Leaderboard

I was there as well, and the only thing I would add to the BB summation, (which I think was missed by most people )was that the MFC doesn't look like and have the feeling of a Football club. He compared the environment at Hawthorn, Essendon and in particular Geelong. To me this is absolutely damning as we have lost the raison d'etre for the clubs very existence. It only confirms exactly the story that was relayed to me when one of the current coaching staff arrived at the club. I am not a fan of the traditional Board based structure being applied to a membership organisation, particularly when it's constitution specifies that it exists to play, compete and foster football. You can have the principles of best practice governance without the structure. Why are appointments made by the Board to the Board? Where are the football credentials of the present and previous boards? Interesting to note that Ben Buckley former AFL deputy has joined the North Melbourne Board recently. These are the types of people needed, because their knowledge is football based, not in un-related public or private ventures. I know it was a long time ago, but Jim Cardwell knew exactly what he had to do, why he was doing it and how to do it. The first principle espoused by the Australian Institute of Company Directors is " know your business". It seems Peter Jackson has in only 6 days worked out that the MFC doesn't " know it's business" any more. Putting ALL that aside ( and we can have endless arguments about who should be replaced and why) the ONFIELD performance is the real concern. That is the Club's business. It is why it exists. I have NEVER seen a more gutless and heartless performance than against GC. The statistics around tackling are damning, but it is even worse because there is no statistic around tackles NOT laid. We all saw a GC player waltz through a pack of MFC players into an open goal and not a single one put a hand on him. No-one took responsibility, no-one even tried....... I help coach an U14's side and honestly they show more intensity in the game, probably because they WANT to play footy. I can't say that about the current group of players at the MFC. Footscray have an equally dismal performance record as we do: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/perceptions-punish-demons-but-dogs-are-none-too-rosy-20130514-2jklt.html but as Michael Gleeson notes in the article : "the biggest discrepancy between the sides has not been win-loss but effort and competitiveness" I hope for and wish Mr Jackson well. But I'm not rushing to get to the game this week because I know the U14's will be putting in more than most Melbourne players, so they deserve the encouragement and support.

I found the article depressing for the following reasons: 1. On first read I can't remember the word "win" being used. 2. Our benchmark seem to be "effort", so if we show "effort" it doesn't matter about the rest. 3. We've had to spend this week learning or re-educating the players about what "effort" is and this has has a significant impact on our "other" learning. My reading is the FD have trained these guys to lose. Neeld prepared everyone for a loss last week when he said GCS were more experienced than us. He's been telling the world, and I imagine the players, we can't expect to win against more experienced teams. What better way to build a culture of failure. And the players are playing like it. And are we being told we are so badly prepared that over 2 preseasons we haven't learned what "effort" is and that losing a week of focus towards relearning is going to be a big setback? The mind boggles. I really like Chris Dawes, he is intelligent and thoughtful and I'm not sorry we've got him. But that doesn't mean I like the message he's presenting. The focus of the players seems to be to back Neeld at every opportunity and slag themselves/each other. I don't like that and it's going to look really silly if and when Neeld goes.

I disagree with the idea that effort is not coach driven. Have a look at the way Fremantle attack and harass the opposition under Ross Lyon and compare that to how they were under Mark Harvey. Most of them are the same group of players. A great coach gets his team believing in him and in his game plan. Fremantle players have bought in to the Lyon style and game because they know it works. Melbourne on the other hand play like they don't believe in the coach's game style. They might say that they do in public but they don't play as though they believe. This naturally affects a player's effort levels. To try to masquerade our problems by highlighting effort as the only or main issue is just failing to recognise the bigger issues. We were not thrashed by Gold Coast in the first quarter purely because of a lack of effort. We were thrashed because our blokes had no idea what to do (either offensively or defensively) out on the ground, because they have no confidence or belief in the message and because of skill errors and poor decision making. I don't blame Neeld for the basis skill errors but I do blame him for the confusion of the players and their lack of confidence and belief. To say it's just effort and that effort is solely a player driven thing is completely wrong in my opinion and is just more spin. It's like the comment that 'we showed a lot of improvement in the last three weeks' (prior to the Gold Coast game). Being three goals down at ¾ time to GWS at the MCG and getting walloped in general play by Brisbane is not what I would term improvement.

