Leaderboard

My daughter ran out with the players a number of weeks ago and they are asked who their favorite player is. They get to keep the jumper, shorts and socks and meet a number of the players before the game. My daughter chose Jack and that is why she ran out with him. the club were wonderful with her and made it a fantastic day for her first game.

Seventh post in. Honestly.

We all know how far back we are coming from. When Roos took over it was 7 years of rubbish. 7 years of no real leadership. 7 years of no structure off field. 7 years with 3 sacked coaches. 7 years of poor culture and average drafting. Before that, for close to 10 years, we may have performed on field (some Years) but our culture sucked. We were flashy and fun but weren't hard working. We didn't chase or work for each other the way that football requires now. The last few years we have been vfl standard at best. Perhaps only 30/40 players were actually worthy of being on AFL lists and of them perhaps only 15/30 performed at AFL level (albeit at bottom of the ladder AFL level). In 18 months we have gone from sub AFL level to "bottom 4" level. In 18 months we have established a stability at the club, introducing new culture. Anyone who thinks in 18 months weer could go from sub AFL level to the levels threat the saints or WCE (both recent finalists) can achieve is kidding themselves. With the length of footy playing careers as they are, 7 years is an eternity. To rebuild a culture and a list you need 5 years to turn all the players over. To remove the last traces of poor culture, of rot. It will take 2 more drafts to have a list of 40 that is comparable with other AFL clubs. Then we will be ready to potentially rapidly improve like saints or WB. Until that time, when Goodwin takes over, we are in a transition period. Building a cultural base. Erasing 7 years of rubbish. I'm not happy with how we are playing, but let's be realistic. More instability, more changes, are not going to fix this. Long term consistency and culture change is the only way we will dig out of it. I know it hurts. And rubbish like the last few weeks it hard to put up with. But unfortunately it is the only way.

I hope Adam Goodes plays at the weekend to demonstrate that the redneck racists who boo him at games will never win. I have locked this thread because it has well and truly run its course. If you boo Adam and think you're not a racist, that's your prerogative but it has been made abundantly clear that he and other indigenous players are more than upset at the behaviour and that it clearly stems from elements among those who are booing that are racially motivated. Unfortunately, too many people are using this thread to justify boorish behaviour that quite frankly has no part in our society in the 21st Century and certainly has no part in a site supporting a club which has a rich heritage of indigenous players within its ranks.

This has been done to death. It's not the point of the thread. The kids love Watts and he is great with the kids, I hope he continues and builds on his good season.

I bet a lot of our female fans would like to have the number 4 on their back.

Dumb people bagging out Nathan Jones. The Flower of our generation, respected (finally) by AFL community but questioned stupidly by morons on here after a loss. He is the heart of the demons and not the problem.

Lumumba finished 4th in Collingwoods best and fairest last year if my memory serves me correctly. He would be lucky to be in the MFC top 10. He may have been in our best 3 once. If he wasn't playing he'd be one of the last players I'd be worried about. Hell, if people pick on Grimes what do they think about this bloke. It's hard to remember too many bits of genuinely constructive play from him this season. For a senior player he's been exceptionally disappointing. IMO he's erratic with his decision making and disposal, good at one on one ground ball contests and timid in the extreme in the air. His desperation is poor. His shocking effort to spoil Daniher in the last seconds of the Essendon game are representative of the way he plays and showed a lack of leadership. By spoiling Daniher he may have given away a free but Daniher would have been sore which wouldn't have helped him kick it 50 metres. If Viney had been where Lumumba was it would have been a different scenario. Lumumba in my opinion was much more effective at Collingwood. He may be having trouble adapting to the different game plan, the game plan mightn't suit him, he may be playing injured, he may be struggling with less capable players around him but he certainly isn't playing like he was at Collingwood. He's been a poor pick up for the price.

Made out of his hair. Seriously though the title of this thread could be interpreted any number of ways...

All this thread is doing is trying to reopen a discussion which Jack closed for good reason. Give Goodes a rest for a while, please.

Beat collingwood only to get belted by carlton haha classic mfc

Tim d if you are suggesting nathan jones "doesnt do alot of off field team stuff" you are dead wrong, he has spent hours apon hours working with our young guys outside hours to help them, he's working as hard off field as on. I just think he's a lead by example type not a luke hodge or mathew pavlich inspire and direct team mates on field type. Still clearly the best we have though, for now.

