Yep, I thought there was. Thats all we need, the players to not agree with the coach on the style of play. Hopefully Neale employs our best tactic on Sunday, and that is kicking it long to Neitz so that Pickett, Davey, Dunn etc have a chance.

Maybe that explains the staleness I percieved in the players this season after all the big talk, & the lack of general excitement from all MFC interested peoples.

That's definitely one way.

You must have stats that show WC and Sydney kick the ball long more than other teams - keen to see them ...

Sydney did against us.

I think the way to win games is stop pretending they are West Coast all the handballing is getting nowhere and kick the damn ball. I am sick of sitting at games where the MFC supporters scream the whole time "Kick it!" (this includes me). Over use of the ball leads to errors from our younger charges. But I agree with Robbo long kicking wouldnt hurt

WHY Does a Coach keep on copying a different teams style every year from one year too the NEXT?

Can somebody please explain, hello is anyone @ home, can anyone hear me, somebody please help me??????

Cheers Jarka.

It's just interesting to hear Russell Robertson come out and say what he did.

Especially in the frustrated manner that he did so.

do you agree with Robertson's statement that kicking it long to the forward line "is how you win games"?

I think that is the universal dilemma of modern football i.e. getting the ball down quickly to a contest but risking dispossession and a turnover, versus kicking shorter and maintaining possession but allowing the opposition to flood back to block off options.

If you have the answer, please provide it. Even coaches can't work it out.

I think that Daniher is the only coach who hasn't worked it out.

If for example Melbourne have a forward line consisting of Neitz, Robertson, Pickett, Davey, Dunn, possibly Bruce, possibly Green, possibly Yze, possibly Sylvia and or a resting ruckman, then why wouldn't you want to get the ball down quickly to them?

Crossed out the names that have hardly been in the team this year.

I think that is the universal dilemma of modern football i.e. getting the ball down quickly to a contest but risking dispossession and a turnover, versus kicking shorter and maintaining possession but allowing the opposition to flood back to block off options.

If you have the answer, please provide it. Even coaches can't work it out.

If for example Melbourne have a forward line consisting of Neitz, Robertson, Pickett, Davey, Dunn, possibly Bruce, possibly Green, possibly Yze, possibly Sylvia and or a resting ruckman, then why wouldn't you want to get the ball quickly down to them?

The thing about kicking to a contest is that someone doesn't have to take a mark for it to be an effective move. With the likes of Davey, Pickett and Bruce running around the base of the pack, odds are that they will win back possession. Not only that, all of these guys know where the goals are more than capable of kicking a bag on their day.

Like you said Maurie, when the ball is moved down quickly, opposition sides don't have time to get back and flood Melbourne's forward line.

Not only that, the opposition's defenders are under FAR GREATER pressure than they would otherwise be under if there was time for their teammates to get back, man-up any free Melbourne forwards and clog up space. Do I need to explain why?

There will be occasions when the ball is turned over. But again, now the opposition have the ball deep in their defense and any mistake they do make will have much worse consequences, thus the pressure is right on them. To add to this, I am far more happier to see the ball turned over in Melbourne's defense than in the middle of the ground. Because like it or not, Melbourne turn the ball over a hell of a lot when they chip it around. In essence, defeating the purpose of the tactic.

Crossed out the names that have hardly been in the team this year.

Sorry, I accidentally posted half way through when I was writing. I've got a new computer and some of the keys are different.

When I talk about this tactic, I'm not just talking about this year. In fact the only game this year that it has been an issue for me was the Saints game where there were far less injuries.

I have been saying the same thing for a couple of years now, before injuries were a major problem.

This thread is hilarious, and completely ridiculous.

For those who saw the show, you'd know that Robbo made a passing remark while talking about ANOTHER team and another game. He didn't make a point of it, and he didn't come out and say "I wish my club did the same thing".

So nobody here has the right to take his words as vindication for their own opinion, and they most definitely don't have the right to get stuck into Robbo.

FFS, how much lower can we get, if we start crucifying our own based on their media performances?

This thread is hilarious, and completely ridiculous.

