On 15/06/2013 at 11:06, Ben-Hur said:

Petterd, Gysberts, Morton ? No world beaters, AND AS I SAID, I was for moving them on at the time. But guess what, they'd all shown AFL talent and ALL regressed under Nerd.

  On 16/06/2013 at 00:31, Ben-Hur said:

My inclination was to agree with this and I was in favour of them leaving.

I only second guess myself because no-one gets demonstrably better under Nerd.

Regressed under Neeld? Really? None of those three got any worse under Neeld, they just failed to get any better.

Your argument about how no one gets better under Neeld might make more sense if you stopped referring to players who have been moved to other clubs and have since not improved anyway. If Morton, Gysberts or Petterd had flourished for their new clubs, you'd have a great argument. But as we've seen, all three are continuing their careers wallowing in mediocrity. Moving them on was the correct decision and it wasn't because they'd gotten worse under Neeld - none of them were good enough.

  On 16/06/2013 at 02:30, jumbo returns said:

I see where you're coming and agree with your sentiments; however, the modern midfielder is quick, fit and strong. At the moment, only Nate Jones fits that bill, with JV coming along nicely.

The template for a modern midfielder lies in an Ablett, O'Meara, Kennedy or a Pendlebury.

Blease has the potential, but will the boy work hard enough to build his aerobic capacity?

McKenzie should always play a negating role and I agree about JT being a solid flanker.

Certainly not putting Magner up as a template for a modern day mid fielder. Just saying he's a marginally better option through the mid at least until we work through the trade/draft period. The starting core midfield till then should consist of N Jones, Sylvia, Rodan, M Jones and Magner. McKenzie is neither a mid fielder or capable of carrying out a stopping/shut down role on anyone other than someone who's equally snail paced and stagnant at the drop of the ball.

There are no other capable mid fielders in this team at present. Viney looks extremely promising and hopefully comes on in the next few seaeons. Pickles might grow into a decent outside mid who pushes forward at times.

Jones is getting assistance. Just not enough of it and is being let down by too many who just arent up to it through here. Magner isn't a questionmark for the remainder of the season. He is a must addition until we trade/recruit better.

While Neeld continues with the likes of Tappy, McKenzie, Pickles and Trengove through the middle, we are destined to be pummeled week after week. Whilst the addition of 1 slight improvement here in Magner wont save us from the same fate, it will at least make us a tad more competitive and maybe reduce the margins by a few goals each week. Better than the alternative.

  On 16/06/2013 at 02:43, Herry Prowse said:

Trengove has not been fit for two years. He is a reliable, hardworking kid who the club has given too many responsibilities. He could easily be as good as Brock McLean who after being considered too slow etc has completely remade himself. Get some good people around him and he will win the ball, defend, take marks and buy into a winning game plan and team. If we start giving up on quality people like him then we become part of the problem as well.

This is correct in terms of being a decent switch man defensively or offensively at either end. But flanker only for mine. I agree, he could be one of our solid contributors. But he's so far off this level having missed the pre season Neeld is doing neither him or the team any favours playing him through the middle or iMO playing him at all atm. The only reason he's been given games at a senior level is that Mad Eye appointed him prematurely as the co captain and now he has no choice but to play him regardless of form. And whilst his form may have improved a little since his return, its still not AFL level in terms of impact and quality and its taken him almost half a season to start showing any improvement.

With another 2 pre seasons he should start to show some of the return promised. Still a long way off the pace at this level right now though.

  On 16/06/2013 at 06:54, titan_uranus said:

Regressed under Neeld? Really? None of those three got any worse under Neeld, they just failed to get any better.

Your argument about how no one gets better under Neeld might make more sense if you stopped referring to players who have been moved to other clubs and have since not improved anyway. If Morton, Gysberts or Petterd had flourished for their new clubs, you'd have a great argument. But as we've seen, all three are continuing their careers wallowing in mediocrity. Moving them on was the correct decision and it wasn't because they'd gotten worse under Neeld - none of them were good enough.

it took McLean a couple of years to get things out of his system, or whatever - he's going well now. Maybe it's too early to call on these other guys.

  On 16/06/2013 at 07:30, Rusty Nails said:

This is correct in terms of being a decent switch man defensively or offensively at either end. But flanker only for mine. I agree, he could be one of our solid contributors. But he's so far off this level having missed the pre season Neeld is doing neither him or the team any favours playing him through the middle or iMO playing him at all atm. The only reason he's been given games at a senior level is that Mad Eye appointed him prematurely as the co captain and now he has no choice but to play him regardless of form. And whilst his form may have improved a little since his return, its still not AFL level in terms of impact and quality and its taken him almost half a season to start showing any improvement.

