Leaderboard

Dear Demonland, I am not a regular poster but I have been religiously reading Demonland for several years now. However, after watching (most of) the match against Essendon I’ve decided it is time to bid farewell to Demonland and take a break from watching football indefinitely. I have lost the enjoyment of following the game and club I have loved for the last 27 odd years. The performance of our players against a club I despise so much (ever since their dirty tactics against our young players in the 2000 grand final) was nothing short of soul destroying. Of course there have been worse defeats than that of late, but after all the positivity around the club during the pre-season it is so deflating and incomprehensible to see the team play with so little spirit and coherency. But that’s not the only reason. The state of the game and the management of the league has becoming a complete farce with the constant rule changes, draft manipulations, and unequal fixturing, not to mention the appallingly inconsistent decision-making of the AFL governing body. Watching clubs like Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney consistently being able to top up their lists without dropping from contention is a complete farce and against the spirit of the game as far as I am concerned. But before I sign off I wanted to say a big thank you to all those that contribute to this forum. I have greatly enjoyed the incredible amount of passion and insightful input provided by the majority of posters. As someone who has been living overseas the last few years with limited opportunities to see the Dees play on the hallowed turf of the MCG I have found the forum to be a great resource. Particularly, the training reports which help keep the fires burning during the off season. I hope you all continue to keep the passion going and I hope the club will (eventually) turn things around and become a finals team once again. Ascobar P.S. Shout outs to my favourite posters in Whispering Jack, Steve the Man, and Saty plus all the moderators and administrators for keeping the forum afloat.

It seems the post match discussion thread is again full of the usual over-the-top comments regarding yesterday's loss so I thought I'd start a thread for those who wish to share some views on some of the deep-seeded issues that are obviously still with this club given yesterday's debacle. Couple of things to start. When you're up against a really proud side with an enormous supporter base who are hosting a 'stand by us' game at the MCG, it would be fairly obvious that as an opposition side, starting well and taking the crowd out of the game as early as possible would almost be dot-point numero one on the whiteboard... What happened? Here are two significant moments that contributed to the essendon snowball that quickly gathered speed pretty early on yesterday: 1: From as early as I can remember, they were running harder, tackling harder and executing their skills to a level above us. Why? 2: Tom McDonald's turnover directly resulting in Essendon's first goal. Crowd went up a gear and so did their side. After 10 minutes and even after the first goal for us, it was clear that they had us covered everywhere except at clearances and eventually that was the story of the entire afternoon. But before I go on to some more pressing issues I have about yesterday, I would like to say that these two points were the catalyst for Essendon to really believe that they were in with a chance. The crowd and their players lifted enormously. As for point 1, I refuse to believe that this is a one off. Do we need reminding of the Nab challenge game against the Bulldogs? Was it not eerily similar early on? The young dogs side ran hard in numbers on the outside, were tackling more ferociously and were generally more efficient with the ball than us in that game and similarly to Essendon, had around 15 of their starting 22 players out. We almost had a full-strength side in. I'm not sure about anyone else, but that game for me was without doubt cause for concern and I made a point of it. What the dogs game and now yesterday has proved is the following: From our backline through to our midfield, we severely lack running power and speed, football smarts and disposal skills. It's alarming and enormously concerning. We're a really one-dimensional midfield. Almost all of our midfielders are contested ball winning players, most of them are one-paced and nearly none of them are damaging by foot. Also alarming. I completely understand that Roos and co wanted competitors but I recall saying a year or so ago that if we keep neglecting equally important attributes such as running power and kicking skills, we're going to stall. Evolutionarily speaking, has the Hawthorn model been completely forgotten? Contested ball winning isn't any more important than being efficient by foot nor being able to run hard both ways. All attributes are equally important and as a team there must be an equal balance if you're expecting to be a quality side which is why Hawthorn have been so dominant. The balance of attributes across their midfield is incredible and now the dogs are on the same path. Roos is still thinking Sydney 2005. Which brings me to my next point: Paul Roos: I'm not sure about the rest of you, but I strongly believe he is past match day coaching. As posters have rightly noted, he was outmaneuvered yesterday. Embarrassingly so. Following on from my views about the way we've been drafting and recruiting, it's clear he is stuck in the 'Sydney of 2005' model of playing the game. His post-game pressers rarely shed light on anything. I think he's been huge for the club in regards to steering the ship, implementing elite behaviours within the club and assembling a great development coaching team but the sooner Goodwin takes over on match day, the better. Backline: Would love to know whether this is Roos or Rawlings idea, but this rotating of backmen on opposition players is simply a joke. I heard McDonald talk about it during the week. When asked if he was looking forward to getting redemption on Daniher, he answered something like 'the way we're playing defence this year is a bit different, it's not as much an individual battle'. McDonald has played his best games for this club when assigned a single opponent. Garland has played his best for the club when assigned a single opponent. Dunn has played his best when assigned a single opponent. What the [censored] is going on? Yesterday, Daniher took marks against Jones, Jetta, Garland and McDonald. There is absolutely zero organisation in our defensive group at present and it's contributing to poor performances. McDonald and Garland again played with an incredible amount of inconsistency. Jesus I hate to say it again, but will Garland contribute anything positive to the team again? Kicking, body language, aggression, run, leadership, anything? I'm becoming increasingly confused about his role at our club. He has no spark! Why we're trying to emulate Hawthorn's back six when we simply don't have the cattle I have NFI. If we want to improve our backline in a way that is going to be relevant for successful football next year we'll need to offload Dunn, bring in Hurley and another defender who can break lines and use the ball who can provide what Garland should be providing. Forwardline: It will continue to suffer if the quality of the disposal going inside 50 remains the same. Kicking long to the disadvantage of Hogan and two opposition defenders. It simply comes back to my point about the types of players we have on our list and what their strengths are. I can deal with it from time to time as every supporter can. But game after game we're seeing it. It's deep-rooted. We have a long way to go. We're still broken in certain areas of the ground and the only way we'll see genuine improvement is through further list changes that contribute to a more 'balanced' team. We are missing far too many important attributes all over the ground.