The interchange is the biggest change seen in our game. Out on the full and other changes over the years have not changed the essence of the game. Interchange was meant to provide relief from injury. Not intended to become the athletics carnival it has become, with players constantly dashing on and off in twos threes and fours, like kids running after an ice cream van. Except in some coach's wet dream. (Which then came true.) Restricting interchange ... and I don't mean from 9,000 per game down to 8,500 ... has to happen. Only interchange at quarter breaks. Only 8 per quarter (or some other nominal number). None at all -- only subs. Take your pick. But that's the thing that has made our game unrecognisable. Zones, limiting backwards kicks ... these are against the spirit of the game, so well summed up by Conan Doyle in the doc's post above. Kill or maim the interchange.

This might not quite belong here (although it does contain one suggestion about improving the game) since it picks up on a few other threads/arguments, mainly Munga's observations about responses by strangers to the game and Special Robert's spoonful of sarcasm about a nineteenth century 'golden age' ... maybe there was a golden age closer to us, and maybe someone unfamiliar with the game could see what we certainly can't now. I came across this in doing some research on spiritualism in Australia (don't ask, but no I wasn't desperately looking for a more radical solution to the MFC's woes). It's from Arthur Conan Doyle, perhaps paradoxically a spiritualist despite his famous creation's obsessive rationalism. Conan Doyle visited Australia in 1920 and was at the grand final that year: One of my first afternoons in Melbourne was spent in seeing the final tie of the Victorian football cup. I have played both Rugby and Soccer, and I have seen the American game at its best, but I consider the Victorian system has some points which make it the best of all—certainly from the spectacular point of view. There is no off-side, and you get a free kick if you catch the ball. Otherwise you can run as in ordinary Rugby, though there is a law about bouncing the ball as you run, which might, as it seemed to me, be cut out without harming the game. This bouncing rule was put in by Mr Harrison who drew up the original rules, for the chivalrous reason that he was himself the fastest runner in the Colony, and he did not wish to give himself any advantage. There is not so much man-handling in the Victorian game, and to that extent it is less dramatic, but it is extraordinarily open and fast, with none of the packed scrums which become so wearisome, ad with linesmen who throw in the ball the instant it goes out. There were several points in which the players seemed better than our best—one was the accurate passing by low drop kicking, very much quicker and faster than a pass by hand. Another was the great accuracy of the place kicking and of the screw kicking when a runner would kick at right angles to his course. There were four long quarters, and yet the men were in such condition that they were going hard at the end. They are all, I understand, semi-professionals. Altogether it was a very fine display, and the crowd was much excited. It was suggestive that the instant the last whistle blew a troop of mounted police cantered over the ground and escorted the referees to the safety of the pavilion. (Arthur Conan Doyle: The Wanderings of a Spiritualist, Chapter 4) This is an expanded version of Conan Doyle’s thoughts given in an interview with The Herald at the time, which can be found at http://australianfootball.com/articles/view/%27The+best+game%27+says+Conan+Doyle/1080 While some things change, some stay the same. The rapid entry of mounted police at the end of the game might have amused/bemused Conan Doyle, but since it was a Richmond-Collingwood game it seems through local eyes entirely normal. But the spirit of Harrison’s ‘equalisation policy’ might productively be revived by the AFL, whose own view of equalisation is hardly as ‘sporting’ (there’s a lost word nowadays) ... although perhaps Conan Doyle's suggestion might help bust the game open again (though not yet ... not until we've got some runners).