My mental highlight reel is replaying my sitting behind the goals in the rain during the 1960 grand final and watching us keep collingwood to 2 goals for the day.

To Demonlanders, I have been a long time and now a first time. I always thought I'd never be a member to write to the club but after the events of today I felt compelled to. I have attached below my email to the Dees today. I awat a response. I apologise for the long windedness of this letter for those who are reading it.I also apologise for it not being half as entertaining as some of the comments and threads on this site. To whom it may concern, I know you have probably been inundated with emails and most likely a lot of complaints regarding the teams position at this current stage. I too am a mad demon supporter, member and was one of the 13,000 people there on Sunday watching the Dees play. I agree with the calls that it was unacceptable but that’s not why I am emailing. Today, we had a visit from 3 Richmond players (Cotchin, Conca and Elton) who came to our school (I'm a year 6 teacher at Greythorn Primary School in North Balwyn) to give a talk on leadership and answer a few questions. A great school visit and something I too was impressed by. I will admit that I too was a little star struck as well. It didn't matter what team the kids followed there was a buzz about AFL players visiting the school. When it came to question time, the players answered really well, giving their perspective on what its like on to be an AFL player, Leadership and the positives and negatives of being a AFL footballer. They were then asked "Who is the easiest team to play?" The response........ Melbourne. Now I copped my right whack from the kids who really enjoyed hearing that response and then they were ribbing me about it. It was probably pay back, as at the start of the year I was quite bullish about the Dees and everyone knows I follow the Dees. I'm also well aware it is always great fun to give a teacher some lip and I accept that, I can cop it. What was really noticeable and what upset me was how the kids who follow the Dees felt and responded. They were genuinely upset. For an area that was traditionally a Melbourne heartland for Melbourne supporters, it was disappointing to see the whole year 5 and 6 group laugh pretty nastily at those young Dee supporters sitting there. You really could see the hurt. A student even came up and said to me "How can they say Melbourne are the easiest". He was bewildered. Now I wouldn't ordinarily email or write in but I felt compelled to. I know there are so many other issues going on at the moment and this may not necessarily be a priority with all the accusations flying around around the Dees and the coaching staff and also the work that is being done, but the Club needs to look at its junior fans as I am really worried that the club runs the risk of losing a couple of generations of fans. My 22 month year old daughter is a member but is at an age where she doesn't have a choice, but many kids I have talked to are losing real interest in "our" club. I know many players were calling junior members which is fantastic but there are a lot of kids out there who aren't members and are feeling very low. Winning games is obviously the answer and I will be there this week willing us on, ironically against the team who were represented today. I don't have any answers regarding what you can do but I felt compelled to let you know that there are some really upset students (and one teacher) who left school today knowing that at least one other team in the AFL sees us as the easy beats of the competition.

Who would want to coach Melbourne? I see that question asked a lot in the media and on footy forums Well here are a few reasons why - 1) Any coach that can drag us out of this hole will go down as one of the all time greats, possibly the greatest 2) Peter Jackson is a respected CEO and a smart operator and will give the football department a serous tidy up and get us looking and functioning professionally 3) Our list isn't anywhere near as bad as our current predicament suggests 4) We are likely to land a Priority Pick in 2014, which in the right hands would be pure gold and we may go in with picks 2 and 3 5) Our drafting history and player development is irrelevant to the new coach, and he gets to do things his way 6) Jesse Hogan looks special and will be ready to go as a ready made power forward in round 1, 2014 7) The untapped potential and ability of Jack Watts and Jack Trengove. Under the right coach these two guys would be stars already. 8) Knowing that the MFC will have a lot of salary cap available for free agency, and backing yourself in to land a gun player or two Maybe you guys can add some more.