Me too, special. At 32 I'm just not sure I have the years left.

Trengove's kicking was very good. His fitness surprised me. If I didn't know his history I'd say he looked fit enough to pay next week. Clearly he won't, but he's not far away. I could see him coming in very soon. I did see him sprint in the third close to the boundary on the member's side and his speed was fine. He certainly didn't look "slow". It was markedly different to when he looked embarrassingly slow a couple of years back.

God that was hard to read. Only because I completely get where you're coming from

"Tom Dyson is terribly at footballing..." You can't make that stuff up.

We killed Watts, lets also kill this kid because of a poor game by the club. We have moved on from this type of over reaction thankfully. Let him find his feet and if he earns a game then play him.

I have no idea if screenshots work on this forum.... but a lot of people are talking about Garland and I saw several of these moments from him: Dees up by 2 points in the last. 5 minutes gone so players should still have legs. TMac attacks from the front and fails, spoil allows the ball past. Garland is standing in front flat-footed. Bugg runs straight past Garland to make the tackle, preventing an open goal and is paid a free for Ess holding the ball. TMac instantly runs forward to create an option. Garland stands next to Bugg. Bugg switches to Dom who is the only player apart from TMac running. Dom has nowhere to kick so goes long to Gawn, beaten in a 2-1 and the ball comes back, Garland two steps behind. Personally, I see TMac attacking well. Bugg covers well. Dom creates well. If Garland had made an option, the rebound down the wing would've been fast and aggressive. Switching to Dom locked it in.

