I have been to the 3 Melbourne games at the MCG this year and I still can't work out what Bailey's (or Melbourne's) game plan is.

Fom what I've seen, it seems to be;

1. When under pressure, handball to someone who is within 2 metres of you and has at least 1 opposition player standing next to him.

2. Make sure all handballs or kicks, bounce on the ground in front of the player you are passing it to.

3. If the ball is in the hands of our defenders, all forwards run to the opposite wing so the the player in possession has no-one to kick to.

4. When kicking into the forward line, kick the ball behind the leading Melbourne player so he has to go backwards.

5. Don't man up.

6. ALWAYS kick to a 1 Melbourne Vs 2 Opposition player contests.

7. Only kick when under pressure - if clear, wait for opposition to tackle before trying to disposing of footy.

8. Kick points.

Can anyone tell me any others?

Moose

and you were thinking you didnt get it !!!!

Now Im sure thats not the plan per se...but its probably like a dog barking at you to go play in the park...and all you hear is WOOF WOOF WOOF !!

seems to be a similar level of understanding doesnt there !!! :D

How about when we take a mark on the half forward line wait until the opposition has had ample time to flood before trying to pick out a forward.

there is no game plan

its run around get a touch if u can

or give the other team the ball

How about when we take a mark on the half forward line wait until the opposition has had ample time to flood before trying to pick out a forward.

dang ...forgot that one. .very important that too. !!..They've got that one down pretty pat Id say !!

Bailey doesnt have the cattle

YOu can blame Daniher and his sidekicks for that one

Also..before playing on from a mark.. you must wait at least 5 secs..then handpass it to a friend...thats nice !! ..doesnt matter which team...just as long as its a friend !! <_<

maybe his gameplan involves whinging supporters that want bailey to work miracles with rubbish that have no game sense, aside from sir cale, rivers and matty whelan.

i still think it'll come together as we get focus into gear through the removal of several players and instilling proper team values into the MFC.

our biggest problem today i thought was the rubbish exhibition of the handball, which couldnt hit a target from 5 metres, but i think we'll fix it

Also..before playing on from a mark.. you must wait at least 5 secs..then handpass it to a friend...thats nice !! ..doesnt matter which team...just as long as its a friend !! <_<

LOL = funny but true!

Bailey doesnt have the cattle

YOu can blame Daniher and his sidekicks for that one

Amen!

What a surprise, another loss resulting directly from our misuse of the footy, another 'hilarious' thread taking cheap shots at the game plan and Dean Bailey.

Where were you all in the last 5 years when Daniher tried failed game plan after failed game plan, instead of realising that our players were not up to it and getting rid of them.

But lets blame Bailey, it is totally his fault that Mark Jamar feels the need to trip over his own legs, Bruce and Green can't kick goals from short distances, Moloney decides to give away two idiotic 50m penalties and PJ and Bate are injured.

Lets just burn down the MCG and be done with the overreaction.

Amen!

What a surprise, another loss resulting directly from our misuse of the footy, another 'hilarious' thread taking cheap shots at the game plan and Dean Bailey.

Where were you all in the last 5 years when Daniher tried failed game plan after failed game plan, instead of realising that our players were not up to it and getting rid of them.

But lets blame Bailey, it is totally his fault that Mark Jamar feels the need to trip over his own legs, Bruce and Green can't kick goals from short distances, Moloney decides to give away two idiotic 50m penalties and PJ and Bate are injured.

Lets just burn down the MCG and be done with the overreaction.

The question was simple (with a few tongue in cheeks comments to cheer us up after 5 straight and frustrating losses) What is Bailey's game plan?

Isn't it a coaches job to develop players and enhance the skills lacking - such as mentioned above?

Jaded - can you explain to me what he is trying to do?

Moose

Jaded - can you explain to me what he is trying to do?

Read this thread: http://demonland.ugbox.net/forum/index.php...mp;#entry139372

I can't be bothered having the same argument over and over again. I appreciate that maybe you didn't read the other 58 threads we've had on the same topic since the start of the pre-season. Now is your chance.

Read this thread: http://demonland.ugbox.net/forum/index.php...mp;#entry139372

I can't be bothered having the same argument over and over again. I appreciate that maybe you didn't read the other 58 threads we've had on the same topic since the start of the pre-season. Now is your chance.

Cheers, I will.

And then I will have another laugh at the other replies for this topic.

Before I go on...some caveats;

1/ I watched this game from behind the bullet proof glass of the Long Room...so much like the Pope I am somewhat removed from reality.

2/ I have had more then a few beers.

However, today I did see some positives...