With another 2 pre seasons he should start to show some of the return promised. Still a long way off the pace at this level right now though.

I can see what you mean, but he spent the preseason in a moonboot. He is only just getting a level of match fitness and he has the intensity in defence that most of the rest of them lack. Will be a vey good onballer and admired by MFC followers (if there are any) in the future. 100% agree on the premature appointment, gives him no chance to learn without the spotlight being on him.

we got ride of Maloney, rivers and martin to take a step backwards in order to go forwards. A risk but there must have been some reason to clean out a few players. Perhaps they were not considered ideal role models for the younger kids. I doubt any supporter knows why certain decisions were made and the long term expectations. I think Jackson would have an idea by now and wouldn't make a decision based on hysterical demonland forum posters.

  On 16/06/2013 at 07:30, Rusty Nails said:

This is correct in terms of being a decent switch man defensively or offensively at either end. But flanker only for mine. I agree, he could be one of our solid contributors. But he's so far off this level having missed the pre season Neeld is doing neither him or the team any favours playing him through the middle or iMO playing him at all atm. The only reason he's been given games at a senior level is that Mad Eye appointed him prematurely as the co captain and now he has no choice but to play him regardless of form. And whilst his form may have improved a little since his return, its still not AFL level in terms of impact and quality and its taken him almost half a season to start showing any improvement.

With another 2 pre seasons he should start to show some of the return promised. Still a long way off the pace at this level right now though.

Really necessary in this debate? Or a term of affection??

  On 16/06/2013 at 08:17, machine11 said:

we got ride of Maloney, rivers and martin to take a step backwards in order to go forwards. A risk but there must have been some reason to clean out a few players. Perhaps they were not considered ideal role models for the younger kids. I doubt any supporter knows why certain decisions were made and the long term expectations. I think Jackson would have an idea by now and wouldn't make a decision based on hysterical demonland forum posters.

I will be pretty annoyed if the basis for his decisions are contained in these forums!

  On 16/06/2013 at 08:31, jumbo returns said:

Really necessary in this debate? Or a term of affection??

Certainly not a nasty reference Jumbo. Watching him in action reminds me of a character from Harry Potter who i quite like (with Watts as Weasley lol)....

Hopefully he'd see the humour

  On 16/06/2013 at 04:07, Demonsterative said:

Does the constant reference to Neeld as Nerd a breach of the COD?

No, but it does make the anti-Neeld lobby collectively look about five years old. I have no particular objection to it, as the childishness of the little joke merely serves to reduce the credibility of everything else they have to say. At the moment the majority of them seem to be arguing the case that "Neeld has to go because!" and "We've made up a childish nickname for him to show how bad he is!" Very few of them are even trying to put up a reasoned case for his dismissal.

  On 16/06/2013 at 11:25, RalphiusMaximus said:

No, but it does make the anti-Neeld lobby collectively look about five years old. I have no particular objection to it, as the childishness of the little joke merely serves to reduce the credibility of everything else they have to say. At the moment the majority of them seem to be arguing the case that "Neeld has to go because!" and "We've made up a childish nickname for him to show how bad he is!" Very few of them are even trying to put up a reasoned case for his dismissal.

Abuse is much like racism. The effect lies within how the victim feels. Somehow I believe Mark would rather be called Neeld than Nerd. BH and his cronies have little respect in the eyes of many. Name calling and jumping on bandwagons much like media. Next year under a different coach BH will be applauding The same players he is currently bagging. He seldom holds onto a thought for too long.

  On 16/06/2013 at 11:25, RalphiusMaximus said:

No, but it does make the anti-Neeld lobby collectively look about five years old. I have no particular objection to it, as the childishness of the little joke merely serves to reduce the credibility of everything else they have to say. At the moment the majority of them seem to be arguing the case that "Neeld has to go because!" and "We've made up a childish nickname for him to show how bad he is!" Very few of them are even trying to put up a reasoned case for his dismissal.

What on earth? What is this "they" business? From what I can tell, Ben is the only one calling him "Nerd".

A reasoned case for his dismissal? There is a 140 PAGE THREAD on the subject, and there are plenty of reasoned arguments contained within.

Strange post.

  On 16/06/2013 at 11:25, RalphiusMaximus said:

No, but it does make the anti-Neeld lobby collectively look about five years old. I have no particular objection to it, as the childishness of the little joke merely serves to reduce the credibility of everything else they have to say. At the moment the majority of them seem to be arguing the case that "Neeld has to go because!" and "We've made up a childish nickname for him to show how bad he is!" Very few of them are even trying to put up a reasoned case for his dismissal.

