The Incapable Demons....

[beelzebub 22,282]

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/game...6851012519.html

Personally I reckon Jake Niall is as hit and miss as the handball skills he highlights in this article. However it does a fair fist ( unlike 22 of our folk!! lol ) of getting to the nitty gritty of the situation.

I'd go as far as to suggest this is probably only one leg of the stool, others being the age and effectiveness of some players outright as well as the sheer ability ( or lack of ) of some of our retained younger list.

But anyone who has witnessed the Barnam and Bailey Demons will know we arent too sharp in the skills department of late.

Still the article does get to the guts of it...whatever Bailey is trying to get them to do they simply cant or wont do it!!

I wonder what some of these lads are going to be doing next year ??? ...

[DaveyJones'sLocker 597]

Just another article which makes a good read on the way to work or uni.... his points make sense but are fairly minor IMO..

kinda the only positive from losing so bad ... theres an article every day in the age and herald about the dees to read

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

"The new coach's choice is clear: he either compromises his long-term plans and beliefs, or gradually rids himself of players who cannot adapt to the new running regime. "

While I am confident he wont if Bailey was to compromise he should resign.

A better than average article. Trevor Grant of the Sun would struggle to understand it.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I brought up a similar point last year when Daniher first introduced "runs and curry".

It's all very well to say that Melbourne will draft / trade players to fit a gameplan and delist those who don't, but how long will that take? There is no quick fix for Melbourne at this stage, but if they keep getting smashed the way they do, things are not going to get any better, no matter how disciplined the players are.

I just would have thought that a gameplan would have been brought in to play to the strengths of the team and then build on that.

[Weedster 174]

I brought up a similar point last year when Daniher first introduced "runs and curry".

It's all very well to say that Melbourne will draft / trade players to fit a gameplan and delist those who don't, but how long will that take? There is no quick fix for Melbourne at this stage, but if they keep getting smashed the way they do, things are not going to get any better, no matter how disciplined the players are.

I just would have thought that a gameplan would have been brought in to play to the strengths of the team and then build on that.

Sorry..but I can't see any evidence of any game plan whatsoever

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,382]

The thing I learnt from that article was that in 2006 we had a 2:1 kicking-handball ratio and played devastating football at the MCG with an 11-1 record. And when we lost we rarely allowed the margin to exceed 5 goals.

Why the need to change?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I just would have thought that a gameplan would have been brought in to play to the strengths of the team and then build on that.

You are putting the cart well before the horse.

In the case of this side there are not too many strengths and further the kicking style of game that was predominant during most of ND's reign is not sustainable and was not going to carry us to success given the way the game has changed.

For some players, they need to learn the key elements to be a competitive team into today's football. Commitment, discipline and accountability. This wont stick too well with some senior players and its going to take time to learn.

Every other successful side at the moment has been through the process. MFC is doing that now.

Watch the better teams like Geelong, Collingwood etc and see what they are doing. Take note of the rapid use of interchange. What is that telling you? That is where football is heading.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The thing I learnt from that article was that in 2006 we had a 2:1 kicking-handball ratio and played devastating football at the MCG with an 11-1 record. And when we lost we rarely allowed the margin to exceed 5 goals.

Why the need to change?

This was posted by one of the more intelligent posters here on another site. I think its one of the best analysis of the changes and it should go along way to answering your question.

"IMO we didn't play particularly attacking football in 2006. We were successful because we were able to lock down the opposition and then maintain possession with short kicking. We'd chip the ball laboriously forward until we could set up someone inside 50. McLean was excellent at times with this style. This was the era of 'tempo footy'.

But I think that the concept of accountability was slightly different. It was not necessarily one on one footy per se. We simply flooded the contests with numbers and drove the ball contiuously forward, either in contests or by chip kicking. At the MCG we were unbeatable because we had space to chip the ball. At the SCG we were very good because we could get lots of numbers at the ball. This was the football that McLean, Junior, Moloney would revel in. We also had the likes of Bartram running in the midfield and able to harrass. He and Junior were insane defensively. I don't think that the gameplan was about being accountable as much as it was about getting numbers to the stoppages.

But when the ball is in stoppage it's easy to find a man because the game is slower and you can be covered by the masses of numbers at the contest. There were also many numbers inside our forward 50, as the ball wasn't moved quickly and, as such, the ball was harder to rebound. We had some mercurial players who could goal from nothing (ie, Robbo, Yze, Davey) which was really good to have in a crowded forward line.

The problem comes when teams started attacking from defensive 50 with chains of handballs. When you run the ball from defence, instead of kicking, any player not pulling their weight exposes the whole team. Nowadays the pressure doesn't come from stoppages, but in open play. In open play you need to be constantly working hard and you don't get a rest (hence the interchanges). When you have lazy forwards (see how many there are in Geelong - even Johnson is said to be one of the hardest working small forwards and this is why he's successful) this overlap is created far too easily. Our forwards are used to getting a rest (as you see the first instinct is not to chase), but in the constant motion of today's football they aren't coping.