An outstanding post George and whilst I'd take issue with the players "not trying" I love the comments about the structure of the Board. I read with despair the threads about Mitchell and Schwarz joining the Board as I think it's why membership elected Boards are such failures. The members by and large have not the slightest idea whether Schwarta or Neil Mitchell would make good Board members and know their role. Some will like Mitchell and his outspoken views and think he's the man. Others will remember Schwarta and think he's the man. We've seen the damage such populist appointments have done with Garry Lyon being on the coaching selection panel and also carrying out a review of the footy department post Bailey. Lyon is an impressive TV personality but he's not got the slightest idea about running a complex membership based organization and judging by where we find ourselves doesn't have the slightest idea about Football Departments and coaches. He didn't set out to cause the damage he has, he just didn't know what he didn't know. And yet the majority view when he intervened in August 2011 was "thank heavens for Garry". Personally I'd support a restructure of the Club so someone like the AFL appointed the Board where they could ensure competent governance. Make no mistake this is where our failure starts. The Board select the CEO, the CEO the FD and the FD the team. It's taken a while for people on here to see the cause and effect but McLardy/Stynes selected Schwab, Schwab the coach and the coach the team. The reality is the members have failed time and again in trying to elect a good Board because we've got no f'ing idea. It's not our fault, we just don't know. Really, can it get any worse? It's time for a change in the way we are run.

The spin is a PR front. It will never stop, and no one is holding a gun to your head to read or listen to it. It's there for sponsor relations and to try and keep the brand strong under adversity. I hate it too but it's no worse than saying nothing at all. You've 20-25 year olds getting in front of millions of people speaking on behalf of a 150-year-old club. Give them a break now I think. Even I am guilty of being a [censored] sometimes.

I don't doubt the sincerity of what Chris Dawes is saying but there is an enormous disconnect between those thoughts and the way the team is performing out on the field every week. There could be a number of explanations for that - lack of confidence and self-belief, limitations as far as their ability both physical and mental is concerned, an inability to fully accept or take in the coach's tactics and strategies and generally succumbing to the pervasive political issues that have afflicted the club over the past two years. Ultimately, Chris Dawes can talk till he's blue in the face but if the playing group runs out there and produces the slop that it presented us with last Sunday then, for better or worse, the public and the fans will continue to be non-believers.

After reading that article, does anyone really need convincing that Dawes was a good choice anymore? The guy has what we need.

OMG Paul Roos doesn't hate us anymore. He is totes about to ask us out on a date, get us drunk and try to get into our pants, only to never call us again. OMG YAY!

I want Gerard to coach MFC so we can sack him!

The main thread on Wilson is long on accusations but I'm looking for specifics. Since you said they were "well documented", I thought you were able to provide the answer. Sorry for asking. I can see it was an obvious waste of time.

To Dawes's credit, he's done a sterling job at attempting to defend the indefensible. But I'm sorry Chris, the very idea of professional athletes being taught how to try at the expense of learning a gameplan, in Round 8 of a coach's second season, is one that is best not said aloud.

It is genuinely insulting for you to fail to give any of the the players any respect, and not even acknowledge that they may be being truthful. I find it absolutely disgusting that many on here continue just abuse, abuse and abuse, without giving the players any respect as people. It is the same reason I will NEVER abuse our own players or opposition players, even if I have a dislike for them. For people to come out and openly suggest that first Garland, then Dawes are just flat out misrepresenting things just to toe the "club line" gives them no respect as people. And in my opinion, those who are suggesting such things, should also be given no respect. Paying a membership, and supporting a club does not given anyone a right to abuse and disrespect a person expressing their opinion. All members, and even the players are hurting because of the performances. There may be some players hurting less than others, but to suggest that players aren't hurting again is disrespectful to the playing group as people. Those who keep suggesting that the players are just spinning c*$p and just making excuses, I ask this question...if they didn't believe in what they were saying why would would they make such statements?? Again, I'm guessing the responses would be along the lines of....to protect their own skins, etc etc etc But what would compel someone to come out and mislead the membership when they don't have to. They could sit back and say nothing. To me the players are coming out and standing up for what is happening at the club because they believe in it. I have found that people are more likely to stand up and defend something when they believe in it, as opposed to when they don't. Why are so many on here so quick to acknowledge the way the club has stuffed up in the past, yet not patient enough for all of that poor work to be fixed. I believe this club has been in a poor state for over a decade, and I think it is unrealistic, bordering on lunacy to believe that it can be turned around in 18 months. Many have suggested that a coach like Paul Roos could fix things, to which I have suggested that Sydney were in a similar position to us in the early 90's when Barassi was brought in to fix things, then Eade took over, and led the club for 7 years (including finals appearances) before Roos took over. Sydney took about 4-5 years to dig themselves out of where they were in the early 90's and return to playing finals football. Why should we expect any different? Look at the history of other clubs who have been in similar positions to where we are at. I think you will struggle to find examples of where a club has returned to being competitive and successful within 18 months. But back to my main point. It is simply disgusting for so many on here to simply abuse and disrespect the players and those in the club that are genuinely trying to move this club to where it needs to be. People want the club to show integrity......so how do they want that to be represented? To me, integrity means being consistent in your words and actions, yet people are getting sick of hearing the same old message of "it's going to take time, but we're on the right path". Since Neeld took over, I have seen more consistent messages coming out of the club regarding where it is at then I have for any time in the last decade. The actions or results have not been there and there has been little evidence that the players are performing at the level intended or expected, but does that mean that the players lack integrity, or that the club lacks integrity?? The club has always said it is going to take time. It is taking time. They have clearly explained that their are standards the players are expected to meet. The players may not be consistently meeting those standards at the moment, but how many 20 - 25 year olds are always consistent in their behaviours. There are reasons that those clubs near the top of the ladder are where they are, they have a more mature and experienced group of players. Some people are being blinded by anger, and frustration when looking at the club. Take a step back, take a rational look at the playing list (which isn't great at the moment), and think, when compared to other lists, where should this club be sitting on the ladder?. Some food for thought is an article from today's Age comparing the performance of the bulldogs and us...... http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/perceptions-punish-demons-but-dogs-are-none-too-rosy-20130514-2jklt.html We are in no better state than the bulldogs, GWS and GC in terms of development (though we are arguably behind GC now). This club is rebuilding, is starting afresh, and we have some good young talent. We just need to develop them properly. So rather than disrespecting the players, and those in the club that are trying to bring this club success, how about we actually respect them as people, and for once try and believe the players when the come out and publicly state their views. To me, the most recent comments from Garland and Dawes have been some of the most compelling evidence that the bulk of the players are behind Neeld and Co. Maybe we should be giving the benefit of the doubt and start trusting the comments of the players, no matter how frustrating things are at the moment.