I think the discussion on what went wrong yesterday is largely on the wrong track. We have some very good players but yesterday most of them didn't play well. Vince, Jones, Kennedy, Tyson and if you're to believe Roosy Lumumba probably got a pass mark. So what went wrong? Why would 17 or so players play so far below their best and all do it on the one day? I watched yesterday as Essendon beat us to the ball and beat us in the spread. Countless times you'd see them with the ball on one side of the ground and from a switch you'd see a line of them lining up to take the ball along the fat side. We were zoning down the thin sided nowhere to be . And it happened all day. You could call it well before it happened. Many here are suggesting that Roos' game plan is inadequate and we need to go back to Goodwin's plan. Frankly I think it's preposterous to suggest that Roos has reverted to his game plan. The game plan hasn't changed from preseason but our ability to implement it has. Or perhaps we just don't understand it, perhaps we can't do it or perhaps it's no good. Or perhaps the messenger has changed and that has an impact. I suggested during preseason that the messanger shouldn't change and got not one dot of support but interestingly now many are suggesting it should. Frankly I'm not even sure that's the problem and unless you are inside the club it's not possible to know. But it should be looked at. You'd also need to look at training. To suggest our players looked tired was correct but why would that be so? Bar Brayshaw I think all had a week off before the first game. How could they be tired? Did the FD stuff up their training before the first game and then again midweek so they were spent on Saturday before they started. What did the coaching staff do to prepare them for the match? All those things come into it. Why does Roos say we focused on fitness and then go and play AVB who hadn't trained fully until the last session before the GWS match after being injured in the NAB Footscray match? How was he fitter than others? How does Grimes not get a look in but Lumumba does when Grimes is fit and frankly makes far less mistakes than H and is twice as brave. Hogan and Watts were disappointing but I suspect Watts was hampered by his cork from last week and Hogan has an ankle that stopped him running hard. He was in the rooms for sometime after the quarter time break and was probably getting a jab. The trouble is we can't answer most of these questions so it's easier to blame the players because they are the ones we can see. When we played GWS we had a handful of players that didn't perform, that's pretty normal in any team. Yesterday we had about 17. Not only that we didn't seem to know what to do or how to play. We've stopped switching, we've stopped running and we lack confidence. How does that happen after a full preseason and a successful series of games to date. I don't know but the buck stops with Roos and he needs to find the answers. Mike Sheehan stepped in for Robbo on 360 last year and when talking to Roos asked why our starts were so poor and the players so unprepared to "go" from the bounce. Roos sat silent for about 5 seconds with no answer until Buckley got him out of a hole. He hasn't found the answer over the off season. I think it's possible Jackson and Mahoney have a problem. We live in interesting times.

This thread assumes Roos was in charge of the box yesterday. Maybe he said to Goodwin - go for it today, it is all yours. Not so silly, everyone expecting a win. If Roos did give it over to Goodwin he and Macca would give input but let Goodwin could make the final call on tactics. In the absence of knowing how the box was set up calling for anyone to step aside is premature. My view is the coaching box as a whole failed badly. They need to sort themselves out, fast.

Btw, Every time the players are asked, "You have the chance to win two games in a row, is this big for you and the club", I cringe at the response. The answer is always, "absolutely, we haven't done it during my time here". It's akin to Queen's Birthday being labelled "our Grand Final". If I hear that again I'll spew. Try this response... Every game is important and every game delivers 4 points, whether it's two wins in a row or 10. We expect to win every game and treat each on their merits. We certainly don't reach for the calculator in the week leading up to each game and we'll let others analyse the record books.

You are happy with a bloke who drops marks and runs around like a headless chook and then with every single kick or handball, turns the ball over. Well I am not. Lumumba is a liability to us and was all last year and yet Grimes, who granted can do a poor disposal, but is hard and fit, is overlooked.

My squeeze has stuck by me pretty well.

I think just when we were on the threshold of being at least an ok side again the change in interchange numbers has altered the game. Roosy is old school defensive and thats not a good look in 2016. theres now 2 things that have happened 1. the players look a little too big and not aerobic enough and 2. the game plan looks inadequate....again. Freo are suffering also. Lyon and Roosy were the masters of defense. I just had that sickening feeling that it wasnt just a "bad loss" but a sign we were on the wrong side of history. It wasnt a massive loss points wise but my footy depression meter has gone off the scales.

