THE BIG QUESTION MARK

[Demonland 73,140]

by The Oracle

Until Saturday afternoon came along, I fully believed that Melbourne had done it after all these years! I thought that finally we were over the syndrome that had afflicted the club for so long; the feeling that you could arrive at a game and not have to ask which Melbourne was going to turn up on the particular day.

You know the feeling?

You turn up asking whether today was the day for the hard tough Melbourne that would fight tooth and nail to achieve the advantage over its opposition and prevail with its skills or would it be the Keystone Cops Melbourne that would fumble away and ultimately drown in its own ineptitude even when the opposition was a bottom of the ladder outfit destined to win the prize of the number one draft pick?

I honestly thought I would never have to ask that question again – at least not this year or in the foreseeable future.

But early in the opening quarter, the big question mark loomed large over the Telstra Dome's slippery surface..

?

There it was. Up in the sky. It's a bird, it's a plane, no.

It's the big question mark!

?

And there they were. All the old doubts came flooding back giving the appearance that those old cracks had just been wallpapered over for a few months. The poor team selection, the baffling positional moves, the unfathomable matchups, the pathetic decision-making, the lack of purpose, enthusiasm, skills and desire.

Have I missed something?

Melbourne might not have taken the field with the aim of deliberately throwing away the four points or jeopardising its top four prospects but it certainly did a good job of convincing us that someone lost the plot this week.

Yes. In one fell swoop, the team was slip sliding away on the Telstra Dome turf and we started losing our faith and our trust in them just in time for the business end of the season. It wasn't even the grass that the team had difficulty running over - it seemed as if the selectors had problems of their own as well!

Of course, it didn't help that we lost the services of Aaron Davey, Byron Pickett and Travis Johnstone but who was responsible for picking that opening line up?

When the team lined up at Telstra Dome, it spelled one word - negativity! Attacking players like Cam Bruce and Adem Yze on the backline and defenders like Nathan Brown and Simon Godfrey up forward. There was no obvious match up down back for Ben Holland so, for the second week in a row he lined up forward in close proximity to David Neitz limiting the team's forward line mobility to a snail's pace.

I wonder why Brad Miller and Lynden Dunn or at least one of them wasn't given a game?

If there is one thing that Miller does well, it is when he plays on Sydney's Barry Hall in defence. If that's the idea, then why not play him against Carlton on Saturday? Why leave him at Sandy, where he plays on the Sunday and then has a six day break before the Sydney game? Or is there some other reason why he isn't getting a run after showing good form in consecutive weeks with the Zebras? Melbourne was aching for a target in the key forward positions and could have done with Dunn if Miller wasn't preferred. The kid showed out at Sandy on Sunday and, although the VFL is a long way south of the AFL as far as the standard and pressure of the game is concerned, he surely would have done better than what Melbourne had on offer.

And there's nothing wrong with plumping for youth is there?

Of Melbourne's three best players on the day, two were teenagers in Matthew Bate and Nathan Jones. The other was James McDonald who continues to have a brilliant season - even when his teammates fall around him.

The fact that a couple of youngsters like Bate and Jones stood out, simply emphasises the team's failing - there was nothing from the leaders, the experienced players and this was fatal in the end. The game was screaming out for some leadership on Melbourne's part. It needed someone to come out and set the example. Instead we got a mirror image of the first game where the team was out thought and outplayed by a Carlton which got behind the ball and then ran it out of defence with purpose always finishing in a position where a shot for goal was on the cards rather than on difficult angles as when the Demons went forward.

Four months later, they showed they had learned nothing whatsoever. You simply don't play an MCG game at the Telstra Dome.

My other question mark is not so much about the poor form of the players who we know are probably on the fringe when a full list of players is available. It's more about the much vaunted four horsemen - the four blokes in their third and fourth seasons at AFL level who we expected to step up a few notches by now and become regular top line players but it's not happening, is it?

Of the four, Brock McLean, Colin Sylvia, Daniel Bell and Brent Moloney, only McLean has truly stepped up a notch this year but on Sunday, he looked tentative and unfit. Sylvia is going backwards, Bell's career is static and suffering from poor disposal and inept decision making when under pressure (he looks good at Sandy but it's another thing in the bigtime) and Moloney is suffering form osteitis pubis and looks a spent force this year.

Suddenly, Melbourne looks extremely vulnerable and history threatens to repeat. Can the Demons be trusted to come out and play next week?

I hope they can and they do but for the rest of 2006, the old doubts will linger and our hopes and dreams are now full of them ? ? ? ?

Melbourne 1.5.11 4.8.32 7.10.52 10.13.73

Carlton 4.1.25 7.5.47 9.7.61 12.8.80

Goals Neitz White 2 Bate, Jamar, Jones, McDonald, Whelan, Rivers

Best Bate McDonald Jones Whelan Carroll White

Injury Robertson (shoulder)

Change Johnstone out (leg soreness) replaced in selected side by Bell

Reports Nil

Umpires Quigley Nicholls Wenn

Crowd 24,113 at Telstra Dome