In short, we were being defensive in 2006, but now were are trying to be both attacking and defensive. Unfortunately we're are stuffing up the attacking through poor skill/familiarity and not working hard enough defensively. We need a team of hard runners to pull off this game style, but it should be very effective and entertaining when it eventually comes off."

[beelzebub 22,282]

The problem comes when teams started attacking from defensive 50 with chains of handballs. When you run the ball from defence, instead of kicking, any player not pulling their weight exposes the whole team.

This what we're trying bu conversely if you not pulling this off too well YOU are the one exposed !!...this is us

In short, we were being defensive in 2006, but now were are trying to be both attacking and defensive. Unfortunately we're are stuffing up the attacking through poor skill/familiarity and not working hard enough defensively. We need a team of hard runners to pull off this game style, but it should be very effective and entertaining when it eventually comes off."

In a nutshell...yes

[Deeoldfart 7,810]

Spot on ...... an excellent analysis! Isn't it amazing how quickly our game is evolving?

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,382]

This was posted by one of the more intelligent posters here on another site. I think its one of the best analysis of the changes and it should go along way to answering your question.

/i]

Cheers Rhino!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

This what we're trying but conversely if you not pulling this off too well YOU are the one exposed !!...this is us

That's right Bub.

What is being shown up now? For starters

1. We need to work on handball skills and our thinking under pressure.

2. DB is seeking to sort who can be relied upon to be committed, accountable and disciplined. Some names fall off straight way. The previous game plan and culture catered for that. Everyone is struggling with the change more or less. Its a test of character who rises to the challenge. We just cant carry anyone who may be offensively impressive but defensively lacking.

3. We need to focus on getting players with both skills and pace through the midfield.

This is why I am more enamored with Miller and Buckley. Sure they are making errors and in Miller's case a limited footballer but they are committing to do the things that DB demands of the players. Its going to look bad if not everyone is pulling their weight.

A wonderful barometer of this is when you compare Steve Johnson in 2006 with the Steve Johnson in 2007. 2006 he was selfish lazy and undisciplined but in 2007 he was the opposite. It had a dramatic effect on the team. Someone else pointed out Cam Mooney.

Now which are the players who you think fit the 2006 model and how will they go this year? The next 10 weeks are going to be very interesting regardless of the score line.

[beelzebub 22,282]

dead right there Rhino.

As much as it pains me to watch Miller he will at least try to do the "new" right thing ( just limit in ability to do it ).

It will encourage some to know that when we do start to 'click' in some fashion there ought to be better than linear progession in our game. One accomplishment augments another..until suddenly you almost look like playing footy again.

Sobering though is its going to take some pain to get there. Also a few more players that can do it would help..lol.

which you ask ?..hmm.. a testing questing. I m not sure we can really fill a list properly..however..

No allowance to positions..just ability...( or at least stop gap ability)

I assume we're talking teh backline handball brigade ?

Well the handball king.. Miller.. but only ever near half back flank please..lol

Rivers.. Carroll...but he really really needs to get his timing and choices a tad better..( a big TAD )

Bell.....

Im strugglingno to think of players who will play the PLAN. I would have thought Petterd, but he seems in the bad books.. ( by some ) I just thought he was undercooked..So I will include Ricky.

Now Benny will and can.. but are we going to include those unlkley to be there next year? or we still going stop gap ?

Quite interesting exercise. if we start with this as our first line of attack then a few players are going to have to be redeveloped into this end of the ground. Wheels ( fit ) is good...but his first option is unlikely to be to run it..will he adapt ?

We seem to be a few short..lol how surprising

probably need the help of Batram and Buckley.

Whilst some of these might fulfil the plan idea...it will leave us height exposed....again

Houston...we have a problem.

[Rampaging Demons 1]

an excellent post....

it is amazing to go to a neutral game of footy and just watch it.. rather than watch a melbourne game where you are tense, frustrated and appauled.... the different styles of footy

i think that the move of miller on the weekedn to the forward line showed why he should be left there... he will work hard, he will not stop presenting and ensures that there is a structure...

buckley is prepared to run the lines - use his hands and keep running.... yes it looks bad when it does not work but when your teammates are not running or not prepared to work hard, then it will terrible....

robbo for me is one that is struggling - his lack of chase on the weekend was terrible... i could not believe the way he stood and watched!! he would fly like an eagle but that was all...

we need to work as a team, do the unselfish acts and play for one another.. not enough of this is occurring at the moment!!

i am prepared to watch the list be turned over, every player be given extra opportunity to show that they do or do not have what is required...

yes, it may be frustrating as buggery at the moment but long term you can see what we want to do...

come on melbourne!!

[Hards 2]

Thought the article was excellent from Jake Niall.

I don't neccessarily agree that the best way forward for us is to completely rid ourselves of a 2:1 gameplan in favour for a Port gameplan. It will take 5+ years because all our drafting in recent years has been geared towards a different style - you need different types of players to play that style, as Niall outlined. I don't believe Port planned and drafted initially for the gameplan they use, they took stock of their list and decided it was the best way forward and then added players to suit it (eg Rodan, Boak, Westhoff). Geelong have done the same, and so have Collingwood, who have focused on doing the fundamentals right and not being particularly outlandish in the way they play, because they know that their players are still developing.