Boo Hoo Boo fookin Hoo, you lot. Now, don't get me wrong - I was there yesterday and very frustrated, especially because Essendon irritate the [censored] out of me with their arrogance and self-righteousness. Yuck. I left frustrated and annoyed that we were beaten in all aspects of the game, especially since I was also at last week's game and saw the pride and spirit that forced the Demons across the line. What I don't get is all this rushing about with skirts over heads, crying about this being the darkest day in Melbourne's history, how this is it! Tearing memberships up, never coming back to the G, had it with Melbourne etc etc etc. Now, I've not been following the Dees as long as the vast majority of you - I came to Oz at the end of 2005 and have been a die-hard Demon ever since. That's one year of finals in 10 years of football - surely I'm statistically better placed to call it a day than most people ?. I won't though, because despite the performance yesterday, I firmly believe that we have the nucleus of a great side. However, in the build up, we are always going to have these days, just like we are going to have the Geelong victories and pull Richmond and Collingwood's pants down. Days like Saturday will get fewer and fewer over the next few years. I find it laughable that on these forums last weekend, we were bragging about our new young guns and this week, we are hanging them out to dry. Despite some putrid performances yesterday, I saw Jack Watts hit up Hogan with an inch perfect pass from the wing and also get right into the grill of some Bombers players; saw Angus Brayshaw bang one through off one step from outside 50; saw BenKen run all day, saw Clayton Oliver tough at the ball and with clean hands; saw Jeff Garlett run half the pitch to smack the ball right amongst the Bombers fans. I'm proud to be a Melbourne supporter, proud to be part of the vociferous 30k that lifted the roof of the G last Saturday. The dark days are gone now: we are heading the right way, but we are going to get these sort of inglorious days along the way. Onwards and upwards, I say.

You're both lucky there's not a bin for shite grammar and poor sentence construction.

Normally I would agree with your sentiments although not with your logic or dismissive attitude to disgruntled and disillusioned Demon supporters. But in the case of Ascobar your comments are a little unwarranted. As others have pointed out one the main things he emphasized in his post was to praise the passion and insight of many of the posters on Demonland. I concur with his comments and his choice of favorite posters although there are a few others whose dedication and insights make Demonland worth reading. And he also raises legitimate concerns about the way Australian football has recently developed. I share many of these concerns and suggest that all Melbourne supporters should at least be aware of the way the administration of the game is trending. That is, in my opinion, the development of a two tiered or defacto relegation system and Melbourne gets the short straw in this situation. However, the main reason I wish to respond to your and other similar comments is more in the hope that you may have some understanding of the Ascobar's situation which I completely relate to. In my case I have been a member of the MFC for about 38 years. When I lived in Melbourne I would attend most of their games. In 1992 I moved interstate but still watched most games on TV and managed to get to a few games a year as well as holding positions in the local Demons supporter group. So I really don't think my past loyalty and devotion to the club can be questioned. Like Ascobar, I moved overseas last year and I can relate to his present outlook. I don't have the opportunity to watch Melbourne play live and of course the tyranny of distance precludes me from attending games. I did subscribe to the AFL live webcast last year but found it useless and a complete waste of money as I couldn't get one single game live. The website itself is so arcane that I found it impossible to contact the AFL to rectify the situation. So once bitten twice shy and this year I rely on snippets from the free to air AFL website, the Fairfax Press the club and of course Demonland for my fix. But I am living in a country which neither knows or cares very much about Australian football much less the Melbourne Football Club. Interaction with other supporters is limited to emails. Under these circumstances it becomes difficult to accurately discern the reality of the teams's situation from the wild overoptimism during the preseason So it is almost inevitable that when you are so isolated that your enthusiasm starts to wane, especially after yesterday's debacle . So I think that Ascobar's considered post was worthy of a more balanced response than "Careful not to knock the bong over on your way out the door." and "Real fans stick fat"

I think Weideman will crack it for 5-7 games this year but wouldn't put him in yet. Trengove and Petracca are at least 3 games away. Roos won't be putting underdone players in anytime soon after Brayshaw's game yesterday.

