Bonuses?

Bonuses?

Umm, well say an assistant coach was to be caretaker for the remainder for the season, surely he would get a pay-rise or pay bonus.

Not necessarily. The way I see it the bonus here is for the assistant coach being given an opportunity to step-up & demonstrate his value to the club, whereas the head coach has failed. If ND goes, there should and hopefully will be a cleanout.

I am so fed up with the utter sh*t some people here write. Is it not possible to have a spirited and intelligent debate about some of the issues facing the MFC?

Are people seriously going to tell me that missing 8 players from our best side in a team sport which is so even is not at least a reason why we performed so poorly? We won more clearances and centre breaks than Geelong, so it wasn't hardness that was the problem. Sure, the skills of our second tier players and poor form of some of the seniors contributed to the loss. But to say injuries is no excuse is frightfully ignorant. Are people seriously so deluded that they think a red hot Geelong isn't going to be advantaged by having less key injuries than us?

Whether ND should keep coaching, why don't we give it a few weeks to see how the season takes shape. We need to be 4 - 6 at the half way to make a really good shot at it. Let's see.

But seriously, take Hall (Neitz) and Goodes (Robbo), plus Bolton (Brock), Leo Barry (Rivers) and a handful of others out of Sydney, how do you think they will travel? How about Kerr, Glass, Braun, Lynch, Hansen and others from WC. If you want to take a pot shot at the club, at least be fair and reasonable about it.

Yep, the coach is totally and unquestionably blameless. Just explain one thing...why is it that over Danihers 10 year reign, the players have been able to look like superstars one day, yet duds the next? Our inconsistency with form and fortune (injuries or none) has been the garbage we have had to swallow year in, year out.

If you want to go looking for positives, injuries is no place to start. Try '87 under Northey...or that there are only 18 games left.

Daniher is out of time ..and out of excuses.

Yep, the coach is blameless.

Is that what I said is it? Great contribution

Not necessarily. The way I see it the bonus here is for the assistant coach being given an opportunity to step-up & demonstrate his value to the club, whereas the head coach has failed. If ND goes, there should and hopefully will be a cleanout.

ND's post-game comments don't sit too well with me.

On The Footy Show, he said the main obligation of a coach is to win games of footy. Coaches do have some responsibility to make the game a spectacle, but he said it all comes down to winning.

We take on a good team in Geelong with heaps of firepower. We are down on our firepower with Neitz and Robbo out, Pickett at Sandy and Davey in horrendous form. It didn't take Einstein to work out that if we were a chance to win, we'd have to reduce Geelong to about 10-11 goals. We'd have to make the game an ugly scrap, slow it down, get numbers back and try to score goals on the break. There was no way in the world we'd win going head-to-head in a shootout.

So why, then, does ND go with an attacking game plan and try to "match" Geelong? On what basis were we going to match them? We didn't have the manpower nor the form to go against them in an attacking game plan.

After half-time we tried to bottle it up. We were still pathetic and while ND was pleased with the effort, IMO we were just as bad in the 2nd half and had Geelong kicked accurately it would have been a 15-goal loss.

ND then says that we now know that we can't go in so attacking in our current state. We need to restrict teams and keep them to low scores. We have to make it ugly. Well what on earth was the coaching staff thinking prior to the Geelong game? Why wasn't this discovery made during the week? It was painfully obvious.

ND also commented that he didn't want to raise the white flag and tell his players they couldn't win. Well, a defensive game plan does not mean you are conceding the game! It's merely finding a different way to win. Richmond beat Adelaide with a unique game plan last year. Teams can win playing a defensive game style, as it can throw the other side.

I wouldn't write ND off just yet. He has proven his ability to turn things around quickly. But I just cannot understand how our coaching staff could not engineer a defensive game plan when it was so obvious that we needed to play a lock-down style of game to have any chance of prevailing.

I wouldn't write ND off just yet. He has proven his ability to turn things around quickly. But I just cannot understand how our coaching staff could not engineer a defensive game plan when it was so obvious that we needed to play a lock-down style of game to have any chance of prevailing.

Yep, or why it took so long to get Brad Green to FF.