So the players admit there was not enough effort. The question begs , why when we are at such a desperate stage in our history , is there not enough effort?

Not so sure about that. She agreed to marry me - even my parents think that was probably a reckless decision.

Gameplans in footy are quite amusing sometimes. Clarko's Cluster,The press and now the Geelong Highway is the in thing. All other teams follow the leader then draft the players for a required gameplan and then prepare for that gameplan. Then teams figure out a way to outplay the old premiership gameplan. Bailey wanted a run and gun style of play through the guts of the ground. The press came in and blew away this plan. Now with some tinkering teams are shying away from the boundary plan of Malthouse and our Neeld and are looking through the corridor once again. It seems part of Bailey's plan is back and trending well. I'm not trying to pot Neeld and pump up Bailey I just laugh at the merry go round of trending gameplans.

People forget under Northey we often kicked low scores & hung on to win close. It was stressful to watch but it was a huge buzz when that siren blew. Northey was not a boring coach, he led a tough battle.

For those commenting on Roo's and boring football. I dream of going to the football and seeing our club playing and being "bored". Sure beats the hell out of the current alternative.

I think we have good bookends - personally I was, and continue to be, a big supporter of the decision to recruit Dawes. As everyone knows, it's our midfield that sucks. And AFL seems to be all about the midfield these days. That said, I think it's probably the easiest area on the ground to fix, and to fix quite quickly. It seems to be easier to lure an A grade mid, than to lure an A grade forward or defender. There are just plenty more mids out there, and there are always a few 'on the move', unlike the really good KPPs. Our list still has a lot of upside IMO.

It's fluff because all we ever hear are the apologies and the remorse... "Ohhhh we didn't see it coming" "Ohhhhh we need to try harder" wah wah wah.... Get some balls. Tell us something to get us up and about, not just the same old tearful sob stories. Sick of us being such an apologetic club. Stop apologizing for what you should have done, and do what you're supposed to do!

You cant say yet if Dawes is a bad choice. people said the same thing about Mitch last year and until he got injured he was great. Wait until we both have them in the forward line. I have faith in Dawes. We all have seen how good he is.

