I am loving this

[Gorgoroth 12,924]

So you intend changing the whole list?

Where do I say the whole list? We need a second true forward, Frawkey is doing ok, but is not a long term option. Small forward that's not just learning their craft there ie JKH/Salem, a specialist small like Ballantyne.

We need to replace players like Terlich, M Jones, Bail with players who give as much but can use the ball better.

A ruck man to replace Jamar, wether that becomes any of the others we have I'm not sure.

More mids as well.

[Satyriconhome 10,723]

Where do I say the whole list? We need a second true forward, Frawkey is doing ok, but is not a long term option. Small forward that's not just learning their craft there ie JKH/Salem, a specialist small like Ballantyne.

We need to replace players like Terlich, M Jones, Bail with players who give as much but can use the ball better.

A ruck man to replace Jamar, wether that becomes any of the others we have I'm not sure.

More mids as well.

So not quite the whole list then..........

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,693]

If people don't like games where very few goals are scored, the so-called World Game is in a lot of trouble.

And given that soccer is doing fine, I think AFL will survive the occasional low scoring affair, too.

I'm with those who found Monday's game compelling, rather than boring. The advantage of a low scoring game is that either side still has a chance to win until quite late in the contest.

[Uncle Fester 2,848]

So not quite the whole list then..........

No. Just the ones that aren't going to be there when we play finals.

[Satyriconhome 10,723]

No. Just the ones that aren't going to be there when we play finals.

So the fact that Roos is playingTerlich, M Jones, Bail et al, at the moment, means that he will waste this season getting them up to speed with game plan, roles etc and just get rid of them?...and bring in new ones and start again....sounds like an excellent plan

Edited June 10, 2014 by Satyriconhome

[Uncle Fester 2,848]

So the fact that Roos is playingTerlich, M Jones, Bail et al, at the moment, means that he will waste this season getting them up to speed with game plan, roles etc and just get rid of them?...and bring in new ones and start again....sounds like an excellent plan

I didn't mention anyone by name. That's you either projecting someone else's argument on mine, or making it up in your head.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

So the fact that Roos is playingTerlich, M Jones, Bail et al, at the moment, means that he will waste this season getting them up to speed with game plan, roles etc and just get rid of them?...and bring in new ones and start again....sounds like an excellent plan

If you base that he should replace the new players with the same standard as the exiting ones, then you're right - terrible idea.

If you base it on that the new players should be a better standard than the exiting ones (which it should be and what Gorgoroth originally said), then you've just described list management which all clubs do - great idea.

[dees189227 12,373]

The thing is no one complained when we beat richmond, Carlton and adelaide. I mean in the past we have kicked a lot more goals. I reckon the game looked bad because we kicked inaccurately. If we managed to kick some of the goals we should have then I doubt people would complain. If it was 10-3 instead of the other way we would have won.

[jazza 1,323]

Anybody who didnt realise this was PRs gameplan doesnt follow footy very well.

And it will continue until we improve our skills or get new players with better skills.

When that happens he will attack a bit more,otherwise its going to be the same for now.

[Gorgoroth 12,924]

So the fact that Roos is playingTerlich, M Jones, Bail et al, at the moment, means that he will waste this season getting them up to speed with game plan, roles etc and just get rid of them?...and bring in new ones and start again....sounds like an excellent plan

Ok Saty, would those players get a game for Hawthorn, Sydney, Port? I highly doubt it.

They may get better, but I think when we are pushing top 4, they won't be playing, the reason they are playing now is we don't have any better at the moment.

But I don't know why I'm trying to put across a different point of view, all our players are tops!

[Satyriconhome 10,723]

Ok Saty, would those players get a game for Hawthorn, Sydney, Port? I highly doubt it.

They may get better, but I think when we are pushing top 4, they won't be playing, the reason they are playing now is we don't have any better at the moment.

But I don't know why I'm trying to put across a different point of view, all our players are tops!

I do think some posters on here when they were growing up, the kid next door always had the shinier bike or the newer skateboard, one minute Paul Roos is being praised from the rooftops for developing players who some on here thought were past redemption, now he needs to get rid of them and start again....we played 2 top sides in 2 weeks, we just couldn't maintain our new standard for 8 quarters, but we didn't go backwards...........to deflate your balloon slightly...let me think Ted Richards was happily let go by Essendon, same with Josh Kennedy at Hawthorn and Rhyce Shaw at Collingwood...amazing they can get a game at Sydney

Edit spelling and grammatical indiscretions

Edited June 11, 2014 by Satyriconhome

[Gorgoroth 12,924]

I don't disagree that Roos has made players better.

And he has made say Bail better than he was, do I think he has it in him to be a top four club player? No, I don't.

We will turn players over come draft time and the three I've mentioned would be in line to be replaced, it's up to them to improve themselves so they get replaced and they all have good qualities but all have big deficiencies and to move towards being a good side these players get upgraded.

