melbournefc said:

It's simple - if your PLAN doesn't work, CHANGE IT. Dean Bailey, stand up and take note.

How much more simple can Bailey's game plan be?

Win the ball in the middle, move it quickly to our forwards, be accountable going the other way, be competitive at all times.

Should next week's game plan read: "be selfish, don't chase your opponent, bomb it long to a 3-on-1 contest, play for glory"? That will sit comfortably with our list and win us a grand total of 0 matches.

  Eastie Boyz said:

What happens when he runs out of game plans? (which will happen)

This is illogical..as for all we have seen is one.. so where are ALL these plans he's using ??

What you are actually seeing is a number of differing efforts to try and get ONE plan to work with differig results.

Clearly I was joking.

Just get over the fact that the list is sh1te compared to the better clubs

We have a list of front runners when we play well every player looks good when we are getting beaten our senior players go missing, this is just not this year but the past 10. I was against a clean out but we need one too many players senior players are not good enough anymore. Bailey is not to blame he got a list with 1 quality KPP player in Rivers, sorry to Neitz your not to blame and a pack of slow midfielders with limited skills. Don't wait until round 7 time to see what youth we have.

We are in a position where we need to be rebuilding, and from the way Bailey is coaching, it appears that come hell or high water, his game plan is the one we will be playing, and that's it.

The problem is, rebuilding isn't a decision the coach / footy department make by themselves, and they have no hope of making this work unless they get buy in from the rest of the club.

Hawthorn are the best example of rebuilding done right. The whole club decided on it's direction. Obviously they tried to win games, but if they didn't, the longer term vision was there, and they stuck to it without compromise.

Bailey can't keep going the way he is without explaining what's going on, and without support for a plan. If we are not rebuilding, then he better start to change the game style to suit the cattle we have and get back to being a team worth watching.

But if we are rebuilding, get the support of the board, and give the supporters some insight into what your trying to do so we can brace ourselves for a few years of pain. At least there will be some vision of success at the end of it. Otherwise if it keeps going the same way, Bailey will end up as just another coach who will get his marching orders by a board hounded by it's disgruntled and disillusioned fans!

  4dees said:

What is our Game Plan.

I havnt seen one yet

Well, i am pretty sure DB doesn't spend all week instructing the players to kick it to the other team, make sure all passes by hand or foot arrive about 30 cm on the ground before their intended receiver, give hanballs to players under pressure in stationary positions, don't run hard and present an option, etc....

  Rhino Richards said:

Well done Mo. I did not think you had an alternative.

And its actually a fair question to ask if you think that list is not too bad to ask where our list stands against other leading teams.

But just another issue you have avoided.

Predictable

Bollocks.

At trade time last year, 2 clubs wanted Robbo and Miller (WBD & Sydney). Good enuf then. On current form, Mt Gambier 3rds wouldn't want them. I'd bet that Bruce, Green, Rivers, Davey, at least, of the experienced players would easily find a new club (though maybe not the $'s they are getting at MFC).

  Real Demon said:

We are in a position where we need to be rebuilding, and from the way Bailey is coaching, it appears that come hell or high water, his game plan is the one we will be playing, and that's it.

The problem is, rebuilding isn't a decision the coach / footy department make by themselves, and they have no hope of making this work unless they get buy in from the rest of the club.

Hawthorn are the best example of rebuilding done right. The whole club decided on it's direction. Obviously they tried to win games, but if they didn't, the longer term vision was there, and they stuck to it without compromise.

Bailey can't keep going the way he is without explaining what's going on, and without support for a plan. If we are not rebuilding, then he better start to change the game style to suit the cattle we have and get back to being a team worth watching.

But if we are rebuilding, get the support of the board, and give the supporters some insight into what your trying to do so we can brace ourselves for a few years of pain. At least there will be some vision of success at the end of it. Otherwise if it keeps going the same way, Bailey will end up as just another coach who will get his marching orders by a board hounded by it's disgruntled and disillusioned fans!

Excellent. your points are all good, and well put - particularly letting people know what the go is.

  deanox said:

i don't blame bailey for this one at all. these players are afl players and need to be up to standard. he is introducing a game plan that is meant to win an afl premiership. if players can't follow it they are out. if players try to follow it they are given time to learn, and improve their skills. these players are proffesional footballers. if they cant learn to kick and handball it is them who have the problems.

we will see dramatic list turn over over the next 2 seasons.

120 [censored] " rotations" and nearly 160 handballs, i think hes got plenty to answer for.

ok to settle the argument:

Robbo tries taking a speccy and his opponent runs off him and sets up a goal - coaches fault?