Healy is absolutely spot on with this comment 'they need someone who can sell hope'. A club that has near 6-7 years of being crap needs to give its players and supporters some hope, it needs to sell hope. In some ways the appointment of Neeld sold some hope that if the if the fundamentals could be changed we would improve. The promise was of incremental improvement, which is ok and acceptable for most fans. There is still a message of hope in incremental improvement. But if anything we are going backward and at an alarming rate. No hope there. Neeld has, from the start been very circumspect about improvement, which again is ok as long as it happening. He has deliberately not promised too much before last season or this season. Ironic then that the two things he has said have proved so laughably and spectacularly unfulfilled. Before last season there was : simply we want to be the hardest team to play against. Tragic and the blackest of black humor. This year was his comments at the AGM (and i think repeated in an interview?) that people might be surprised at how we go this year and that success may not be as far away as people think. Well at least those comments might be partially true. Few believed we would/could be this bad. Compare his promises with Hinkleys at Port. He has said the only thing they will promise is that they will never give up. They have come back and won 2 games this season after falling more than 7 goals behind and pushed North after being well down. I'll take that promise. And Hinkley obviously gets that supporters need hope which having a side that refuses to give up will provide.

Bob while I am as depressed as any Dees fan, I agree with Jackson that it is not a hard fix. First he gets the right people in place and clearly defines their roles and the goals. Next he ensures proper governance. Last we need to get the perfomances on field up to a proper standard. That of course will not be his task but rather the FD. As for the List, I am sure we all thought that while not great, it was reasonable at the start of the year. Clearly the performances are far below what we could have reasonably expected. Those performances can color one's impression of the list. If you analysed the list, you could say it was reasonable in the back half, ok in the forward half when you accept Hogan is to come, lacking in the midfield and ruck and lacking strong leadership and talented experienced players. IMO the club sought to remedy the last bit with Gillies, Byrnes, Rodan and Pedersen and IMO has failed dismally. Admitting the error at season's end and moving them on puts us back one year only if that. Playing younger players adds experience to the list. I can see a PP or two plus another early pick and that should allow us to improve the midfield if we get it right. A free agent or two could further add to the midfield. We have several young players to come, in Toumpas, Hogan, Barry, Tynan, Fitzpatrick, Blease, Taggert, Davis etc. On the horizon is a young Stretch and maybe a young Grinter and others. The key is getting the right people in place and especially a Coach that the players will work for and learn and develop from. The culture, that wonderful word, can be created with all of the new breed coming in. The bad press needs to stop and I accept that will only happen when performances improve. We need fairly soon to end the Coach speculation, even if a fill in takes over until a new permanent Coach can be appointed. We have significant assets and no debt at the moment. The membership will rise when we improve on the field. WE ARE NOT A BASKET CASE, WE ARE JUST PLAYING LIKE ONE.

Been our best player this year easily IMO. Considering it's his first season and he's playing in the AFL's worst midfield, I think he's pretty much a superhero.

My last real positive memory is 2010 v Sydney at the MCG, we took a good proud team apart. Paul Roos greatest loss as a coach it was magic.

Was there that day the comeback v Freo....we couldnt believe it. One of the greatest games I was ever at.

Really? Bailey consistently said from day one that we were at rock bottom and starting a rebuild and developing our younger players. Yes we made mistakes but the message from Bailey was clear and consistent. Some of Neeld's favourite comments at the moment like 'rebuilding the rebuild' and 'we are in the basement', I never heard those mentioned last year. In fact during the pre-season we heard how we would improve significantly and surprise a few teams. So you base your opinion on what the players say in public as opposed to their performance on game day? Actions speak louder than words and our actions on game day this year seem pretty compelling to me. I don't blame the players for saying this as they have no choice, but you'd be a fool to rate public utterances over on field performance.

The players have been drinking Neeld's Kool Aid that they're no good, unfit, too inexperienced, can't carry out instructions and have therefore been delivering on his message. One day they're gonna wake up from the nightmare and wonder how they got where they are.

