Introducing the elephants in the room.... I watched our forward structures yesterday all game, & half way through the second quarter it became obvious we had none!! Our midfielders and half backs were busting their asses to win ball (McKenzie & Howe throwing themselves on smothers, & Rodan & Jones constantly taking high hits...don't get me started on the umpiring!), but whenever they'd look up and kick forward... No one... The ball winners were often the closest Demon to the goal, & they were on the wing!! Now I'm no fan of Brown or Rawlings, didn't think they were good players, & am not convinced either can coach. How hard is it to line up players in a potent forward line structure? What are they doing at training? Watts had three on him many times yesterday, that means we had two loose men (somewhere else?). One of the shining lights was Davey's final quarter goal. We finally used a player's natural talent (in this case Davey's speed) to better an oponent. Given it happened once only yesterday, I find it hard to believe this was a coach's instruction. Kick ins.... We really take the cake here... I reckon one out of every five exits the 50m line. Again, what DOES Rawlings teach them?? Only twice in the game I saw Dunn and Garland roost it to the centre square! We have the talent, it just doesn't seem to be part of our 'game plan'.....

Bring on the PJ-overhaul!! The players and supporters deserve better than these coaches & Board members!!

I think your analysis is very insightful. (I saw it but it's significance didn't sink in till you pointed it out - so I guess I didn’t see the elephant.) But is it PJ’s job to review the coaching personnel? Regardless, I guess he won’t be able to avoid forming an opinion and passing it on.

.

make sure others in the team know the strengths and patterns to be used and make sure they play to the exytent of their skills as a team

ITS THE COACH

They ARE playing to the extent of their skills. Which, in case you've missed a few games recently (understandable given the circumstances ...), are sub-standard, especially under pressure. 24 scoring shots from turnovers says it all.

It's the players - or most of them.

(Though they showed something to hang onto for a little while there on Monday.)

I think your analysis is very insightful. (I saw it but it's significance didn't sink in till you pointed it out - so I guess I didn’t see the elephant.) But is it PJ’s job to review the coaching personnel? Regardless, I guess he won’t be able to avoid forming an opinion and passing it on.

.

That's a good question. If you are asking should the CEO be involved in the football department then my answer is tricky. If it was still Cameron Schwab, then I'd say no (I trust him about as far as I could throw him). If however, the CEO is Peter Jackson, whom appears to be following a different agenda (an AFL-initiated review of the club), then I would say yes. In fact I feel he is obligated by a duty of thoroughness to assess outcome measures (i.e on field improvement or otherwise) under the stewardship of our present coaching panel.