SHOULD WE GO DEFENSIVE?

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,777]

Another 16 goal loss would be shocking for us, so I think the temptation for the footy dept. is to try to tag all the Geel. players, and flood as much as possible, in the hope we'll limit the amount of goals they'll score. Neita full-back, Flash tagging Jimmy!

Neil Balme did this in 1996 against Port at AAMI, and lost his job a fortnight later.

I firmly believe that in Australian football, the worst thing you can do to stop an opposition run-on is to stop attacking! Once the opposition know you're not trying to score, they know they've got nothing to lose by playing aggressive, adventurous football! Even if they stuff it up, and cause a turnover,they know that there's no-one in position to take advantage of the error. The defensive team compounds its underdog situation.

I reckon we should try the opposite! Don't tag ANYONE! Play on at all costs! Try the ambitious! Be aggressive!!!

I bet we try to cut our losses, and go defensive+++++. I don't blame DB for this.

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,691]

I reckon we should try the opposite! Don't tag ANYONE! Play on at all costs! Try the ambitious! Be aggressive!!!

Well Essendon (who are much better than us) played unaccountable and lost by 99 points. Imagine what will happen to us.

Stem the bleeding and play defensive. I can't handle another week of being the laughing stock of the AFL. I don't care if its an 86-28 scoreline. Beats 200-70.

[Waltham33 475]

To play defensive, do you not need defensive minded players? Not sure we have enough of them. Still it would be great to hold the Cats to under 100 points this weekend.

[IWAP 170]

Looks like you may get your wish Jack

New Demons AFL coach intent on attack

New Melbourne coach Dean Bailey has pledged not to take an ultra-defensive approach against reigning premiers Geelong despite the Demons' disastrous opening to the AFL season...........

[Jumping Jack Clennett 1,777]

I know that very few Demonland posters are the slightest bit interested in tactical discussion(the lack of response to this post from early this week emphasises that).

Tonight I watched the Bulldogs play StK on TV. I was surprised to see the Dogs play their star, Robert Murphy, down back(on Milne of all people) in the first quarter. Alarm bells went off with me! Are they trying to shut them down? Soon it was 5 goals to 1 in the Saints' favour. In desparation the Dogs moved Murphy forward. All of a sudden, the Saints had a problem down back and the game changed completely.

By the way....could we have got Hudson?

[Lord Travis 10,692]

Just attack attack attack. No point in playing defensive football when we dont have the talent to do it properly. When you're getting smashed as bad as we have been recently, what's the difference between 100 and 200 points. Just makes getting #1 pick easier

[Jarka 767]

We're fighting out of our weight division but that shouldn't stop Bailey from changing the gaem plan that will continue the development of what he wants the team to eventually get to. I honestly don't mind these big thrashings because I believe that I understand what Bailey is trying to achieve and some short term pain will eventually see results.

[Gorgoroth 12,911]

We have to attack, no use flooding, they will beat us even if we do flood, I would like to see us play one on one over the whole ground though.