For those who saw the show, you'd know that Robbo made a passing remark while talking about ANOTHER team and another game. He didn't make a point of it, and he didn't come out and say "I wish my club did the same thing".

See Hards' post.

I think that summed it up pretty nicely.

Yes, it was a passing comment that was in the context of another team but he did say "that is how you win games" which was not specific to the Pies.

Not only that, the ever slight hint of frustration in Robbo's voice spoke volumes.

See Hards' post.

I think that summed up pretty nicely.

I read his post, and I know what he is talking about, but I rather not comment.

The point is, nobody should be drawing these conclusions based on Robbo's comment. If they do, they are either extremely bitter, trying to back-up their own point of view, or they know more than they are allowed to say.

The point is, nobody should be drawing these conclusions based on Robbo's comment.

The only conclusion being drawn is that Russell Robertson believes that kicking the ball "long into the forward line ... is how you win games".

No, he didn't say that "I wish my club did the same thing". But I'm pretty sure that he wishes his club would "win games".

Why do you always feel the need to make personal comments about the people you're arguing with? You do it all the time, CB is just debating the issues but you come in and start with completely unnecessary personal attacks.

I sometimes wonder this, Jarka, but in this case I reckon you have to go back and look at the "wanted" thread. RR has explaind PERFECTLY well where the fault lies in CB's reasoning. And not only that but he explained it about 10 times, and all CB could manage to do was cling to his point so as not to appear subordinate.

Somehow, a simple difference of opinion that is really quite clear cut has mutated into what we see now. If there's one thing I hate it's when people resurrect old posts to prove someone else wrong. And in this case CB has resurrected a thread in which his reasoning was shot down completely, and has SOMEHOW convinced the GP that his point holds water. (for the record I love a funny rehash of a thread, or one to relive a glory, or prove a quirky or risky prediction true... nothing wrong with that)

As far as I'm concerned, now that we HAVE no forwards, CB's point is made correct. When you've got guys like Jamar in your forward line standing around like trees occupying space and generally being a nuisance, and your team is ACTUALLY winning some ball, then YES the forward line is the problem. But again, RR concedes this.

But in the vast majority of games so far, and certainly in rounds 1 and 2, our problem was first and foremost GETTING the pill. Had ND not flooded back the Bruces and Greens, along with The Yzes and Daveys (all our big eggs) even mediocre opposition midfields would have extracted the pill EVEN EASIER, and we'd have lost by TWICE as much!

You watch when Robbo returns and we have some sort of forward structure back. The SAME thing will happen if the team doesn't win some of their own footy in defence and in the midfield, and doesn't make use of their first and second possessions.

As for Robbo, his comment was only regarding our overuse of handball, AND THAT'S IT. And if you can't see that you're blind and deaf. He doesn't want his team JUST to kick long. He wants his defenders and mids to WIN the footy, run hard, expose the forward line THEN kick long. Ironically, making space to lead into in the forward line is the responsibility of the mids, in this day and age. OUR mids have to make their opponents accountable. If they start doing damage in defence and on the ball, all the Hawks' flooding defenders would have had to man-up, leaving some nice space for a few of the forwards to lead into.

Yes, it's true that right now, with leading forwards like Jamar, all the space in the world isn't going to do you any good. So bringing in a GOOD FF will help. But are you seeing my point? If Neita comes back, kicks a bag, and wins the game, it will be a sign that we're winning the ball out of the middle better (which we have been doing sporadically), but then CB and others will come back on and claim they knew it all along, and resurrect old threads in an attempt to discredit guys like RR, who made the correct call in the first place.

Makes me angry... The only solution Jarka, is to let it go. To my knowledge, RR had done this repeatedly, and CB KEPT pulling it out. And he's done it here again MONTHS down the track, and now you pick on RR for being petty. Just seems a bit unfair to me, that's all.

Cheers.

I sometimes wonder this, Jarka, but...

Dappa, I don't know the history between the two but really it's irrelevant. Here's a part of the Code of Conduct post made by Demonland.

