WRITING ON THE WALL by The Oracle

It was early in the final quarter and the game was well and truly over. Matthew Richardson marked the ball in front of Nathan Carroll at a little over fifty metres from goal. Noticing that his opponent's attention was elsewhere, he took advantage of the situation, ran around Carroll and booted a goal that put the Tigers back to eight goals in front. The next thing that happened was that a kindly trainer came along and gave the Demon defender a drink.

And that was it.

An hour later, the coach fronted the media and slammed his players for an "embarrassing and insipid effort"; the loss was "the team's worst in a long time" and he vowed his side would respond to the defeat. The how and the why of the promised response was not explained but I suspect that the details have not yet reached the drawing board stage. After all, the blueprint for the entire 2007 season has long been declared a total failure and, in its place, there are no Plans B, C or D.

Had there been a Plan B, C or D then it should have been employed at the ten-minute mark of the first quarter which was the time when the coach said he knew "the writing was on the wall". In the context of this match, that was about five minutes after it had become obvious to the rest of us. Melbourne's first two or three forays up forward were easily thwarted due to a lack of marking targets. Two of Richmond's early goals came as a result of coast-to-coast movement of the ball from defence to attack to goal without challenge. This pattern had been well and truly set for the night. In the context of the season of course, the writing had been well and truly engraved on the wall a long time ago.

The problem is that the pattern has hardly been altered as the club's season lurched out of control. Last night's game was allowed to become a training drill for the bottom side - one which had not won a game in the first two and half months of the season. Richmond's last goal of the first half from Shane Tuck said it all. He took the ball in the middle and ran unimpeded to forty metres to slot it through. Shamefully, as was the case for most of that half of football, not a single opponent came near him.

Yes, blame the players by all means for the lack of pressure on their opponents because they were absolutely pathetic. There was no application, intensity or hunger for the football and there was no sense or purpose in the way they played but the same can be said for the people pulling the strings up there in stratosphere. They were equally insipid starting with their team selection and ending with their slow reaction to the initial Tiger onslaught. After that, they were simply rotating deckchairs on a fast sinking Titanic. There's no use in hanging your hat on the fact that Melbourne won the second half because a young team like Richmond is always going to tire after the effort it expended in the first. The Demons had the wrong combination out there from the start but, in any event, they were switched off when they came out onto the ground.

And that brings me to ask the fundamental question which this game raised.

What is wrong with this club?

When the team won what was only its second game for the first half of the season, the playing group was falling over itself to declare Neale Daniher the best thing since sliced bread. Russell Robertson used his post-match interview following his seven goals against Collingwood to give "a resounding thumbs up to the prospect of Daniher being offered another contract." We were treated to a virtual chorus of Demons singing Daniher's praises and telling us how much respect they had for him. Well, they stopped singing last night because, by their performance - and that's what counts in this caper - all they could do was to show that they hold him in utter contempt.

Perhaps the players will one day realise that if you can't walk the walk on a regular basis, you don't talk the talk. In the meantime, they should leave it to those who have been charged with making the hard decisions about running the club to make those decisions. I trust that the Board has already made this fact known to the playing group, otherwise it will come back to embarrass them when they have to make some hard decisions in the near future.

I am not even going to mention Melbourne's better players, and they were few and far between, because that was another heartbreaking aspect of this game. The sad fact of the matter is that a lot of them are at the end of their careers and won't be part of the club when the next coach comes along to pick up the pieces. Hopefully, the person in question will have what it takes to give his full back his proper dues and not hesitate to remove him from the ground if he ever takes his eyes off an opponent after being outmarked.

Melbourne 2.2.14 2.4.16 8.6.54 11.9.75

Richmond 6.3.39 12.8.80 14.12.96 18.16.124

Goals

Melbourne B Holland 3 A Davey 2 M Bate P Johnson N Jones B McLean R Petterd R Robertson

Richmond N Brown K Pettifer M Richardson G Tivendale 3 B Deledio C Hyde 2 K Johnson S Tuck

Best

Melbourne not this week thank you

Richmond S Tuck N Foley G Tivendale J Bowden M Richardson G Polak

Umpires C Donlon M James B Rosebury

Crowd: 46,161 at the MCG

I think you didn't name the best because it would be nigh on impossible to pick any

The problem wasn't that Melbourne didn't have a Plan B, C or D, they didn't have a Plan A.