No, that is not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that effort is not solely a player thing. A coach can have a big influence on effort. If you have a player who refuses to put in any effort no matter what then obviously there's not much a coach can do. But I don't think many AFL players fall into this category. Most players try hard and put effort in. A good coach can extract that extra effort from his players. Again I point to Ross Lyon coached teams. It's not often a Ross Lyon coached team is accused of a lack of effort. Yet at Melbourne we've already heard that our effort has been an issue against Port, Essendon, West Coast (second half) and Gold Coast. The reason for this IMO is not because Melbourne has a team of players who are predisposed to a lack of effort while Fremantle has a team of players predisposed to giving maximum effort. One of the reasons for the effort discrepancy IMO is that the Melbourne players lack belief and confidence in what they're doing while the Freo players are totally committed to Ross Lyon's game style. As I said Freo's list has not changed significantly since Mark Harvey yet Lyon has completely eradicated their flaky nature and those typical Freo performances when they don't turn up. Of course the players are a part of the problem and I'm not in any way excusing them. Neeld is severely limited by the playing list at his disposal and in particular the lack of a midfield. Even with the best coach going around we would still be a struggling team. But what I do believe is that a great coach like Ross Lyon would extract more effort out of our players than what Neeld is currently getting. No one is saying it's just Neeld. The main reason for our current predicament is insipid drafting and even worse player development. I feel sorry for Neeld as he is working with a really poor list and absolutely no midfield. This thread was about lack of effort and Chris Dawes' comment that it's solely a player thing. It is my view that a coach has a role to play in extracting effort out of his squad. Ross Lyon has proved this at two different clubs.

So we get Roos, pick 1 or 2 and picks 18 and 19(should we get a priority), Hogan, Toumpas(a year older and fitter) and possibly Barry(a year older and fitter. Clark gets a full presaeson as does Trengove and Grimes. All of a sudden we start to win games and we all fawn over Roos. Neeld has had to deal with a dead President and now an incompetant one, a CEO who has now been sacked for utter incompetence, tanking, drugs and the constant and ferocious glare of the media. On top of this his 2 captains are injured along with his key forwards. Yet we all expect him to drive us up the ladder. Talk about dreaming. Roos ain't the Messiah, we are on the path to improvement. Oh and another thing I bet if all AFL players spoke honestly about their coach they'd be many who have plenty of derogatory things to say. Winning fixes the problem. It will start happening next year regardless of who is coach. Our list isn't the tragedy many think it is.

Would love for us to go after Simon Black for a midfield coaching role next year, whether it be as the main midfield coach or as an assistant. Highly likely he will retire at the end of the year, and has been doing a coaches course. He carved us up every time we played them, and is an extremely smart footballer. Think he would be a great asset for the club. Not sure if he would want to move away from Brisbane, and they might want to keep him, but definitely worth having a crack at getting him.

The point no-one considers in all this speculation is that R Lyon knew the Melbourne gig was in the offing and yet he chose to speak on the quiet to Freo, keeping even his manager out of the loop. G Lyon thought he sussed it out but R Lyon was on a mission of his own, his management notwithstanding. From this it is fair to conclude he had no interest in us, and figured the Freo list was a better option, so let's stop the hyperventilating over would he wouldn't he have joined us.

. ^^^ This."That sort of effort shouldn't need to be coached, and the fact that this week it does need to be coached is an indictment of the playing group." It shouldn't but it needs to be there as a bare minimum pass mark and part of any coach's 101 manual player non-negotiables. It sounds from Dawes's comment like it wasn't. Another Neeld fail. "If things are going to improve and we're going to achieve some sustained success, it will be gradual. There will be no silver bullets." The word IF worries me here. If the players truly believed in where Neeld was directing them to me he would be starting with the word WHEN not IF. I have yet to see anything "gradual" other than most players either stagnating or regressing. I don't think any genuine Demon fan is expecting a magic silver bullet in the first 3 years. But we certainly weren't expecting a team to come out in its 2nd season under Neeld bereft of skills, belief, fight and generally uncompetitive and unwatchable at AFL level, expecially against start up clubs and clubs that are heading south. Massive fail. "The only silver bullet will be effort." Hold on, I thought you just said there would be "no silver bullet"? If trying your guts out every week and giving your all for the club that's paying you a hefty fee is considered a silver bullet in your mind (and i wonder how many others in the FD/list) then it's no wonder we are where we are. Again, this is something most professional footballers and clubs consider a non-negotiable and part of a the natural order at this level. Sure, even the pros have off weeks and periods where their form aludes them, but very few will ever be accused of not giving their all in terms of effort. It's just a given that "effort" is part of a competitive animal's make up. That's why they play and why even the most docile of characters off the field (eg Bruce Doull, Matthew Scarlett) bring it once they cross the white line. This is not something that had to be coached into them at senior level. It was inherent and expected when they walked through the club doors. More effort might be a coach request at various times during a match or season. But I doubt if a senior Coach would ever have to explain and coach a whole week of "effort". As a coach you might be able to motivate and inspire greater effort from a base effort. But that base effort should arrive from the inherent competitive spirit within each individual. The fact that the group (almost as a whole) don't show this most weeks and haven't so far under Neeld is again, IMO, a massive fail on the part of Neeld and his team. "There is a magic bullet. It is SELF BELIEF. It is the coaches job to instil it in every player". So again, there is another magic bullet. And yes it certainly is the mark of a good quality coach and person to find & bring the best out of every player. I've seen very little or this during Neeld's stint so far and certainly neither belief or effort at the beginning of any match this year other than against the Lions in the first quarter where I believe we drew the quarter and that was against a depleted out of form outfit. Sorry Chris, nice try but I believe the only magic bullet from here will be when/if we can find an experienced coach that brings and is able to bring out the skills and belief in the playing group to a base minimum level of competitivess and accepts nothing less from a player than an AFL level competitive effort at the very least. And who also expects and prepares his team to win every week and prepares them accordingly, both physically, mentally and with an AFL skill level (eg, quick movement and transition of the ball with minimal turnovers) that allows/assists them to do so.

