What's this got to do with the price of fish?

Where did I mention culture?

team plans go out the window if the culture is soft & the current match gets too hard. disciplines drop away, & the team becomes a group of individuals. playing for one another falters.

we are trying to build a healthy culture, & get confidence back into the club... for sure it will get tested as we go along. yesterdays match was a hick-up in the road forward. I think game styles revolve around the same things.

mental strength in individuals.

team ethos

physical strength

real desire & enjoyment of contact sport

quick wits & spontaneity

dedication

passion

having these aptitudes in players, most game styles will be acceptable, as long as all are happily on the same page.

At every level of this game,if you're not good enough to win the footy,then the team and yourself are in trouble.

And in PR's aftermatch interview he simply said "we dont have enough of those players".

We are 4 years behind all clubs that have a list of players that can win their own pill.

Jizza makes some sense here. Jack Dyer also pushed this "old fashioned" message.

. All footy theories go to pieces unless you have ball.

Almost every time the ball hit the ground after half time they grabbed it

They got the ball - we didn't -They sh it on us.

I stood there and watched the sh it.

build the club for September success, it may take a little while but 100 Aaron Davies will never win us a flag. we can only have one Aaron in a team, & if they won't chase or tackle, then they're no use.

Brad Hill and Rioli makes two.

Like Roos said last week you need players who can run for 4 quarters & players who can win their own ball. That aspect of football has never changed. The surprising thing for me is that he didn't take his own advice today & play enough running players. 4 tall forwards & 4 tall backs is too much in my opinion.

We played 4 tall backs? Who? I assume Dunn, McDonald and Garland make the first three. And although I didn't see the game, I assume Jetta, Salem and Howe were the other starting defenders. Are you saying Howe is a "tall back"?

In fact, I suspect our longer-term problem might be that McDonald is our only true tall back. Garland and Dunn play on talls but aren't quite big enough themselves although that's not to say they can't play well in that role. (And neither Rivers or Frawley could play on gorilla forwards, either). I appreciate that Frost and O McDonald may have been recruited to fix that deficiency, but neither is playing there at the moment.

Some follow trends some make the trend we have be the ones who make them, followers don't win flags trend setters do

Brad Hill and Rioli makes two.

Rioli has some size in his torso & in his mind, re physical aggression, he loves the physical contact & contest.... Height: 177cm Weight: 80kg

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-hawthorn-hawks--cyril-rioli

It looks like Hill also has the mojo of a heat seeking missile, must love the physical contest as well. so he has what it taken in his mind.... Height: 181cm Weight: 78kg

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-hawthorn-hawks--bradley-hill

Aaron was quick and skilled in disposal but wouldn't bulldog a fly away coles plastic bag.... Playing Height: 177cm Playing Weight: 73kg

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-melbourne-demons--aaron-davey

Maurice Rioli, Jimmy Krakoeur, Andrew Mcleod, Nicky Winmar, Shaun Burgoyne, Peter Matera, Gavin Wanganeen, type of players, no problem.. they all really take it on, & won't back off.

Bailey was trying to emulate Geelong... except with no defensive structures or two way running.

No he wasn't at all. He said very early in the piece to be putting together a game plan to counter Hawthorn's and he was right. He just didn't have the cattle, the facilities, the budget, the staff... I could go on. He also had one epic f-up of a roadblock in Schwab.

No he wasn't at all. He said very early in the piece to be putting together a game plan to counter Hawthorn's and he was right. He just didn't have the cattle, the facilities, the budget, the staff... I could go on. He also had one epic f-up of a roadblock in Schwab.

This.

Bailey was an innovator. Boards don't like innovation, the prefer the safer immitation option to taking a risk and possibly failing.

Edited April 13, 201510 yr by wretched.sylph

We need to look at what the Premiership team does, guess what teams are going to do to stop it, and then to whatever stops THAT.

It's called "metagaming," and it works.

The answer is to figure out what everyone else is going to do to stop whatever is currently effective. Then while they're all busy beating last year's game plan, we'll be beating them.

If we know scissor beats paper and the premiers are paper, then we need to be rock, so we can beat all the scissors who are trying to beat the paper.

I like the theory a lot Chook. The idea of negating what is likely to happen next is certainly what Goodwin should have on his mind, as this will peak under his watch. Would it be fair to say that speed and offence is what's happening next (as we have seen the beginnings of this year). So how do we counter this?

I like the theory a lot Chook. The idea of negating what is likely to happen next is certainly what Goodwin should have on his mind, as this will peak under his watch. Would it be fair to say that speed and offence is what's happening next (as we have seen the beginnings of this year). So how do we counter this?

Flooding.

It was frightening how much quicker and cleaner GWS were from clearances in the second half. The sad thing is I don't think we have that in us/nor do we have the resilience to fight back after a team starts exploding like GWS did. We can't afford to give it less than our all given the amount of talent we have, as Roos said. The good news is that we already have a home win under our belt. If what happened in the 2nd half keeps happening, hopefully it's just interstate. I'll take a couple of beltings on the road to see the players riding a passionate crowd at the G all season

Something that not many people mention is how Melbourne has been behind football trends right through the last 10 years. In my view, this is why we are always falling short of getting out of the hole we are in.

For example, we went with the Morton, Grimes, Blease types just as the game shifted to the Hawthorn/Geelong big-bodied mids and the game went to being all about tough, contested footy. It moved to be more offensive in the last couple of years (think Hawthorn and Gunston, Isaac Smith type runners), right when we went (shudder) back to 'kick it down the line to a contest'.

In the last couple of years, we have mostly looked at bulking up the midfield with tougher types like Viney, Petracca, Tyson, even van den Berg (although I admit we did go with Salem who is more of a silky outsider).

We're going to get left behind again, because the game has shifted to be faster and higher scoring this year and probably into the next couple. If this keeps going, we will again be 2-4 yeats behind trend and have a team that's completely useless for what is being dished up by the competition.

Thoughts?

I think you are scrambling for a story. An article in today's paper says scoring is as low as it's been for some time.

This.

Bailey was an innovator. Boards don't like innovation, the prefer the safer immitation option to taking a risk and possibly failing.

Bailey was an innovator alright - he may have overseen some exciting, attacking football, but he also oversaw some of the worst defeats in our history and allowed the players far too much leverage in terms of how they trained.

I liked Bails but he is hardly what I would call 'innovative'.

I think you are scrambling for a story. An article in today's paper says scoring is as low as it's been for some time.

Just throwing up a discussion, nothing more than that.

Is that for last year as well, or just this year?

Just throwing up a discussion, nothing more than that.

Is that for last year as well, or just this year?[

It's point was for this year. Your topic is a reasonable one. Just that part of your argument was presumably - should I trust the media - inaccurate. Trends in football are fascinating. I'm inclined to think the best teams find their best way to play.