The problem wasn't that Melbourne didn't have a Plan B, C or D, they didn't have a Plan A.

Beat me to it...

Not even the cold comfort of being smashed by a superstar (Judd) this week :angry:

Great summary. Insipid performance. I've followed Melbourne for 25 years and I am struggling to remember a time I've been so angry at a performance.

The problem wasn't that Melbourne didn't have a Plan B, C or D, they didn't have a Plan A.

There's no use having any plans when you disregard the fundamentals of footy. No tactical masterstroke is going to improve a team that refuses to work hard and apply itself in a game of footy.

There's no use having any plans when you disregard the fundamentals of footy. No tactical masterstroke is going to improve a team that refuses to work hard and apply itself in a game of footy.

Who is responsible for instilling a regard for the fundamentals of footy in the players?

Best

Melbourne not this week thank you

Richmond S Tuck N Foley G Tivendale J Bowden M Richardson G Polak

Bit tough on Jeff White. He dominated and can hold his head up high! You could have at least named him as our best player.

Who is responsible for instilling a regard for the fundamentals of footy in the players?

I didn't exonerate ND from this aspect of our performance.

In such circumstances, both players and coach are at fault.

I didn't exonerate ND from this aspect of our performance.

In such circumstances, both players and coach are at fault.

I'm not really discussing who's at fault but more who bears the responsibility for a team that consistently performs inconsistently.

There's no use having any plans when you disregard the fundamentals of footy. No tactical masterstroke is going to improve a team that refuses to work hard and apply itself in a game of footy.

The problem is that when a team goes into a game with a poor team selection, poor structure, poor attitude and poor strategy it's hard for the players to play good football in the first place.

As a result, the players lose confidence, because they know that the structure that is in place isn't working which makes their job harder and in turn their performance suffers.

All the while the opposition are running over the top and by the time any changes are made, it's too late.

The problem is that when a team goes into a game with a poor team selection, poor structure, poor attitude and poor strategy it's hard for the players to play good football in the first place.

It's a player and coach thing. You can't isolate the players and excuse them for the performance they dished up on Friday night. ND is at fault and so are the players.

Collingwood had four starting defenders out last night. Was it hard for their players to "play good football in the first place" being without these players and having a weak structure? If poor team selection can completely change our players attitudes, then we have got the wrong blokes on our list.

If only we knew where the attitude comes from. It is clearly a combination of both players and coach. What we don't know is the degree to which the parties can be blamed.

For a team to come out with the attitude it had on Friday night, given its horrendous season, sitting in15th place with 2 wins from 11 games, is an absolute disgrace. They played like millionaires instead of the hungry, committed attitude you'd expect of a team that's been down all year and wanting to win back the respect of the footy world.

This team is just too easily contented and is not hungry enough. As leader of the team, ND will cop the blame and rightly so. But it comes down to more than just poor strategy and poor structure. It is a basic lack of desire to compete week-in week-out and that's what enrages fans more than anything else.

It's a player and coach thing. You can't isolate the players and excuse them for the performance they dished up on Friday night. ND is at fault and so are the players.

Collingwood had four starting defenders out last night. Was it hard for their players to "play good football in the first place" being without these players and having a weak structure? If poor team selection can completely change our players attitudes, then we have got the wrong blokes on our list.

If only we knew where the attitude comes from. It is clearly a combination of both players and coach. What we don't know is the degree to which the parties can be blamed.

For a team to come out with the attitude it had on Friday night, given its horrendous season, sitting in15th place with 2 wins from 11 games, is an absolute disgrace. They played like millionaires instead of the hungry, committed attitude you'd expect of a team that's been down all year and wanting to win back the respect of the footy world.

This team is just too easily contented and is not hungry enough. As leader of the team, ND will cop the blame and rightly so. But it comes down to more than just poor strategy and poor structure. It is a basic lack of desire to compete week-in week-out and that's what enrages fans more than anything else.

I'm not saying that the players aren't to blame as well.

What I am saying is that it is hard for a team to perform when they are dealing with poor selection, structure etc.