Neitz drops a chest mark - coaches fault?

the midfielders don't man up - coaches fault?

a Davey tackle gets broken - coaches fault?

McLean gets run down from behind - coaches fault?

Brad Miller kicks ball into man on mark - coaches fault?

Nathan Carroll's opponent out wrestles him and takes a mark - coaches fault?

Jeff White wins a ruck contest and taps it straight to the opposition - coaches fault?

I could go through every single player but I'm lazy

My worry is no changes till its too late .

We dont seem to be trying things.

Put players in different positions earlier in the game.

Put Green at full forward one out , Belly on the ball , give Aussie arun off the half back,

Carrol to stand in the forward goalsquare and put it on his head, anything different early.

Forget about rotations, leave Davey on after kicking a inspirational goal.

  belzebub59 said:

Oh ye that have no vision !!!

I do believe Jaded ( and few others ) are onto the dilemma. Quite simply we are mismatched as to players and plan. Oh how obvious you marvellous Bub some deride...but wait..there's more. The real dilemma is that Bails CAN see where the game is going. Even if he could manage to get a coupel of the nongs out there to meld togethre for 5 mins long enough for a few wins' we'd actually be going backewards as the game would be rocketing passed us still !!

Bails, I think , is attempting to instill into the club a game style that wil lset us up for the next 5-10 years. Its a quicker game.. a more possession game. A couple of fudged wins will atually acomplish very little. Anyone with half an eye will realise that only a handful of the current crop will still be around in a few years when we become really competitive.

So ..we chnage our sourse to suit what we have now..and end up beaching the boat eventually..or we continue along and get the crew to do the job.

I know this sounds liek heresy but winnig is irrelevent as such at the moment ...its about getting things right.. about attitude, about following team rules..about aplying for 100% of a game.. These are the foundations upon which any plan is based.. we arent doing too much of any of it.. we arent competitive enough to worry anyone.

Bails has set a task for the Dees.. who can listen ? who can apply ?.. those that pass muster will be there next year.. others will go.

You might as well get used to it some of you..we will win very few if any games this year. What would you prefer..a couple of wins this year with no gain going forward as a team.. or to get it right !!

There's an expression...look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves...

well..

If we look after the basics..and get them right...the wins will look after themselves.

Its not Bails.. its the clowns in red and blue !!...get more clowns..

wots that in english?

  kramer said:

120 [censored] " rotations" and nearly 160 handballs, i think hes got plenty to answer for.

yep

Why should he explain himself to anybody, at the moment Bailey is finding out which players can play under him. The problem is most of our senior players have had it easy over the past few years we are now finding out they have no future at the club under Bailey. Any MFC supporter with any knowledge on footy knows that Bailey got a Crap list with big holes in it and a bunch of Senior players that earn big pay cheques but have limited ability. It is time to get real and make some tough calls on some very senior players and not the easy targets Neitz, Holland and Yze, I'm talking White, Bruce, Green , Robbo they these players are not required anymore. We have to rebuild and start now.

  belzebub59 said:

Oh ye that have no vision !!!

I do believe Jaded ( and few others ) are onto the dilemma. Quite simply we are mismatched as to players and plan. Oh how obvious you marvellous Bub some deride...but wait..there's more. The real dilemma is that Bails CAN see where the game is going. Even if he could manage to get a coupel of the nongs out there to meld togethre for 5 mins long enough for a few wins' we'd actually be going backewards as the game would be rocketing passed us still !!

Bails, I think , is attempting to instill into the club a game style that wil lset us up for the next 5-10 years. Its a quicker game.. a more possession game. A couple of fudged wins will atually acomplish very little. Anyone with half an eye will realise that only a handful of the current crop will still be around in a few years when we become really competitive.

So ..we chnage our sourse to suit what we have now..and end up beaching the boat eventually..or we continue along and get the crew to do the job.

I know this sounds liek heresy but winnig is irrelevent as such at the moment ...its about getting things right.. about attitude, about following team rules..about aplying for 100% of a game.. These are the foundations upon which any plan is based.. we arent doing too much of any of it.. we arent competitive enough to worry anyone.

Bails has set a task for the Dees.. who can listen ? who can apply ?.. those that pass muster will be there next year.. others will go.

You might as well get used to it some of you..we will win very few if any games this year. What would you prefer..a couple of wins this year with no gain going forward as a team.. or to get it right !!

There's an expression...look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves...

well..

If we look after the basics..and get them right...the wins will look after themselves.