I agree with this. Drawing the conclusion that he doesn't care on the basis of his outward appearances is ridiculous - nothing in that regard is different to how he was at Sydney. At Sydney he didn't get emotional often, he was calm, he deflected questions, he avoided tough questions. That's just wrong IMO. Plenty of players are drafted into AFL clubs because they display athletic qualities and their football skills are secondary. Fitzpatrick, Spencer, Bail and M Jones are all players who were drafted primarily because of their work ethic, fitness, mobility, tank, and that's just Melbourne. Every club has done it over the years. Agree with this too. As always on Demonland, things are either black or white, people cannot see in between. Just as it's simplistic to blame everything on Roos and suggest he's the entire source of the problem, it's also simplistic to think the entire blame is on the players and Roos is completely infallible. The truth must surely lie in between. Roos isn't coaching well on match day, and he's also failing to develop the players into a team that can play the gameplan consistently. Whether it's because the gameplan is a bad one or whether it's actually a good one but he can't get the players to play it consistently, I'm not sure. I tend to believe the gameplan is fine and the issue is that the players and coaches have not taken us to the point where we can execute it satisfactorily every week. I think the way we performed against GC, Richmond, WB, Geelong, as well as against Collingwood, the first half against GWS and Port, suggests to me that the plan, when it works, displays high quality football from which we are capable of scoring well, and developing strong leads (26 points up against Adelaide in 20 minutes, 33 points up on GWS in a half, 24 points up on Port in under a half, piling on 5 goals in about 10 minutes, twice, against Collingwood). We can score 100+ points while smashing sides in the CPs and clearances (the Richmond and WB games showed that). The problem, IMO, is that the players aren't capable of doing it for four quarters weekly, and the resultant lapses are appallingly bad. That's the players' fault and the coaches' fault together, not just one or the other.

I have recently returned from a two year sting working overseas (Ethiopia). I returned to Australia a week ago, went to the Brisbane game on Sunday, then watched today's game against the Saints on TV. Prior to this I the last game I saw live was in July last year against the Cats at the MCG, and before that it was the game against GWS in 2013 when we somehow kicked 12 goals in the last quarter...plus I have watched a couple of game replays where available on YouTube (AFL website replays weren't available in Ethiopia). Here are a couple of musings based on two years with very limited opportunity to see my beloved Demons play live: Firstly, Demonland is a godsend when you are overseas. I can't thank the administrators enough for their efforts to keep the site functioning and for the insights provided by some posters, particularly those with insider knowledge and who provide such great training reports during the offseason (the most exciting time for us poor MFC supporters!). For all its faults and failings, the community of supporters on Demonland helps to keep those of us overseas in the loop and to make sure we still feel part of the club in spite of the distance. The regular reporting by Football journalists just doesn't cut it in this regards. Secondly, what happened to the excitement of our beloved game? After Garlett snapped that goal to make it 5 for the Dees in the first quarter against the Lions I was jumping out of my seat at the G and genuinely excited about the next 3 quarters...but by time the final siren rang I couldn't even sing the song after almost dying of frustration. Yes, we won, and yes both teams are high stoppage teams, but seriously if I can't get excited about seeing my team win for the first time in over 2 years then something is definitely wrong with the state of the game. Thirdly, after two years I would definitely have expected greater improvement. Sure it's been less than two seasons under Roos, but surely we should be able to address our consistency issues by now. It's hard to understand how teams like St Kilda and the Doggies who were contesting Grand Finals and Prelims in the late 2000s have fallen and risen above us. We still seem to be paying for the past mistake of moving on senior players before their time, which has robbed our club of experience that our younger brigade can learn from (both the Saints and Dogs have older/senior players as captains). Moreover, although our recruiting of recent years has been pretty spot on (both national draft and trades) I suspect the high turnover of players is affecting the ability of the team to gel together. Not to mention that many of the players have had to learn 3+ different game plans over 5 years or so. Fourthly, I think we can finally say we have a good group of younger players who can form the nucleus of a competitive football team. Guys like Brayshaw, Hogan, Viney, Salem, and McDonald have all show they have what it takes to become elite (or close to it) players, and more importantly, appear to possess the right attitude. In spite of some recent woeful performances, we should all take some consolation in what these younger guys have showed to date. They just need time to develop and hopefully the addition of some A grade talent and greater improvement from guys already on the list. Lastly, I really feel for those of you who have been watching the games week in and week out the past two years. Having been out of the country I have at least not had to deal with any other AFL supporters on a daily/weekly basis, which means my suffering is largely self-inflicted from my obsession with reading Demonland and consuming all and every article I can find online. As such, I can understand why many of you would be jumping off the band-wagon (or off the nearest cliff) after today's dismal performance. And I honestly don't blame you one bit. If you are not enjoying the footy, then you should find something else to do on your precious weekends. And no-one should be berated for it. But we shouldn't lose hope just yet, in reality the team is still only 1.74 years into yet another rebuild. And the team has show enough glimpses this year that they can play a relatively attractive style of football that looks like the type that can hold up in finals when all cylinders are firing. The question is, will any fans be left by the time we play finals again?