... The one thing that was a constant of the great Geelong sides were a knowledge of where their team mates would be and a belief that their team mates would win the footy. Occasionally they got hurt on the counter, but their belief in the game plan working was so strong that they would play bold attacking footy at all costs. This is what we need to do. We've got a strong defensive mind-set now established by Roos. Now we need to take this discipline and combine it with bold, running play. I'm not saying we're at Geelong's level, but I think there's an apt comparison in there somewhere. Where we have to get to is consistently exhibiting solid team structures and a willingness to take the game on at all costs. When we get to this step, with good coaching, the next steps will naturally follow. My concern is though that we are struggling to believe at the moment and this is resulting in a lack of work rate that is being hindered by perhaps poor communication from the coaching group. These are good points, and agree with the little that I know about the Roos & Goodwin dynamic. It's not that the players "like" Goodwin and "don't like" Roos. They have enormous respect for Roos, and appreciation for the much improved defensive aspects of his game plan that he has brought. But there is some frustration that when things aren't going well and changes are needed, Roos won't change it up. Those who say there's not much difference between Roos's & Goodwin's game plans are right, in a way. The game plan is basically Roos's, and Goodwin has only made a couple of tweaks to it. But those tweaks are absolutely crucial. I do know that the going forward by low firm passes that we saw in the NAB Challenge is pure Goodwin, and bombing high to Hogan isn't. I don't know whether going forward in that way is also Roos's intention - it may be that by bombing it to Hogan, the players were actually disobeying Roos's orders to do it Goodwin's way. But the fact that they did it for the whole match, although it was obviously not working because Woosha had Hogan well & truly covered, makes me think that it was actually Roos's orders to "get it in to Hogan as quickly as you can" (as well as the clear resemblance to the Swans c.2005-2009) And I think - but I don't know - that the other Goodwin "tweak" is the forward press, only because it has been very apparent in games where Goodwin has had control (NAB Challenge) and has not been apparent in games where Roos has been in control. Happy to admit I may be wrong, but what makes me think it's Goodwin and not Roos is that to play the forward press, we have to accept that we're going to leak some goals when the other team gets out the back, but that overall it has more benefits than costs. And to me it just doesn't seem Roos to accept a strategy that involves us leaking some pretty bad goals. So AF, I agree with you totally about the Geelong comparison - a critical part of an essentially defensive game plan is to be able to hurt them on the rebound. If you don't have an effective attacking strategy, in 2016 you can be as good defensively as you possibly can be, but you're going to be eventually overcome, because good sides will realise that you can't hurt them on the rebound, so they'll exploit that and just wait for you to bomb it down the line to a contest (sound familiar?) and kill you on the turnover. Goodwin isn't going to throw Roos's game plan away - in fact, Goodwin's game plan is probably at least 2/3 Roos's game plan (remember Allan Jeans' thing about footy being pretty simple - either we've got the ball, they've got the ball or it's in dispute?). But his tweaks are absolutely vital, and make it more effective defensively as well as offensively. And for that matter, it's possible that Goodwin by himself couldn't have put together as good a defensive game plan as Roos has - he owes a huge amount to Roos. Yesterday, the Essendon brains trust had a plan to tie us up in knots - they sat on Viney, our new prime mover; they had loose men in dangerous positions and banked on Roos not covering them, which he didn't; they knew we had no physical match-up for Daniher, unless we were prepared to sacrifice TMac's attacking game to stand him, which they knew Roos wouldn't do; they knew Gawn would win loads of taps but worked out how to nullify them, and banked on Roos not changing the stoppage strategy, which he didn't; and they anticipated the vast majority of our i50 entries being bombs to Hogan and double-teamed him, banking on Roos not changing it and he didn't. WE ARE ALWAYS VULNERABLE TO THIS AND NEED TO PLAN FOR WHAT TO CHANGE WHEN THIS HAPPENS, and this ALWAYS happens when we are "The Hunted" and not "The Hunter". It's like a fish being caught in a net - the harder the fish struggles and makes an effort, the tighter the net becomes. The players find that the harder they try to do the same thing, the harder it becomes. This is when something needs to change. But in the games where he's had control, it seems that Roos doesn't do changing things in the middle of a game - he seems to prefer to set a strategy at the beginning of a game that he thinks is going to prevail, and expects it to prevail no matter what the other coaches do. And it's this refusal to change when the other coach has us "in the net" that leads to frustration - by which I mean not angry, but feeling that there's a way to fix the problem that's not being used. Now I'm a huge admirer of Roos & what he's done for MFC - his skills in being able (with PJ) to unite a fractured organisation, his leadership, his inspiration, his club-building and team-building, his recruiting strategy (of senior coaching staff as well as of players) have been absolutely fantastic and exactly what we needed. But he is not as outstanding at match-day coaching as all these other things (his background in coaching is actually quite shallow), and he has everything to gain & nothing to lose by letting Goodwin (and Craig Jennings, who I've heard is a great pick up) have more match-day responsibility. Roos is like the best editor in the business who wants to have the front page article as well - we need him to be a great editor, there's someone else who can be the great journo. Sorry for the rant. But I have fears that this situation may set us back a few times this year.