Ralph, with respect...

I think it's fair to say that everyone who posts on Demonland wants the club to be successful again. We've all got our own theories about how that can happen. Whether you believe Neeld should go or stay is a personal opinion. But it is not time to turn on your fellow supporters. Agree with P_Man, no need for the term 'they'. On this forum, it should be 'we'.

  On 16/06/2013 at 06:54, titan_uranus said:

None of those three got any worse under Neeld, they just failed to get any better.

Your argument about how no one gets better under Neeld might make more sense if you stopped referring to players who have been moved to other clubs and have since not improved anyway. If Morton, Gysberts or Petterd had flourished for their new clubs, you'd have a great argument. But as we've seen, all three are continuing their careers wallowing in mediocrity. Moving them on was the correct decision and it wasn't because they'd gotten worse under Neeld - none of them were good enough.

Is that you, Captain Obvious ?

Tell me something I don't know. Do you think I'm not aware of how they're going in their new surroundings ? I'm not even bullish on them as players FFS. I've made that clear.

The essence of coaching is improving the players at your disposal as individuals and improving the team as a collective. Nerd fails miserably on both counts. The players in question regressed under "I don't want you to like me".

  On 16/06/2013 at 11:25, RalphiusMaximus said:

No, but it does make the anti-Neeld lobby collectively look about five years old. I have no particular objection to it, as the childishness of the little joke merely serves to reduce the credibility of everything else they have to say. At the moment the majority of them seem to be arguing the case that "Neeld has to go because!" and "We've made up a childish nickname for him to show how bad he is!" Very few of them are even trying to put up a reasoned case for his dismissal.

Should we even bother to answer this one!

But I am starting to understand the real problems facing the MFC. Too many people are clearly on mind effecting drugs!

As they are clearly making up their own reality.

  On 16/06/2013 at 12:43, TheBigFrog said:

Should we even bother to answer this one!

But I am starting to understand the real problems facing the MFC. Too many people are clearly on mind effecting drugs!

As they are clearly making up their own reality.

Now that's not at all fair. I stopped taking mind-altering drugs at my first university.

  On 16/06/2013 at 13:55, RalphiusMaximus said:

Now that's not at all fair. I stopped taking mind-altering drugs at my first university.

LOL I will give you that one.

  On 16/06/2013 at 04:07, Demonsterative said:

Does the constant reference to Neeld as Nerd a breach of the COD?

May be a spelling issue!

  On 16/06/2013 at 06:54, titan_uranus said:

Regressed under Neeld? Really? None of those three got any worse under Neeld, they just failed to get any better.

Your argument about how no one gets better under Neeld might make more sense if you stopped referring to players who have been moved to other clubs and have since not improved anyway. If Morton, Gysberts or Petterd had flourished for their new clubs, you'd have a great argument. But as we've seen, all three are continuing their careers wallowing in mediocrity. Moving them on was the correct decision and it wasn't because they'd gotten worse under Neeld - none of them were good enough.

Short sighted post alert! Would Brock Maclean be another example of yours??? Oh wait, he went and earned a spot and now look at him.

Jordie Gysberts is a young tall mid who will develop into a real player. Been consistently in the best in the twos and will force his way into the stronger Nth midfield over the next year.

I wish Neeld knew how it felt to lose watch us lose so many games in order to get those high draft picks.

Develop them? Ahhh... it's too late they got traded... Neeld has failed us again on that count.

  On 16/06/2013 at 20:19, Demonstrative said:

Short sighted post alert! Would Brock Maclean be another example of yours??? Oh wait, he went and earned a spot and now look at him.

Jordie Gysberts is a young tall mid who will develop into a real player. Been consistently in the best in the twos and will force his way into the stronger Nth midfield over the next year.

I wish Neeld knew how it felt to lose watch us lose so many games in order to get those high draft picks.

Develop them? Ahhh... it's too late they got traded... Neeld has failed us again on that count.

Totally agree Demonstrative!!! The cruel legacy of the Neeld era will be watching these three in 5 years time & wondering what could have been

SEN reporting meeting of all staff and players at the club in 30 minutes time.

If the sack Neeld thread was closed then shouldn't this piece of history be closed as well.

  On 17/06/2013 at 00:14, Rhino Richards said:

If the sack Neeld thread was closed then shouldn't this piece of history be closed as well.

Agree RR there is no point to this thread anymore thank god.

Continue the discussion here: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/34223-neeld-sacked-with-craig-as-interim/