Thanks to the drafting of Morton, Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, Maric, Strauss, Tapscott, Cook during previous administrations we have no talent in the 23 years plus age bracket. Of those draft picks you would expect , possibly 2 to be A grader's, then 3 others to be holding down senior positions within the team., That's 5 solid players we simply don't have and that more than anything is the reason we are [censored]. Blaming game style or Roos is just plain wrong. You add 1 or 2 A graders and 3 or 4 competent others and we are playing finals. Simple as that.

For once we have a plan in place and there is clear, steady improvement. Not as rapid as we'd all like, but there is obvious improvement. We are coming from further back than any side ever has. We finally have a nucleus of good, young players who'll mature together and pull the club upwards with them. We'll be paying for past mistakes for at least a couple more years and we just have to weather it.

Why not? King comes in and does nothing then he's as good as Dawes, King comes in and does something then he's better than Dawes.

Agree. Average players in good sides look good, average players in bad sides look exactly what they look like.... average.

If he is getting games instead of Toumpas then it says a lot more about Toumpas than Cross

That's essentially it in a nutshell. More patience is required at the moment, which is a big ask after so long in the shite. The right people are in place.

If you heard Roos on AFL360 this wee there was a lot of 'we' in his talking which is something I am hearing more and more. There was no reference to the players mental scarring but the CLUB as a whole: supporters, admin, staff, etc. He knows that EVERYONE has gone through a rough stint and you cannot change that overnight. Too much false hope has been given over the last ten years but I have seen significant change off-field which will (and it will) transfer on field.

Adam, I've seen Jones ignore team rules, run around getting cheap kicks and regularly butcher his possessions. He doesn't do a lot of off-the-ball team stuff. Do you ever, ever see him instructing players, consoling players, directing? I see it very rarely. He is good without being very good. He struggles to lead by example and he struggles to lead through voice/communication. But he is the best we've got I think. He shows moments of good leadership. Moments. But what do we do? Song, he is not "the problem", but rather an example of one element of the problem - a dearth of genuinely talented players with leadership skills. We actually have none.

Harley Bennell can smash the lines.

I'm not convinced that the result on Sunday means that we've necessarily slipped behind St. Kilda or that they are going to be ahead of us as a club in two years. Judging by the Saints' best players from the game:- I'll back us against them any day of the week in 2017.

I urge people to read an article by Dallas Scott (an aboriginal blogger - The Black Steam Train) on this issue. Might give you a different perspective. http://theblacksteamtrain.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/adam-goodes-ensuring-racism-as-sport.html

A different perspective to be sure but the correct one? Maybe not.

As frustrating as it is losing twice to StKilda we've improved. Maybe we will win six games. Should have been 8-9. The wheat is still being sorted from the chaff.

Reducing stoppages isn't so hard. 1st. Pay the deliberate out of bounds. Most games we are lucky if we see 1 in 5 of these paid. Enforcing this rule, will lead to a lot less out of bounds. 2nd. Ball up quickly, none of this nominate a ruckman, clear a path BS, it just slows the game down, letting more players get to a stoppage and normally leads to more stoppages as no clearance is made. 3rd. Stop blowing the whistle when there is a chance of an advantage, wait a few seconds, look if there is an advantage or not, if there is, let play go, if there isn't, blow the whistle and pay the free. None of these require a rule change as such and would make the game a lot more free flowing. It's not rocket science, but unfortunately the obvious is often too hard for the intellects at the AFL.

I'm intrigued by this comment, Nash. Please elaborate. What's changed? Personally, I'd be delisting/trading/letting FA take its course with Jamar, McKenzie, Terlich, Bail, Matt Jones, Garland and Howe. I'd consider dropping Harmes back to the rookie list, but I guess I'd wait until the end of the season to see what else he can deliver. I'd also put the feelers out for Toumpas in terms of a trade. I wouldn't be adversed to losing Riley either. I prefer Grimes gone, but given he's contracted, he's safe for a year and will provide depth. For me though, it's really about getting rid of as many of those players who 1) don't know how to win and 2) continue to make the same errors over and over again. Grimes and Garland are in that category, but so is Nathan Jones. He obviously stays, but he desperately needs support in the leadership stakes and in the midfield. Someone like Prestia would fit the bill nicely, despite being younger. He is the VC at the Suns afterall.