Jamar...has positively provided all at the MFC with crystal clear clarity...he is a "depth" ruckman...provided Steph Martin is able to get out of bed next week he should be our second ruck until PJ is fit, at which point Martin can play down back taking the oppo's tallest forward [and as a 3rd ruck option]

More cheerfully, Chip Frawley show signs that he can develop into a quality back-man, Clint "do you feel lucky" Bartram is running himself back into form, Rivers is showing his class, Womaemirri continues to show promise, and Col Sylvia is actually showing something now he is down back.

The Tigers and Blues are gifting us a secure draft platform...and best of all.

The filth is wobbling...so we may be in with a show of knocking them off again this year,

Amen!

What a surprise, another loss resulting directly from our misuse of the footy, another 'hilarious' thread taking cheap shots at the game plan and Dean Bailey.

Where were you all in the last 5 years when Daniher tried failed game plan after failed game plan, instead of realising that our players were not up to it and getting rid of them.

But lets blame Bailey, it is totally his fault that Mark Jamar feels the need to trip over his own legs, Bruce and Green can't kick goals from short distances, Moloney decides to give away two idiotic 50m penalties and PJ and Bate are injured.

Lets just burn down the MCG and be done with the overreaction.

WE WERE IN THE [censored] FINALS!!! HOW IS THAT A FAILED GAMEPLAN????

Daniher built for his original gameplan, which even despite its modifications through 05-06 was still based around running half backs, kicking to lead up targets and quick ball movement to multiple tall key forwards.

2007 was a major departure from this, as we went to run and carry and while injuries partially masked it, the facts are we played like rubbish with this plan and only won quarters when we threw it out the window and went back to playing the way we play best. A number of players were openly vocal about the gameplan in the media and they were completely right, it didn't suit the players we had drafted/traded for/developed in the past 5 years.

The players are struggling, they lack confidence, that's why they are missing targets. They aren't skill-less spuds, they made the AFL for a reason, and they were a finals side for three straight years just eighteen months ago. Many are being played out of position playing a style of game that is completely foreign to their most effective style of football. Sure, there are guys playing who won't make it, and guys who were playing finals for us eighteen months ago that weren't going to take us to a Premiership, but we were developing in the right process for going for a flag. Did Brisbane throw out their gameplan when they made the finals in the late 90s? Did Port when they lost the 02 Prelim? Did Geelong when they lost the 04 Prelim? You get to a certain level then you look at where the team needs improvement and work on that, not throw the whole thing out the window and start again.

This defend Bailey at all costs mentality is a disgrace. It is HIS gameplan that he has brought to the club from Port under the complete misjudgement that it is adaptable to any squad of players. It does not take into account the runners that Port have that we don't have, and the forward line we have that Port don't have. West Coast use a similar style, and that became successful because it had Judd/Kerr/Cousins and co to make it work. Have a look at how well its going without Judd and Cousins - and watch in the next few years as West Coast develop a better forward line to counter the fact that they have a worse midfield than they had in 04-05-06.

Its not rocket science, it's painfully obvious to see to everyone who watches footy. And with the position our club is in off the field we can't afford to wait 5-7 years to get back into the finals - and it'll take that long because 80% of the players will have to be regenerated to suit this new style.

Thanks coaching selection committee, great job.

WE WERE IN THE [censored] FINALS!!! HOW IS THAT A FAILED GAMEPLAN????

Thanks coaching selection committee, great job.

I said it about 10 times already, but if you're happy being a mediocre side which makes finals but doesn't actually win anything, then good on you.

Daniher's multiple game plans since 2003 got us donuts. Move on.

This defend Bailey at all costs mentality is a disgrace. It is HIS gameplan that he has brought to the club from Port under the complete misjudgement that it is adaptable to any squad of players. It does not take into account the runners that Port have that we don't have, and the forward line we have that Port don't have. West Coast use a similar style, and that became successful because it had Judd/Kerr/Cousins and co to make it work. Have a look at how well its going without Judd and Cousins - and watch in the next few years as West Coast develop a better forward line to counter the fact that they have a worse midfield than they had in 04-05-06.

Thanks coaching selection committee, great job.

I dont listen to Stan Alves very much but his comments today were similar to the above. How long does it take to accept that we cant change so radically and expect to win?

Is it worth the players and supporters going through inexplicable bad football when the players are obviously under pressure to go against their first instincts in just delivering the ball to a teammate?

The new coach is not going to change and the players are not spuds.

If you believe that we have recruited wrongly and it is the players fault, how can you be so f&*%king smug we recruited the right coach?

A mediocre finals side? Brisbane got knocked out of the finals the previous two years to their flag. Geelong didn't even make the finals the year before theirs. It doesn't just happen overnight, but why do you just throw the development away??? No one wins a flag at their first try, most teams are in 4-5 finals campaigns with a squad that gets them a flag.

This is an attitude I just cannot understand.