We are already at rock bottom. A coach only has to make us competitive to be a hero with the fans at the moment. And even a failure would be more of an indictment on the club, and not so much on the coach himself.

When are we going to get out of this mentality that a 'star' will save us? Only one thing will save us and that's an AFL quality midfield. Here's my view on the whole issue of recruiting. In my mind it's far more important than changing the board, or the coach, or re-organising the football department. Don't get me wrong, these things need to be attended to and quickly, but the team itself is now a basket case and a long-term rehabilitation proposition. The old Daniher-style idea that you needed a ‘premiership winning spine’, including a star forward, to be successful to me is out of date. I think it’s led Melbourne to concentrate far too much on the holy grail of Carey-like elite talls as the basis of team success. This idea has been disastrous as far back as Tilbrook. The midfield is the absolute ‘engine room’ of any AFL team. It’s where you win contested ball, make clearances, defend when you don't have the ball, ‘run and carry’ when you do, and actually score more than half your goals. Teams today are effectively one or two ruckmen, a couple of tall backs, a couple of tall forwards and 16 midfielders. That’s what the undefeated Geelong was last week: West/Blicavs, Taylor/Lonergan, Hawkins/Podsiadly, and 15-16 players who can play as midfielders, some in the back half, some in the forward line, and most everywhere. Since 2003, Melbourne has had 19 draft picks in the top 20 (all drafts). Of those 19 picks, they’ve chosen talls (190cm+) over 50% of the time (with some of the rest being small backs). The only true, hard-at-it midfielders they’ve selected with early picks have been McLean (gone), Jones and this year Viney. A lot of the other 'midfielders' have been 'project players (e.g. Morton, Gysberts) who just aren't tough enough. Melbourne has generally selected talls with early picks and midfielders with late picks, when I believe it should have been the other way around. What did Geelong pay at the drafting table for Lonergan, Taylor, Podsiadly and Hawkins? Apart from determining the true value of Hawkins as a father-son, you could quite easily argue they paid far less overall than we did for Frawley, Garland, Clark, Dawes and Hogan. Between 2003 and 2007 Melbourne had 20 National Draft picks in total. Fifteen are no longer at the club. That’s a terrible retention rate and it’s not all lack of ‘development’ (remember that up to 2006 Melbourne fairly regularly played finals with established leaders like Neitz and Macdonald). Many selections have just been extremely poor picks. We just have to realise this as a fact and cease the pointless arguments about development and trying to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. You maximise your chance of an elite midfielder the earlier the draft pick. It’s also why Melbourne now lacks leaders with a couple of hundred games experience. While they obviously didn’t work in isolation, Craig Cameron and Barry Prendergast ought to be called to account for their role in Melbourne’s downfall ... except they don’t work for Melbourne any more. So the drafting disaster has led to Melbourne playing the Gold Coast Suns with a cobbled together midfield of Jones and Sylvia plus a quality but inexperienced player like Viney (6 games). The rest were mainly players who are either late draft picks or elevated rookies: Bail (#64, 41 games), Mackenzie (Rookie, 61 games), Kent (#48, 2 games), Matt Jones (#52, 6 games), Nicholson (Rookie, 24 games), Evans (Rookie, 9 games), Terlich (#68, 6 games). The rucks were Spencer (Rookie, 18 games) and Gawn (#34, 8 games). How can you possibly expect that inexperienced midfield to compete? It’s Mark Neeld’s biggest nightmare and not all of his making. In regard to getting out of this mess, I can’t see how it can be done other than to draft purely for midfielders in the next 2-3 drafts with every pick we get. I tend to think we actually drafted quite reasonably for our midfield in the 2012 ND, with Viney and Toumpas as quality mids, then Kent, Matt Jones and Terlich as later low-cost picks. At the moment they’re just very inexperienced. It's a start, but we need 3-4 years more of it. Please, please, no reliance on trading good picks for stars like Franklin. Let's get midfielders, midfielders and midfielders, either by selection, trade or speculative late picks. If we use our first pick on a star forward in the 2013 draft I'll slash my wrists.