Maybe it's a phase thing. Look at the number of sub 60 point scores each week. Many feature us. One day cricket had a few phases 250 in the 70s was good 190 in the 80s and 90s was defendable. Then those two Sri Lankan openers blew it apart helping themselves to century partnerships off 10 overs. Give me 70s footy - kicking to packs, Phil Baker and Peter Knights flying one on one. Losing 23 goal Grand finals, forwards kicking bags and the ton every season.

don't think it will work munga. winning the 4 points will take precedence by a country mile anyway i don't see reducing the interchange limits as a negative rule. after all it is not so long ago that we didn't have an interchange firstly it was interchange with 2 players then 3 players then it escalated again to 4 players until we created this current mess and changed the game for the worst i don't see winding it back as a negative some form of zoning would be a mess and difficult/controversial to manage last touch out of bounds free kicks would stir up a hornet's nest and not be well received by the fans i wouldn't be averse to marks being increased from 15m to 20m. some marks paid are ridiculously short i would only look at backward kicking marks being play on (in certain parts of the field) as a very much last resort

I was disappointed with the rub of the green on Sunday but I also do not worry about the umpiring, nothing you can do and usually supporters see it in a one eyed way. However the second half of that bolded sentence is confirmed by an article in the Herald sun today about Sunday's umpiring in our game. The average holding the ball decisions for each club before Rd 17 was 3.7. We had TWELVE paid against us in that game. Even Wayne Campbell agreed that he was shocked at the changed interpretation over the weekend. Clearly the Demons were probably the worst affected club. We played poorly, but those decisions really rubbed salt into our wounds.

Paul Roo's is feeling the grim dark oppressive doom that comes with being the coach (or Supporter) of the MFC. For someone who was at Fitzroy just prior to their "merger" with Brissie to say he's never been at a club that feels the pain of losing more than Melbourne, then he's finally got it... We are the twitchy gunshy wretch in the corner, expecting to get beaten up every week, dreaming and clinging to fleeing moments of success And when we inevitably lose, we turn down the lights and sway to Nick Cave and weep prayers to the football Gods to give us a sign. Any sign... Roo's foolishly thought he was the sign, and now he finds himself, like us, on his knees praying for one.... Welcome to the MFC Paul, you're finally one of us.

The reason I wanted Mr. Roos was that he had built in credibility. We knew that it was going to take some time to fix the list and we needed someone who would not have their ability to coach questioned in the first couple of years. Irrspecitive of his coaching ability that has IMO been achieved. Is he still a good coach? To be honest I don't know and I don't think anyone here does either. We seem to have improved the list a bit but it still has someway to go. He will step away at the end of next year and if all that has been achieved is that the list has been repaired I will be happy with him. He will in my view have achieved what I hoped for.

We also lack talent in the all important 23 - 27 year old age group. That is not Roos' fault

Considering that you can't spell Dunn's name properly, have confused Nathan with Matt, and refuse to notice Watts' uptick in form - it's best if you avoid threads like this one...

Regardless of who you bring in and personell etc The big ins need to be 2 way running 100% effort back yourself 2nd efforts tackling pressure Out: waiting for a team mate to do it not taking the 1st option second guessing yourself lack of run

I don't know why Mahoney keeps giving long deals to fringe players like Terlich, Matt Jones and Barry. They should get one year max at the end of the season once the list has been worked out. If they walk to another club, they walk.