Or why, despite the fact that our only chance to score would come from a small, mobile, quick forward line, we still went into the side with a surplus of giants who can't run, mark or kick goals.

Injuries do not excuse the terrible skills that were on display yesterday, and definitely don't excuse the shocking game plan (or lack thereof)

But seriously, take Hall (Neitz) and Goodes (Robbo), plus Bolton (Brock), Leo Barry (Rivers) and a handful of others out of Sydney, how do you think they will travel? How about Kerr, Glass, Braun, Lynch, Hansen and others from WC. If you want to take a pot shot at the club, at least be fair and reasonable about it.

Eagles won in Rd 1 without Cox, Embley, Cousins, Hansen and Fletcher.

Adelaide won in Rd 2 without Burton, Ricciuto, Hentschell and McGregor.

ND's post-game comments don't sit too well with me.

On The Footy Show, he said the main obligation of a coach is to win games of footy. Coaches do have some responsibility to make the game a spectacle, but he said it all comes down to winning.

We take on a good team in Geelong with heaps of firepower. We are down on our firepower with Neitz and Robbo out, Pickett at Sandy and Davey in horrendous form. It didn't take Einstein to work out that if we were a chance to win, we'd have to reduce Geelong to about 10-11 goals. We'd have to make the game an ugly scrap, slow it down, get numbers back and try to score goals on the break. There was no way in the world we'd win going head-to-head in a shootout.

Lets see if Neale adopts the 2nd half tactics against Geelong in the 1st half against the Dockers..and if were up at half time...what are the chances he'll try the 1st half tactics against Geelong in the 2nd half....... ?

Eagles won in Rd 1 without Cox, Embley, Cousins, Hansen and Fletcher.

Adelaide won in Rd 2 without Burton, Ricciuto, Hentschell and McGregor.

Not the same as our injuries, and those teams have more strength than us anyway, and we will also win some games with our injuries. And look at the injuries those teams opponents had, the form of opponents, etc...

But what I am actually saying is if those teams lose games with crippling injuries, surely that's a factor.

And as far as Neale's post game comments, that's the vox pop version of what he thinks. The only real indication of how he feels about the performance was the body language, which said "I'm in pain and we're in trouble".

Lets see if Neale adopts the 2nd half tactics against Geelong in the 1st half against the Dockers..and if were up at half time...what are the chances he'll try the 1st half tactics against Geelong in the 2nd half....... ?

haha i think 100%, which will equate to a loss.

Green needs to play FF this week. No ifs about it. But we need to play completely defensive. We have to slow it down and stop Freo from kicking it into an open foward line, otherwise Pavlich and Tarrant will have a field day.

Not the same as our injuries, and those teams have more strength than us anyway, and we will also win some games with our injuries. And look at the injuries those teams opponents had, the form of opponents, etc...

Don't agree with that Choko. I didn't expect to beat Geelong. But I expected a performance of AFL standard. We were sub-standard.

WCE beat the Swans in Sydney - always a tough assignment. Adelaide beat the Dogs at the G. Two very good wins.

We played an under-strength St Kilda side and were crunched. Then we played Hawthorn who are as ordinary as they come. Geelong are a good side, but red-hot? Can you be red-hot after one win? It's not like we played WCE in Subi or Adelaide at AAMI.

Even with our injuries, we should have done far better yesterday.

I agree Scoop. Also, ND's gameplan is downright predictable. So far in '07 opposition coaches has suffocated our winning recipe by> Shutting down influential players early (Johnstone & Davey), harrassing and applying pressure, double-teamming (esp. half-forward line) and putting numbers behind the ball for easy rebound off halfback.

More noticebly, the players seem to lack composure in decision-making, thus, turning the ball over easily ("dumb footy") where they often choose the wrong option. This is where I think it stems back to ND's pre-game preparations and directions.

Is ND capable of devising a smart gameplan??

Melbourne do have BIG injury problems. They are missing their two best forwards (Neitz, Robertson), best backman (Rivers), just about their best midfielder (McLean) not to mention all of the others (Pickett, Dunn, Sylvia, Bartram).

It was never going to be easy for Melbourne to win.

My problem is the performance that ND got out of the players who were playing.

My problem is the performance that ND got out of the players who were playing.