In: Goodwin Out: Roos Once a coach moves from 'we' to 'they' aka the last press conference, there's a question around their own buy in to the cause....imo The next step for Roosy is to talk in the third person. 'Paul is not happy with the performance'

Firstly, let me preface what I am about to write by saying, I wasn't one of the fans on here last week professing we had turned the corner and were in fact going to make the 8 this year. I thought we played a half of good footy, and were ultimately lucky to come away with the 4 points. The last quarter was great to watch, the first three not so much. I have supported this club for 35 years. I have been week in, week out. I enjoyed the late 90's/early 2000's. The inevitable rollercoaster of the Daniher years (one year on, one year off) the transition into the defenceless Bailey era with the all out attack, to the disaster that was the Neeld era. I was sucked in completely to the acquisition of Roos. And I will acknowledge that I am a huge supporter of some of the recruits he has managed to bring in - Vince, Tyson now Kennedy. Not so much Lumumba. I could go on about this but it's not really the point is it? I have never been more embarassed to be a Melbourne supporter than I was yesterday. I know I will get the inevitable diatribe of "fair weather supporter" "don't follow us then". But if you can honestly tell me that what you watched yesterday was acceptable on any level you are kidding yourself. The only winner we had on the field for the day was Ben Kennedy. The players looked disinterested from the moment they ran out of the race. Roos was out coached badly yesterday. Why Garland was left on Daniher in the first half is beyond me. Why no one manned up on McDonald-Tippungwutti is beyond me. Why Roos allowed Essendon a spare man in our forward line is beyond me. Why he publicised that they had a small forward line, basically daring Worsfold to put Mitch Brown in the forward line is beyond me. Why the ball movement wasn't quicker to attempt to isolate the mismatch between Gwilt and Hogan is beyond me. As you can see from above, a lot of what happened yesterday is beyond me. I will continue to turn up, week in week out as I have for 35 years. But, when will this team stop being so mentally fragile? I couldn't believe the threads on here asking "how many will Hogan kick"? Or, "how much will we win by"? This is EXACTLY the type of game Melbourne lose every year. It kills me.

BTW, did anyone else notice that a number of times Bugg or Jetta were one out against Daniher and the obvious happened. Garland or T Mac went forward with the flow of the ball, while Daniher would go into the middle and then be picked up by a mid and would then run back into the forward line, with a mid or Jetta or Bugg on him. You could see it happening. The two loose players on the wing, unmanned the whole day started the rot. I'll say it again, the Coaching box was worse than the players yesterday.

I didn't like Paul Roos' press conference - I thought it missed the mark.

We lack strong leaders who can hold teamates to account

So heartened by the description of Trengove's game. I wonder how far off a full VFL match he is? Thank goodness for some excellent news on a glum day.