I'll go on record as saying we're on the wrong track right now, but DB is the coach and I'm not, so good luck to him, I hope he can pull it off.

[beelzebub 22,282]

Hards..I think something you mention will send futher shivers up a mass of Demon fans, that there is little likley hood of any quantam turnaround ( Though i do think it WILL get better ) at least for a few years.

Yes folks ...get comfy.. we're in for more , rather than less, short term pain. The players Bails wants dont grow on trees. I think we might have couple...but they'r e in footy kindergarten right now.

I'll be a lil more optimistic and put it that with a couple of pick ups at the end of year sale etc that we might be able to at least put a really decent game of football together early next year. To be truly competitve and a 'looker'..add another 1 or 2.

[mo64 5,240]

Thought the article was excellent from Jake Niall.

I don't neccessarily agree that the best way forward for us is to completely rid ourselves of a 2:1 gameplan in favour for a Port gameplan. It will take 5+ years because all our drafting in recent years has been geared towards a different style - you need different types of players to play that style, as Niall outlined. I don't believe Port planned and drafted initially for the gameplan they use, they took stock of their list and decided it was the best way forward and then added players to suit it (eg Rodan, Boak, Westhoff). Geelong have done the same, and so have Collingwood, who have focused on doing the fundamentals right and not being particularly outlandish in the way they play, because they know that their players are still developing.

I'll go on record as saying we're on the wrong track right now, but DB is the coach and I'm not, so good luck to him, I hope he can pull it off.

Spot on Hards. You've summed up what I've been trying to argue over the past fortnight.

[Mono 454]

If hard running is the essential part of the game plan, where's the fitness level to go with it? :angry:

[Axis of Bob 10,341]

So we should set up a game plan to help lazy frontrunners.

Do we then change the gameplan when we bring in some decent, hard working and committed players? Or do we keep recruiting the same type that we have recruited because they fit in with the game plan that we are using (which was designed to cater for selfish players who don't run hard)?

[Bruce Almighty 0]

The thing I learnt from that article was that in 2006 we had a 2:1 kicking-handball ratio and played devastating football at the MCG with an 11-1 record. And when we lost we rarely allowed the margin to exceed 5 goals.

Why the need to change?

R u Joking? The reason to change is quite obvious dont you think! 10 years of the Daniher Game Plan.........Was good and exciting at times but never won us a flag.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

So we should set up a game plan to help lazy frontrunners.

Do we then change the gameplan when we bring in some decent, hard working and committed players? Or do we keep recruiting the same type that we have recruited because they fit in with the game plan that we are using (which was designed to cater for selfish players who don't run hard)?

Exactly Bob Exactly!

Got it in one!

[Demon16 69]

If hard running is the essential part of the game plan, where's the fitness level to go with it? :angry:

as the jake niall article points out, a huge chunk of our side had compromised pre-season's hence the fitness level. i take my hat off to jake, at least someone who is half interested in the problem rather than the typical fluff, taking pot shots at an easy target such as Robinson, sheahan, Anderson, Grant, Ralph, Bartlett, Smith........A grade wankers all of them.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

as the jake niall article points out, a huge chunk of our side had compromised pre-season's hence the fitness level. i take my hat off to jake, at least someone who is half interested in the problem rather than the typical fluff, taking pot shots at an easy target such as Robinson, sheahan, Anderson, Grant, Ralph, Bartlett, Smith........A grade wankers all of them.

When pre season started there were only 20 players who were fit to start and not subject to an injury or any rehab program. Thats a terrible number to start with.

When we played Geelong in the NAB Cup we have barely enough fit to play the game.

We were behind the 8 ball from the start of the pre season year

[Demon16 69]

When pre season started there were only 20 players who were fit to start and not subject to an injury or any rehab program. Thats a terrible number to start with.

When we played Geelong in the NAB Cup we have barely enough fit to play the game.

We were behind the 8 ball from the start of the pre season year

yep.

the upside is at least virtually all of them have recovered from injury and can now build fitness.

[stueyspencer no12 73]

"the better teams like Geelong/
My God, it's amazing how things can change. What's Melbourne's record v Geelong like in the past 5 years. We've given them some thrashings.
I'm inclined to agree that you don't throw out the baby with the bath water. If a player can kick lke Green why require him to handball?
And one other point. Does one have to use the same tactics every week? Whatever the conditions?It was slippery last week especially in the first half. I would have thought that some long kicking out of defence was called for. It may be different when dry.
Nevertheless Jake Niall's article is excellent

You are putting the cart well before the horse.

In the case of this side there are not too many strengths and further the kicking style of game that was predominant during most of ND's reign is not sustainable and was not going to carry us to success given the way the game has changed.

For some players, they need to learn the key elements to be a competitive team into today's football. Commitment, discipline and accountability. This wont stick too well with some senior players and its going to take time to learn.

Every other successful side at the moment has been through the process. MFC is doing that now.

Watch the better teams like Geelong, Collingwood etc and see what they are doing. Take note of the rapid use of interchange. What is that telling you? That is where football is heading.