[Scoop Junior 3,435]

I can't believe Collingwood/Buckley have escaped criticism for the style of game - every time we had the ball every single Collingwood player was sat back in our forward 50, of course we had to chip it around to try and pick out a short target. If that's not defensive ultra-flooding I don't know what is. Don't expect the morons in the media or the sheep in the outer to pick this up though.

Agree 100%. It takes two to tango - Collingwood to me seemed to accept it was going to be a defensive low-scoring game and adjusted their game accordingly. They got numbers back all game and backed their class to be able to kick enough goals to win, which they did. You don't concede 3 goals for the game without an extreme defensive focus.

I find it amazing how quickly the media forget previous games and focus so intensely on one match. The week before against Port was a cracking match when most commentators expected a blow out, the Richmond game before that was tense and tight and entertaining and before that the Bulldogs game was a fairly high scoring affair that went down to the wire.

After being almost unwatchable last year we have served up some great contests this season. Yet all of a sudden, after one low-scoring contest which both teams contributed to, some people have a dig at Melbourne.

Some people just have unrealistic expectations. Each game is different and that's what I find intriguing about it - you don't know exactly what you're going to get. I have seen plenty of hyped-up EPL games between top sides end in dull 0-0 draws, whereas other times it may be a memorable 4-3 win. That is sport. The more a governing body tries to promote a certain playing style though rule changes means the game becomes more artifical and contrived.

[Demons 32 235]

Am I the only one who actually finds the Paul Roos / Ross Lyon "defence-fest" really entertaining? I mean, I could do without chipping it 40 metres backward for no apparant reason (but then again so could Paul Roos I bet); but other than that I find it much more tactically interesting than the 30 goal a game alternative that I'm "supposed" to like.

100% agree.

It's physical, intense and tough.... Isn't that kinda the thing everyone loves about footy?

[Dr. Gonzo 24,184]

The thing is no one complained when we beat richmond, Carlton and adelaide. I mean in the past we have kicked a lot more goals. I reckon the game looked bad because we kicked inaccurately. If we managed to kick some of the goals we should have then I doubt people would complain. If it was 10-3 instead of the other way we would have won.

Also the Port game the week before was pretty good but of course hardly anyone would have watched it so in their minds it doesn't exist. Most of them will judge us off the one or two nationally broadcast games each year unfortunately for us this year it's been the Swans and Pies games both which were ultra defensive from both sides.

[Tony Tea 2,806]

The AFL will soon bring in a rule which forces teams to play attacking football so that the opposition can kick easy goals. How dare Paul Roos makes it hard for Melbourne opponents to score goals.

[ignition. 1,463]

The constant criticism of our new game-plan is attracting a lot of negative attention, and i am loving it.

We are playing a defensive game that i remember Sydney playing and also attracting a lot of negative attention.

Our ruthless defence will pay dividends in a manner that i can finally see making us a really top team.

Amongst this, we have an identity. We have an identity that invites a contest, rather than a goal-fest. One of my main criticisms of both the Bailey and Neeld game-plans was other teams ability to destroy us on their offence.

I am loving the criticism and i look forward to more "boring" games that finally result in Melbourne getting the 4 points. Bring on the bombers and north.

I prefer it over previous game plans seen in recent years, however, I look forward to seeing our game plan evolve and develop to a point where our players can flick a switch and transition quickly into an offensive attack taking the game on, using an open corridor, and catching our opponents flat footed with the options of multiple leading up forwards.

My only concern so far is it's too defensive at times, they are too slow to take the ball from one end to the other causing a congestion of players in our offensive zones resulting in this over use of the ball by constantly chipping it back and losing whatever space they had just worked so hard to get.

So far it's very promising, we have been able to restrict teams from scoring and are winning a lot of one on ones and contested ball. The next major key that will see us climb the ladder will be "flicking this offensive switch" and taking the game on when need be. The first year under Roos is certainly very promising and I look forward to seeing the game plan develop.

[ignition. 1,463]

The constant criticism of our new game-plan is attracting a lot of negative attention, and i am loving it.

We are playing a defensive game that i remember Sydney playing and also attracting a lot of negative attention.

Our ruthless defence will pay dividends in a manner that i can finally see making us a really top team.

Amongst this, we have an identity. We have an identity that invites a contest, rather than a goal-fest. One of my main criticisms of both the Bailey and Neeld game-plans was other teams ability to destroy us on their offence.

I am loving the criticism and i look forward to more "boring" games that finally result in Melbourne getting the 4 points. Bring on the bombers and north.

Also to help support your point, mid way through last year AFL followers were criticizing Fremantle for their defensive game, also touting it as "boring".

Their game plan took them to a Grand Final unfortunately for them they were unable to deliver on the day. It certainly was a joy watching them steam roll Sydney (nothing against the Swans) in the final the week prior with the immense defense, that to me was a spectacle.