A really good insight into how Clarkson brilliantly neutralised  our center bounce strategy:

"Against the Hawks, Melbourne started centre bounces without players lining up in the traditional wing position. Angus Brayshaw and Jordan Lewis lined up off the back of the square, with James Harmes or Neal-Bullen regularly charged with playing as Melbourne's seventh forward...Hawthorn's Isaac Smith and Harry Morrison originally started in traditional wing positions in the first term, before the Hawks made the call to man up Lewis/Brayshaw and Harmes/Neal-Bullen".

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-04-18/how-wingless-hawks-strangled-dees

Its no wonder they roved brilliantly to Max's hitouts and won the clearance count. 

Unfortunately, we didn't have a counter plan and they led us a merry dance for three quarters. 

I have a probably very left field question. Are our footballs pumped up enough at training? Round 1 especially, but also still happening after round 4, we seem to run under more balls than any other time I can remember. Maybe our players are just that dumb that they can't read the flight but I hoping it is the balls we use...

 

58 minutes ago, Age said:

I have a probably very left field question. Are our footballs pumped up enough at training? Round 1 especially, but also still happening after round 4, we seem to run under more balls than any other time I can remember. Maybe our players are just that dumb that they can't read the flight but I hoping it is the balls we use...

 

If only it where that simple.

3 hours ago, old dee said:

If only it where that simple.

Something is definitely not pumped enough 

If this bloke Rath is so much in demand to the AFL from Hawthorn, what are we doing about his innovations in regard to coaching methodology etc.

3 hours ago, old dee said:

If only it where that simple.

Something is definitely not pumped enough 

On 17 April 2018 at 11:24 AM, Mydee said:

 

I too, am very disappointed, but I don't think our problems are psychological or deep seated. After all  the club at least, at the off field executive level has made enormous strides, We have an excellent CEO and a good president and administration-no more advertising executives, worn out politicians or tennis players, I think the record is a bit less flattering with the coaching staff however.   I am yet to be convinced that a "losing culture" tag bears close scrutiny. Terms like these and "The curse of Norm Smith" are too easy to bandy around and while prattling on about getting rid of a soft or losing culture sounds impressive and provides carrion for the media vultures. it is essentially a very nebulous term because it is difficult to analyse. 

The facts are these: Melbourne had allowed its culture to degenerate to the extent that in the 2000s the playing  group had been allowed to exert far more influence than they warranted, Melbourne had for many years become a retirement village for players in semi-retirement, Pickett, Pitt, Egan, to name a few. The recruiting targeting highly skilled players who were not tough enough, either mentally or physically to make the transition to AFL. Of course we also had notable incidents particularly Brent Maloney's off field exploits as well as those of our Could o'been champion Colin Sylvia. In what was a massive mistake in trying to correct this situation we recruited a disciplinarian, unfortunately he couldn't coach.

But these days things have changed. Very few of the playing group, predate Paul Roos and quite a few would never have heard of Norm Smith, much less his spectre!  Our recruiting has generally improved so much that now we have young men presenting themselves as professional footballers who have few "psychological problems" at least football ones relating to a soft culture. I didn't see too much softness on the day, Brayshaw, in particular was hard at the ball and didn't take a backward step and Jones as always showed what a toughnut he is in blanketing Mitchell.

No rather our loss, relates purely and simply to faults with the senior coaching staff and the lack of adaptability in our game plan.  I did some research into this and came upon an excellent snippet on how to play wet weather football by the Richmond Assistant coach Craig McCrae. He talks about the need to adapt the game plan in wet weather. Players are drilled so extensively that reactions become inbuilt so that it isn't easy to adapt. Richmond uses their runner to reinforce the need to adapt to the situation. We didn't, and without singling out one player for criticism, it was particularly notable with Petracca who played dry weather football with disastrous results. From a champion last week to a fumbling fool in the wet.

So how should we have played? Well according to McCrae Richmond plays wet weather football with the following dictums:

1 Never go backwards, especially handballing -handball kicking, dribbling or tapping the ball forwards is the go,

2 Kick at the goals, not to a player or pack around the goal square from a long way out It is likely that the ball will skid through.

3 Constantly reinforce the change in game plan through the runners.

 

I saw none of this in evidence last Sunday. I also same a lack of defence on the rebound. This is in part down to the coaching staff.

That, in my opinion is why we lost. However if the proponents of the soft culture myth have any spells or potions to counter this wizardry please let us all know

Please start coaching the Dees mate

On 17/04/2018 at 12:49 PM, Sir Why You Little said:

From Titus O’Reilly for those that don’t subscribe.

Hawthorn (115) v Melbourne (48)

In a shrewd move, Melbourne decided to hide any progress they’ve made in recent years, by giving up entirely at quarter time, despite leading at the time.

It was less taking your foot off the pedal and more throwing the car into reverse and flooring it back to 2009.

It was an interesting move that I’m sure is part of some clever long-term plan.

How else would you describe a performance this inept? This lacking in heart?

The Dees would only kick one goal after quarter time, against a Hawthorn team that seemed to only have injured players.

Hawthorn though were trying, and the cruised home in this one by 67-points in a brutal display that at one stage had the Melbourne cheer squad replace their normal flags with white ones to signal the surrender.

It was as if the Dees had seen Brisbane’s and Carlton’s performances and felt their reputation as the most embarrassing team in the competition was under threat.

Simon Goodwin has shown this season that he’ll drop non-performers, with Jayden Hunt being dropped previously, but now he faces dropping almost the entire side if he sticks to his guns.

A lot of people faulted Goodwin after Clarkson did some magic coaching things at quarter time and the Dees didn’t respond, but I’m not sure any coach should have to tell players to do things like run or tackle, these are basics.

As always with Melbourne, the players are the problem and within them lies the solution, there’s no messiah coming, no super coach. With the talent they have, there’s no way they should kick one goal in three-quarters of football.

This is all on them.

Titus is a really funny guy. He's also a die hard Demons supporter. He stopped laughing when he wrote this. He is genuinely hurt.

I think that Sunday’s game allows for some negativity... sorry but I don’t wish to gloss over it like some.. one of our problems is expectation getting in the way of reality... the Tigers are likely to give us a 100 point thrashing ... more about confidence then talent.. speaking of which when is Trac or Gus or Salem or Tyson or Clarry or Hogan or Weed or any other top ten talent ,really going to rip a game apart... are we deluding ourselves about their potential??

I'm going to concentrate on the fact that Jones held Mitchell to 24 touches. Thats a win