Isn't the onus on the players to perform?

Isn't the onus on the players to perform?

It wasn't just the actual performances of the players, but also their attitudes.

IMO there's a leadership problem.

Leadership starts and ends with the coach.

Leadership starts and ends with the coach.

It starts with the coach but it definitely does not end with the coach. There is most definitely a leadership problem though, I agree.

Isn't the onus on the players to perform?

you can take the same ingredients and use two different recipes with two vastly different results...

probably just as well Danners isnt playing other wise he'd probably start at half time !!

is it just me or does he seem consistently 1/2 a game behind ?

I am so fed up with the utter sh*t some people here write. Is it not possible to have a spirited and intelligent debate about some of the issues facing the MFC?

Are people seriously going to tell me that missing 8 players from our best side in a team sport which is so even is not at least a reason why we performed so poorly? We won more clearances and centre breaks than Geelong, so it wasn't hardness that was the problem. Sure, the skills of our second tier players and poor form of some of the seniors contributed to the loss. But to say injuries is no excuse is frightfully ignorant. Are people seriously so deluded that they think a red hot Geelong isn't going to be advantaged by having less key injuries than us?

Whether ND should keep coaching, why don't we give it a few weeks to see how the season takes shape. We need to be 4 - 6 at the half way to make a really good shot at it. Let's see.

But seriously, take Hall (Neitz) and Goodes (Robbo), plus Bolton (Brock), Leo Barry (Rivers) and a handful of others out of Sydney, how do you think they will travel? How about Kerr, Glass, Braun, Lynch, Hansen and others from WC. If you want to take a pot shot at the club, at least be fair and reasonable about it.

mr daniher is good give him more time another 2 or 3 years

Not the same as our injuries, and those teams have more strength than us anyway, and we will also win some games with our injuries. And look at the injuries those teams opponents had, the form of opponents, etc...

But what I am actually saying is if those teams lose games with crippling injuries, surely that's a factor.

Can't agree Choko......we have been rubbish for the first 3 games. We have been making the same fundamental errors since the Saints game, and our preseason was pretty lamentable as well.

It isn't the losses, but the way we are losing......the football is rubbish!

We have not turned up to any game this year and resembled a pumped up, switched on, game ready team prepared to fight. That's the issue!

Nathan Buckley said the other day on SEN that he didn't care which 22 players ran out each week, so long as each players carried out the role they had been given by the coach. We cannot even achieve that at the minute!

Have you taken a look at the Pies injuries......Buckley (Captain), Ben Johnson, Didak (All Australian), Rusling, Lonie, Clement (against Tiges)

Not an excuse for injuries in sight from them after the loss to the Eagles.......just disappointment they didn't win, and a bloody good fight they put up!

The Tiges have had Troy Simmonds, Kent Kingsley, Ray Hall, Trent Knobel, Nathan Brown, Mark Coughlan all injured........they have been more competitive than we have!

I'll accept injuries if and when we go out and show something........until that stage.......injuries is a cop out!

It wasn't just the actual performances of the players, but also their attitudes.

IMO there's a leadership problem.

Leadership starts and ends with the coach.

You get what you pay for, past slack deeds gone undisciplined, so they continue & become more prevalent. Neale is reaping his own crop.

l want Mark Williams from Sandy to take over no one else

ND then says that we now know that we can't go in so attacking in our current state. We need to restrict teams and keep them to low scores. We have to make it ugly. Well what on earth was the coaching staff thinking prior to the Geelong game? Why wasn't this discovery made during the week? It was painfully obvious.

ND also commented that he didn't want to raise the white flag and tell his players they couldn't win. Well, a defensive game plan does not mean you are conceding the game! It's merely finding a different way to win. Richmond beat Adelaide with a unique game plan last year.

All makes sense.

Then you go on to support ND as Coach.

Isn't the onus on the players to perform?

ND has been there 10 years - the list is his.

Our leaders would have been ~20 when ND took over at the MFC.

Daniher will get a 12 month extension on his contract.

All he has to do it point out the ridicoulous amount of injuries that we've copped, and the board will be more than understanding.

(Or at least thats how I perceive the always forgiving Gardiner and his nice buddys on the board)