Demonland suggests that its members:

1. Make use of the search function to avoid repeat topics

2. Argue the points of discussion, not the people involved in the discussion

3. Avoid meaningless one word topics or posts

4. Avoid Political or Religious discussions. This forum is about the Melbourne Football Club, not about the parties or religious affiliation ownership, players, staff and fans may choose to support.

...

In regards to posts on the Demonland Forums, the Demonland Administrators and Moderators reserve the right to edit and/or remove posts that are considered to be:

1. Acts of personal abuse

2. Slanderous

3. Indecent

4. Any other matter deemed inappropriate

Regardless of whether people agree or disagree with Clint Bizket he is just expressing his opinion, which is what this forum is about, and as you've pointed out this isn't an isolated case with RR. It's made worse because he is a moderator.

I didn't see CB resorting to personal jibes in this thread so why does anyone else need to?

Dappa, I don't know the history between the two but really it's irrelevant. Here's a part of the Code of Conduct post made by Demonland.

Regardless of whether people agree or disagree with Clint Bizket he is just expressing his opinion, which is what this forum is about, and as you've pointed out this isn't an isolated case with RR. It's made worse because he is a moderator.

I didn't see CB resorting to personal jibes in this thread so why does anyone else need to?

Cheers again Jarka.

Why do you always feel the need to make personal comments about the people you're arguing with? You do it all the time, CB is just debating the issues but you come in and start with completely unnecessary personal attacks.

The saddest thing is that you're a mod, but you're intelligent enough and you write well enough without having to resort to this crap.

Rhino & CB build a bridge

So you think that Robbo has got it wrong when he says it "is how you win games"?

Well its one way to win games, if you can take a mark...

Rhino & CB build a bridge

Great suggestion.

I think this love affair should continue over PMs. Alternatively, I suggest you stop baiting Rhino, because believe me he'll bite and it'll hurt.

I think this love affair should continue over PMs. Alternatively, I suggest you stop baiting Rhino, because believe me he'll bite and it'll hurt.

Ouch...

The thing is, Rhino and I have a common aim. And that is to see the Melbourne Football Club play good footy and hopefully win a flag. The thing is, we tend to disagree on how they should go about it. And that's what this forum is all about. Discussing ideas and expressing opinions about the one thing we all love, the MFC.

By offering an opinion and creating discussing I'm not "baiting" anyone. I try to argue the point and not the person. Other people don't do this and that's when things get messy.

Imagine how boring this site would be if everyone just agreed with each other.

Ouch...

I'm sure you'll find someone else to debate with.

Try picking a child next time... that way you'll definitely beat them every time

Try picking a child next time... that way you'll definitely beat them every time

Cool.

See this is what sh1ts me with this forum.

One poster makes a point about what Robbo said (Didn't see Robbo say it myself, was switching between TFS and playing 360) and then says we should kick it long to our forwards, and what do you know, half the forum jumps on him saying he is wrong and an idiot.

I don't care who is up forward, it is a pretty simple plan if we want to win games would be to put a big guy in the square who can at least give a contest and give Flash and co. a chance at ground level. Nothing puts more pressure on a defense than a long kick, but wait, lets handball around the half back line and lose games due to it (Rounds 1 and 2).

And if anyone brings up the Sydney game and say our delivery was poor because we kicked long, no it wasn't due to long kicking, it was due to poor decisions by the players, there is a time for long kicking when the forward is one out, you don't just hack it in blindly.

I know exactly why I asked old55 that question.

Because as soon as someone (Russell Robertson) with far more football knowledge than he says something which I (and others) have been advocating for a couple of years now, he tries to dodge the issue by having a go at Robertson.

Are Robbo's views "discredited"?

By that logic Daniher has far more football knowledge than Robertson.

So with your logic above Daniher's plan> Robertson's plan

You can't have it both ways.

I think this love affair should continue over PMs. Alternatively, I suggest you stop baiting Rhino, because believe me he'll bite and it'll hurt.

WTF!?!

What sort of forum is this?

WTF!?!

What sort of forum is this?

Ummmm, I'm not even going to touch that comment