None of the sides that won Premierships this century would have won them if they'd thrown their gameplan away when they lost a final or two. We had a side on top of the ladder within six weeks of finals twice in the space of three years. We lost to a finals hardened Essendon side in 04, finished with 16 fit men against Geelong in 05, beat St.Kilda in 06 and lost to Freo on the road in the semi. Should have we won the flag those years? No, of course not. Were we on the right track? Yes, definately. We had holes to fill, more strength in the middle, more maturity into a few of our younger players, but we were on the right path.

Why throw that away? This wasn't 02 when we were lacking some quality and were too old to get anywhere and needed some changes. We'd been through that. Now you're defending a system that has set us back half a decade and wasted a genuine opportunity at success.

I can't live with that.

...

I agree with much of what you say Hards, but I hated Daniher as much as anyone. What really annoyed me was they way that he would change tactics mid-season and even mid-game, usually when Melbourne were doing well and playing good football. More often than not, the reason Melbourne lost over '04-'06 was because they weren't using the dame tactics or the same plan that they were when winning.

The perfect example was against Adelaide in round 22, 2006 when we got our first glimpse of "runs and curry". All this shiite about "the game is changing" is utter crap. It is implying that there is one way to play, one way to win. The game is still the same, how teams choose to play is changing but there is not one set best formula. The good teams are the ones that play to their strengths.

Brisbane '01-'03, hard, tough, uncompromising direct football. Sydney '05, ruthless, meticulous skills and precision. West Coast '06, hard running with a team full of hard bodies and great skills. Geelong '07 Brisbane '01-'03 + West Coast '06.

I'm all for Melbourne trying to fix certain areas, but the basics that the team play best should not change as a result. We saw how Melbourne completely changed when they got the runs and curry last year and how it ruined the very fabric of the team.

? SORRY TOP SECRET

While I know Geelong has some pretty skilled players, their game plan is pretty simple - put it up through the corridor, quickly into the forward line - if no-one is free put in into the hot spot, if congested carry it into the forward line (basically get it over the congested part and into a 1 on 1 contest).

If you believe that we have recruited wrongly and it is the players fault, how can you be so f&*%king smug we recruited the right coach?

Maybe we didn't recruit the right coach, maybe we did. One way or the other, we cannot make a judgement on 5 games.

Bottom line is, if you thought Daniher's time was up, and a change was on the cards, then it was inevitable that a new coach will bring a new game plan. A smooth transition is a lot to ask. Look at St.Kilda last year, how many people were calling for Lyon's head? Plenty.

I'm not going to support Bailey to the bitter end, just as I didn't support Daniher in his last few seasons. But I can see what he is trying to achieve and I can also see why he would want to implement a complete change.

Yes we made finals in 04, 05 and 06, but we won a combined total of 1 final in that time. Our game plan was not suitable for winning finals, and we were incredibly predictable. We played well on the MCG, but incredibly poorly anywhere else. The game plan may have suited our players, but the players didn't and aren't up to standards in finals.

I believe that Bailey's game plan is in essence quite basic, but it is also difficult for our players to implement because most of our players are really uncomfortable with accountability and contested footy. So the question is, do we adapt the game plan to suit our players and hope they are good enough to win us a premiership, or do we implement a game plan that can stand up in finals, and watch many on our list fall over trying to catch up?

As far as I'm concerned our playing list is not good enough to win us finals, so I'm happy to adapt the list according to the game plan and not the other way around.

A mediocre finals side?

I can't live with that.

You believe in fools gold. You also believed we had a top 4 midfield inspite of overwhelming evidence. You're as stubborn as an old moll. We teased, but were never going to win a flag with the list we had, or have.

A new coach was always going to bring a diversity of style. It's hard to defend Bailey as there's little light to behold. Is he any good ? I don't know, but there's no point bleating like a stuck pig after every loss. He's going to be given time, as he should. I'm happy to turn the list over and weed out those that have shown they can't produce when needed. Lord knows many have had enough time.

Daniher proved he couldn't deliver with the group he picked. And FFS, stop creaming yourself over playing finals. Yes, they're often a stepping stone to ultimate success, but if you thought our finals appearances over the last 3 years were gradients of success you're more obtuse than I originally thought.

I think a coach has to stick to his gameplan rather than change it to suit his players.

Heads up though. First win in round 7 against Freo. Lean patch after that though.

But plenty of tearful goodbyes (Neitz, Yze, White, Holland) and joyful welcomes (Maric, Grimes, Cheney, McNamara, Martin, Valenti, Meesen) to come.

As far as I'm concerned our playing list is not good enough to win us finals, so I'm happy to adapt the list according to the game plan and not the other way around.

Even if it takes 5-7 years? Because as Hards stated, our recruiting policy over the past 5 years has been built around hard in-and-under mids (McLean, Jones, Sylvia,) who aren't suited to a run and carry style.