I think our capabilities have improved above where we were around 2 years ago or so Macca but that was from such a horrible low we still aren't at a level that you would say is acceptable at AFL level. But in the end it is as you say, very much above the head for this club as a whole. It is incapable (for some unknown reason) to raise it's intensity/effort to a level required to meet and often beat it's challengers. Some are rated at or around a similar level to us, at least on paper anyway and in the case of Essendrug y'day, they were not expected to beat anyone all year (according to most). There is no consistency of output on the field over consecutive weeks. We occasionally win, then drop our bundle the very next week if coming up against what is considered an opponent we are capable of beating and in some cases 'should' beat (based on recent form). How often do you hear the comment on here "yet again we have played a horribly out of form team ...into form!". The team we are sometimes expected to beat (the week after a win) generally raise their level of intensity/attack and execution, and for some reason we are (in most cases) apparently unable to raise ours to match them (and beat them) and seem content to just play out the match and take the loss. When you keep losing and are incapable of stringing any consistency or your game together for more than the occasional win it has to be moral sapping and a big dent to some individual's belief and confidence in their own game (including their skills....no matter how much you train them!!) and that of some of the players around them on game day (and vice versa). This has to impact on their belief system eventually (even if it's one chink at a time) as well as their belief in the Coach/Game plan and club as a whole if left to fester for too long. I've been saying this for years so apologies if you've heard this before (probably under diff coaches) but unless or until Roos (with the support of the FD/Club) or Goodwin when he takes over, addresses this fundamental issue within the club, we will continue to dead cat bounce for years and maybe decades to come. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves (including Roos and all officials at the Club) and will only lead to more heartbreak and disappointment as each heartbreaking let down unfolds. As soon as we start to think we look like there's a positive on the horizon (after the odd win). As soon as we are challenged (by pretty much any team outside of the absolute worst). We will almost always crumble and fold like a pack of cards the very next week IF this issue isn't addressed and eradicated. And that process of eradication has to begin this week! If the coach/FD & club decide yesterday was just an aberration and it's steady as she goes then i'm afraid we are doomed as a club to be forever irrelevant. My worry from Roosy's presser yesterday is that he appears (on the surface) to be willing to do just that, Unfortunately many still believe there's going to be some sort of saviour that's going to somehow lift this club from the mire and into a new golden era given enough time (which varies depending on who you ask). Personally i don't think anything is going to change for us until we address the reasons behind why we continue to have the most brittle underbelly of any team in the AFL over the last decade (some will no doubt argue longer given our lack of success since 64'). Roos (and PJ) now have some big decisions ahead of them. Do they keep sticking their fingers in the dyke and ignore the elephant in our club rooms and just hand the problem over to Goody who will run up against exactly the same problem in his tenure? Or do they take this most important issue head on and commit themselves to getting to the bottom of it before Roos moves on? Do they even see/realise that the problem is inherent within the club and needs fixing. I sure hope one of them does! Otherwise it won't matter who they put in the coaches box.

I was interested in your pictures No. 10. Sometimes though you just get fatigued saying the same thing over and over again and being labelled a biased uniformed hater.

Really? That desperate for some kind of validation that you go back 3 years?

It doesn't matter who sits in the box if the players aren't in it mentally and the effort isn't there, 90% of what went wrong yesterday lies between the ears of the players.

well, I like to read these threads after a win or a loss. I like to get the view from other perspectives. Quite often I am staggered by how far removed from reality some 'supporters' find themselves after an upset. This chatter about Roos and Goodwin having different game plans is hilarious! The suggestion that Roos only won a premiership at Sydney because of one mark is very similar in tone to the description of Hogan's dummy-spit when things don't go his way. The reality is, we didn't play well in a game we were expected to win. That's it! That's all of it! We were, however, ahead and looking likely to win half way through the final stanza. The analysis of why we struggled and why Essendon prevailed is enlightening. The Bombers got up for a game that was earmarked as a line in the sand moment. Our blokes couldn't counter the wave of emotion and intent. Viney doesn't suddenly become a lesser Viney! Oliver doesn't suddenly become an unworthy Rising Star! Gawn doesn't suddenly return to the VFL scrap heap! Roos doesn't suddenly become Mark Neeld! After a fine start to the 2016 season we got set back on our heels. The way we respond will tell us something of our future direction.

This. They often started a four man back line with the two hbf pushed up to side of the centre square. Those two would then rush in and outnumber us at the bounce. We got smashed in there. If we did possession, and tried to llink up a chain of handballs out laterally, there was no space and enormous pressure. Our players didn't know how to respond at the set up... Lots of pointing. I'm no expert, but it was as clear as the extra man behind the ball debacle last year Roos is getting a very easy run here, and needs to be asked tough questions.