Its not Bails.. its the clowns in red and blue !!...get more clowns..

Coaching is more than a new tactic, and like it or lump it. Any clown can come up the "new solution"; the hard part is getting it to work with the resources you have.

  Eastie Boyz said:

What happens when he runs out of game plans? (which will happen)

Then cut your loss' and move on. Obviously, he wasn't made for the job. He needed to sell his "game plan" to the players, NOT the board.

3 games with a shithouse playing list and he's not good enough?

Players with terrible footy brains can not execute a game plan

I speak of -

Bruce

Bell

Jones

McLean

Miller

These guys are played in key posts every week, and continually murder the ball or make crap decisions ie. handball to a stationary player who is surrounded

The sooneer they are replaced by Maric, Wonemarri, Petterd, Grimes, Morton etc. the better

  Rhino Richards said:

Well done Mo. I did not think you had an alternative.

And its actually a fair question to ask if you think that list is not too bad to ask where our list stands against other leading teams.

But just another issue you have avoided.

Predictable

Ok I'll answer it. 25, there happy?

If freewheeling football is the best way for our players to kick a winning score, then that's the way we should play. Give the players license to be attacking, rather than having the mindset of negative accountability. As i've written ad nauseum, the players appear to be focussing too much on doing the "Bailey thing", rather than playing instinctively. In turn, their confidence is shot. If Moloney was dropped after round 1 for his lack of accountability, it was a disgrace.

It's probably lost on you Rhino that a team actually has to kick goals to win a match. But that's not important to you, as long as the players are accountable.

*cough*Sydney*cough*

  drdrake said:

Why should he explain himself to anybody, at the moment Bailey is finding out which players can play under him. The problem is most of our senior players have had it easy over the past few years we are now finding out they have no future at the club under Bailey. Any MFC supporter with any knowledge on footy knows that Bailey got a Crap list with big holes in it and a bunch of Senior players that earn big pay cheques but have limited ability. It is time to get real and make some tough calls on some very senior players and not the easy targets Neitz, Holland and Yze, I'm talking White, Bruce, Green , Robbo they these players are not required anymore. We have to rebuild and start now.

I'll answer that for him. None.

  mo64 said:

If freewheeling football is the best way for our players to kick a winning score, then that's the way we should play. Give the players license to be attacking, rather than having the mindset of negative accountability.

OH MY GOD!

You obviously don't understand what's going on if you believe that Bailey is trying to get them to play negative football and not attack the play.

Quick ball movement is all about attacking the ball and giving first service to our forwards. Notice how he encourages players to break the lines from the half back flank and take the game on? Buckley was trying to break the lines, but unfortunately turned it over 9 out of 10 times. He is now at Sandy, and rightfully so.

Teams who are not accountable, get smashed by 100 points plus each week. Show me one premiership side that lacked accountability. Chasing, tackling and harassing your opponent does not equal playing negative football. Negative football is flooding, which we don't do, negative football is chipping the ball around the boundary, which we don't do. The idea with the handballing is to move the ball quickly. That our players can't handball is NOT Bailey's fault. Short of playing himself, he can't do much when sitting in the box.

Where were you last week when we lost to Geelong by 5 goals? Was our game plan flawed last week, or is Bailey to blame for Carroll's three missed attempts at rushing the ball for a point?

Bailey's game plan is very simple, and any decent team should be able to execute it. Last week we showed glimpses that things are starting to sink in, today we regressed completely. Perhaps it was easier for our players to execute the game plan on the smaller ground down at Geelong, and maybe they need more time to work out how to play the MCG better with this plan.

And before you jump up and down and tell me how well we played at the MCG two years ago with a different plan, let me remind you that we won a grand total of 1 final in that time. Not exactly anything to get excited about.

As far as I'm concerned, to keep blaming the game plan is to keep plastering over the massive cracks in the wall.

Unaccountable, skilless, soft teams don't win premierships, they barely make the finals. Is that what you want us to be, because Bailey is not satisfied with that and neither should you.

Honestly, I don't know why I'm letting this pointless argument distract me from my assignment. UGH!!!

  Jaded said:

Bailey's game plan is very simple, and any decent team should be able to execute it.

So, what is that game plan? Anyone know (no guesses please)? Most people watching have no idea what it is, nor apparently do the players.

Pray tell, at what point does the buck stop with Bailey. Its as if he's trying to turn a bunch of electricians into plumbers.

That'd take 4 years. So give him that

  Eastie Boyz said:

That'd take 4 years. So give him that

There won't (financially) be a club within 1 year at this rate, let alone 4.