MFC suffer before much needed change is implimented (10, 100, 1000)?
7. What are the KPI for the coach, current or future?

Find the person or persons responsible for the above issue and the MFC can be in a position to achieve success again. I have my thought as to the group mainly responsible and his first letter starts with M.

Unfortunately the MFC would have more chance of winning the 2013 premiership then anyone admitting they got it wrong!

[Hulett Packard III 166]

The evidence of the shocking culture at the club has been there for all to see over the past decade or so.

Fitness levels can be measured and the measurements don't lie.

I can only assume that Moloney was completely and utterly delusional if it's true that he spat the dummy at not being chosen captain. His reaction was of course, proof positive that the correct decision was made. He's not a captain's bootlace.

[Tatu 416]

I hear you all, but I see the games too. Great talk, [censored] walk, I say - a plain as day naked Emperor. For me, what's happening on the field undermines any explanations and arguments you put up. So that telling me how impressed you were by listening to Neeld speak just isn't going to outweigh my impression of how the team is playing under his coaching.

You claim that good foundations are being laid - but this will of course only be verified (if it is verified) in the future; likewise, my claim that we can't afford to wait will only be verified (if it is) in the future. Where I think I have you is, what it is all about - going to the footy to watch our team. That is a present and unambiguous horror show. Missing the most basic fundamentals of manning up and tackling, spreading and shepherding - nothing to do with experience or skill. Without these things, there is no winning. I don't know how to enjoy the game when I spend three out of every four quarters groaning in frustration at the vacant centre and the 10 metre policy in minding your man. We lose every game in uncontested possession, so we focus everything on contested possession. I tell myself, this rubbish cannot be a sound foundation for the future, no matter who says what. Tell me how I'm wrong.

I'll tell you something I haven't read here yet: there is a type of belittling teacher who uses sarcasm and autocratic means to secure intense loyalty from his students; students commonly learn to embrace his every little signal, knowing that there are rewards for those who please. Compliance is his yardstick and he stands firm on "walk, don't run". It's true that a regime of discipline does bring some reward, and this teacher's students may have a degree of success (if they don't rebel). But it's also true that others taught differently will go further, both at the time, and even more so in subsequent education.

So I ask myself, when is all this buy-in going to produce results other than players (and supporters) declaring loyalty to Neeld? And when will the agenda stop being about this man and become about the team?

regardless of whether we move Neeld on or not.... The supporters of MFC are going to have to wait..... This ship isn't going to turn around just because there's a new coach on board.... It's gonna be a long wait.... Get use to it or don't watch.... It's that simple....

[Return to Glory 7,787]

I have the answer to your question, received it at a Club function straight from Neeld and Craig, haven't bothered posting anything on the function, because the anti-Neeld/anti MFC everything brigade will only hijack the thread and turn it into a bashing again

I wish to take you to task. The last part of your quote is little more than an attempt to bait others that will in turn enable you to restart your 'I'm right and you're all idiots' routine. If this is indeed what you think 1. name names and allow people to respond. 2. Clarify what you mean re anti - Neeld. For instance, I have come home from a number of games and been livid at the performance and felt that he should go. It doesn't necessarily mean I'm anti Mark Neeld or the club. It means I'm a normal footy supporter.

So as a starting point, name names as I suspect many are curious as to who are in this brigade that you speak of.

[Whispering_Jack 28,089]

I often wonder if, in the context of the MFC, there is such a thing as a "normal football supporter".

I think Satyriconhome has dealt with your question and most posters here have dealt with the subject in a fairly positive manner.

Can we please keep the thread going in that vein?

[rufus 916]

regardless of whether we move Neeld on or not.... The supporters of MFC are going to have to wait..... This ship isn't going to turn around just because there's a new coach on board.... It's gonna be a long wait.... Get use to it or don't watch.... It's that simple....

I agree that it's going to take time to become a really quality unit whichever way we go...but the question is, how long is it going to take to produce competitive, desperate efforts for the club and the supporters. Right now our club is being dragged through the mud because of what is being produced on the field.

I am not anti Neeld, but I am with 'Return to Glory' in that I am anti what is being produced on the field at the moment. I can accept that if we are trying to teach our players zones and all these new age things that it might take time (as it did for Clarkson when he began and Worsfold when he made major changes). Our players are producing football that is nowhere near the quality that those clubs were producing even when they were going through their changes.

It really boils down to the effort we see from the players at the moment. And if there is a belief that the players are giving 100% intensity every game and have bought in to the program then surely that would suggest that the program, from a gameplan perspective, is somewhat flawed.