I think most supporters agree that Roos was the right man to galvanise the club at the time. But some, like Scoop, sheet home nearly all of the blame to the players. Perhaps they think he's got the most out of the group and that they're performing at the level they should be - at prerequisite levels. I can't agree. I believe they're performing below expectations and that the game-plan is either too complicated, or deficient. In the preseason there was evidence they were going to use the corridor more and focus on faster ball movement. Clearly, this was short lived. Either the players can't follow instruction or the message isn't getting through. Ultimately, this falls at the feet of the coach. The boys from Champion Data show that Melbourne start their attacks from near the last line of defence. Simon Goodwin acknowledged this a few weeks ago in a prematch interview and stated we wanted to start attacks from near the middle of the ground. It's not happening. I acknowledge we have talent deficiencies, who doesn't, but I also see a club like the Dogs, who sacked their coach and CEO, had their captain walk out, and lost their best mid with a knee. Are their talent levels so superior to ours, or do they have an easier to understand and implement game-plan ? The answer seems obvious to me. Roos may not want to coach like Beveridge, I get that, but I also remember him in year 1 stating that by round 6 supporters should start seeing what type of footy we were going to play. Yeah, I see it and it's unedifying. Roos would rightly accept the accolades if we were winning. Conversely, it's a nonsense to absolve him of criticism when nearly 2 years in we're regularly seeing performances like the weekend.

Give us a break, Ron. We're all in a glass case of emotion!

With you 110% RB. Its easy for some on this thread to critcise Roos on 360. But 360 it is a 2 edged sword for him. On the one hand he gives us and our sponsors much needed exposure and gives supporters a bit more insight into the club. The flip side is he must dread going on week in and week out to explain the inexplicable - that his team were pathetic. Again! He can't say they are pathetic, that they are dumb ie lack footy IQ (except Watts), that the leaders go missing etc When referring to 'the past' he is saying the same stuff posters say on DL: the poor drafting, the dysfunctional club, lack of leadership etc I don't get why posters are happy to write this themselves but object to the coach saying it. What do those posters want - A public whipping followed by a public hanging! An important part of Roos job is to give Goodwin breathing space. Imagine if he handed over to Goodwin at the end of the year (as some want) and we continue playing like crap. It would be a Neeld like mauling frenzy by the media. No thank you!

Roos has greatly assisted in transforming this club for the better. His legacy will live on for a long time. This thread's ridiculous.

Finally. I just don't get the hate for Michie. He has played 5 games, 3 as sub and been dropped the next week. He has not been given much of a go. And yet people on here expect miracles from a player who has played 10.5 part games. Vanders was poo this week but I have read he "had a virus" or he had a"migraine". JKH is seen as a future star but (IN MY OPINION) he has done very little since his 3 goals in the nab cup against Richmond last year. On the weekend Roos' son got as much as JKH at Casey and he was the 23rd man. Stretch and Brayshaw are just going at the moment and are contributing very little. They both have more game experience than Michie. Interesting stat from the weekend Michie got more possessions in the last qtr than anyone else on the ground. Give the poor bloke a break and play him a few games in a row.

Watching the game yesterday and many others I had the distinct impression many of the midfield turnovers were caused by a lack of options up forward. Roos seems to prefer allowing the opposition to have a spare man in defence (what the football specialist commentators in the media infuriatingly insist on calling a +1). Whether that's caused by Roos wanting an extra in our own defence or by the opposition choosing to create the extra I can't discern, but the net effect is an inability for our players running through the midfield to find an open forward. Rather than take a chance, they then fiddle about waiting for an opening and eventually lose the ball due to poor skills and an inability to absorb pressure.

Michie MUST be given at least TWO FULL games to show his worth. He has been badly treated this season. In and out like revolving doors.

We are unwatchable. It's not the defensive focus or the rolling scrums, it's the fact that you just know with every movement forward, we will torch the entry in to 50 and lose it. It's just so bloody frustrating. Stretch, vanders, Brayshaw and Harmes - these young blokes all add something at their best and have really bright futures, but there are too many of them in our side and when they all fail at once, it leaves too much for too few. It's not their fault, it's just how it is. I expect to see Matt Jones, Bail et al reappear and finish the season out shortly. It sucks, but that's why they're on the list - to take punishment instead of the valuable youth. I don't know why the selectors bother picking Michie. I'm not particularly a fan, but he is being set up to fail, or so it appears from my bean bag. Bernie, Jones, Cross, Dunn (if I'm generous). Thank God for these guys. Carrying the side on their backs at present. At least it's not poor old Jones on his own now. I don't forecast a bleak future based on my most recent memory like many, I've seen plenty to remain optimistic this year. The risk for me is that I die of boredom waiting.

We have improved a lot, in a lot of areas both on and off field, sadly that will be an unpopular opinion.