Not if we can't get the ball out of the middle in the first place.

I think Chris Dawes article is a terrible indictment on the FD. And if you saw the GCS game, it parellels the disturbing Dawes article. Neelds departure must be imminent post the Richmond game.

Spot on Nutbean. Of course he'd adapt. He is a winner and he used a game plan at the Swans that maximized his teams chances of winning a flag. If he coached now and that game plan was not going to win a flag he'd adapt it (whislt imagine still keeping the emphasis on hard nosed defense and non negotiables such as accountability). No one is accusing Freo of being overly dour this year as Lyon has apated his game plan from the flooding model he used at the Saints

And people still call for Neeld's head. "Effort shouldn't have to be coached." This playing group is lamentably poor. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Dawes could be OK, if you have him and Jesse Hogan in the forward line, and Clark rucking instead of always, in the forwrd line. our ruck strength is not good

Good on him for saying it as it is. If it gets noses out of joints, tough. "That sort of effort shouldn't need to be coached, and the fact that this week it does need to be coached is an indictment of the playing group" Well said Chris. For the morons calling this piece fluff, thank for reminding me of why I ignore you!

I like Dawes, especially when he speaks, but that article is absolute fluff that I'm sick of hearing.

It was only 2 years ago, everybody screamed for Baileys head too, they got their way, but nothing changed, I was there on Sunday and its a low as I can remember but jumping from the frying pan into the fire won't help, It's not a time for major changes, the whole situation needs to be viewed, and making sudden knee jerk moves won't fix anything. Let PJ look at the club for a month or so, and then make some suggestions, maybe some minor changes of personnel in the ever increasing FD will be looked at, but the head coach must stay for now.

I for one don't want Roos, everybody seems to think he will be the Savior,I don't agree, he coaches boring boring football. I read Chris Dawes's blurb on MFC.com tonight, he's right, change for change sake is dumb. Neeld needs some help, I think PJ will assess and keep him but will get a more experienced structure around him.

I don't believe Viney was apart of the Old Boys Club that we all lie to blame for our ills. In fact he left the club in 2001 and cam back after a decade IIRC. Most notably he was at Adelaide and Hawthorn as successful Assistants (if one can be a successful assistant...). Love the passion that flies around here for the footy club. Which is why I won't ignore those that have the club, and want the best for it, in their minds eye. Both RR's have been more about petty point scoring and self-aggrandizement while trying to antagonize all and sundry. One is banned, the other is not. Oddly enough, when RR was a mod he would have banned people for doing what he is now doing.

"Coaching is not an option at the moment." "Look, if the scenario happened and the club came to me, I don't think I could say yes." James Hird, August 2010

I find this rather funny to be honest. We "need someone who can sell hope" do we? I'd rather have someone who is honest and tells us the truth. Neeld told us right from the start that the team was a shambles and it would take time to fix. He's not even halfway through his contract and people are calling for his head because it's turned out to be true. Before this season he said they weren't up to the standard he wants and there are still holes to fill in the list. He hasn't tried to sell us hope, he's sold us reality. The reality is that you don't fix a team as messed up as ours in one year. The reality is that if we sack him now we'll have another coach starting from scratch with another new message and we'll be a year and a half further back. The hope I hold onto is that Neeld is right and with time, fitness and experience these players will gel into a cohesive unit that can get the job done. I'm willing to back him for another year to see if he can make it happen.

Did he mention the game against the Gold C...., er Gold Suns by any chance?