I feel like a battered wife. I keep getting hurt but for some reason I can't leave. This relationship has been toxic to my health for a decade.

I can't change clubs, because I despise them all. I'm stuck with the Dees like some kind of misfortune STD. I would love someone to get rid of my love for the club but it is with me for life whether I want it or not. Farewell Ascobar, I envy you being able to walk away. I simply can't do it even though I want to.

I arrived about 10 minutes into the first quarter and as I walked in Trengove took a strong mark and kicked a great goal from about 40m. It was a great sign. It took me quite a while to work out who was who so I might have missed some of the good work by the MFC listed players in the 1st quarter by half time I had them pretty much pegged. Having said that it took me till the last quarter to pick out Jayden Hunt. Alex Neal-Bullen was the best demon player over 4 quarters, played in the centre and was constantly in the game, kicked a couple of goals following the ball forward. Dunn played well at full back, looked short of a gallop but seemed to get better as the game went on. Half way through the 3rd quarter he came off for a spell and i heard him say to someone on the interchange that he was fuched but he played a good last term. I think he'd be right to come in next week. Trengove was in everything early, moved very smoothly was clean and made good decisions. Looked to be doing it pretty easily at this level to be honest. He was rested for almost all of the 4th quarter. Petracca was very good in patches, he was off and on the bench a lot and came off about half way through the 3rd quarter. He has great hands in traffic, very soft. I was surprised to see he had 20 touches. Hunt - As I said I didn't realise it was him until the last quarter and he was good. He used his speed a few time and broke the lines but tends to blaze away and not kick it to the advantage of the forwards. Weidemen was good, took some good marks, positioned himself well in the forward line and kicked straight from what I saw. Still very raw, but isn't afraid to throw himself into the contest. Hulett - another i didn't realise who he was until late. Will need time but did some nice things leading up to the wings. I'll think of more later, any questions just ask. Cheers, HB

And you will be there next week at training patting all the players on the Bum telling them not to worry Satyr won't you.....

everyone needs to grow a pair and man up. Stick fat - you can't choose to get off this ride once you are on. So remember things in footy are never as good as they seem and never as bad as they seem. dees by 21 points next week.

I think we need to have a serious look at our forward set up, they're just bombing away, i am certain we'll be a three goal at least better team the moment we stop that and start lowering our eyes, our forwards leading occasionally would help, the only time Hogan seems to lead is when he see's Watts get the ball.

The form of Tracca, Trenners, ANB and Weideman is helping to ease the pain of losing to Essendrug Casey Scorpions ‏@CaseyScorpions 7h7 hours ago Goal kickers Weideman 3, Frost, King, King, Neal-Bullen, Trengove, Wilson 2, Grimes, Smith 1. 2 retweets8 likes Reply Retweet Like More Casey Scorpions ‏@CaseyScorpions 7h7 hours ago FT Stats Disposals - Neal-Bullen 36, Hunt 23, Trengove 22, Wagner 22, Petracca 20, Grimes 19, Munro 18.

Again, all things considered arguably the worst loss in the games history. We are a mess.

Don't let him off so easily. Unless he was injured and he did go back into the rooms at quarter time, he was pathetic today, in all facets of the game of football. He has immense talent, but today showed no effort.

Oliver got the rising star nomination last week and now expert posters saying we should have taken Parish because of today's game. Classic.

Too many on here were too confident, everytime. "How many is hogan going to kick?" i mean please.

What does Roos usually do in a situation like this ? OUT Jones Bail IN Toumpas Grimes

In : Daisy Pearce

Hell, at least a kitten is going to get a new home.

Some positive news in this thread at least. I know Trenners, Petracca and even Weideman will come in time, but I am really happy ANB had a good game (by the look of it). He is one of the fittest guys at the club, and I think there is a spot for him in the seniors, as early as next week after today's debacle.

Unfortunately I am. I should make my sarcasm a bit less dry next attempt...

I think I'll stick to this thread, makes for much better reading...