Scoop Junior

If the right track is 36 goals to 5 in six quarters of footy, I'd hate to see the wrong track.

I'll say it again...I'm not basing Neeld's performance on JUST our on field performance. Sure it is a big factor, but as I said I'm judging him on a number of other areas as well. If you reckon Neeld thought we'd be as bad as we are right now then I suggest you have got it very, very wrong. The first few games totally and utterly shocked him and now he has changed his tune on where we are at to serve his own purposes and to act as a convenient excuse. Compare his comments pre-season to his comments now. It doesn't take a genius to see the change in tune.

Don't confuse Neeld's performance with the team's performance. The team's performance is a critical KPI for Neeld, but it is not his only one. His performance would also be assessed relative to other KPIs, such as development of young players, leadership, team development, cultural influence, etc. It is my view that Neeld's performance has been sub par (and I'm not basing that solely on the team's performance week to week, I'm basing it on a number of factors). Neeld's performance is all that matters in judging him.

Not the poor performances from the team. HIS performance has been poor. And I never said I don't like him. All I said was that IMO his performance has not been up to scratch for a senior coach.

You are entitled to your view UH, and I'm not going to waste my time setting out my position again. I've just highlighted the above comment you made. It was you, not me, that alleged the board was bowing to media pressure. So don't go asking me to prove to you that MFC is not bowing to media pressure. You made the statement, you provide the proof. I have at least provided reasoning for my views, whereas you want me to disprove your opinion. I've never said you are wrong, all I've said is that there are strong grounds for sacking Neeld and that it is entirely plausable that a decision to sack Neeld is made on solid grounds and is totally unrelated to media pressure. You assert that the board is bowing to media pressure, so you prove that statement.

You reckon Neeld is performing as directed? What has Neeld done to achieve his KPIs? Improved training - appears to be the case, but I don't think this takes much coaching talent to be honest. Elite standards - it's one thing to demand high standards and another thing to achieve it. Neeld is demanding it but there's no evidence he's achieving it. Anything else? It would take a fool to believe that on field performance was not a critical component of Neeld's brief. Do you seriously think we pay a bloke $400k a year to improve training standards? No one expected him to make us a finals contender this year or have us playing sensational footy, but I'd be shocked if the board and Neeld himself didn't expect improvement from when he was appointed in 2011. He has taken us backwards and he didn't see it coming...he even said so himself.

Fair call. I agree with that. Trust me, I also try to walk away from games with some positives as it's so depressing of late. But my comments were more directed at those who believe we are showing progress and were quite happy with aspects of the team performance. I don't think we are progressing at all, rather we are plunging further into the mire.

Ok let's just have a look at what you've said now. Thanks for agreeing with my view. How else do you measure someone other than on performance? Chris Dawes and Brian Royal have said we are on the right track. What!?! Wait a second, stop this all now! Sign Neeld up for another 3 years, because a player and assistant coach have told the public we are on the right track. Surely we MUST be on the right track then. All this worrying for nothing. (Sorry about the sarcasm but to give anything more than scant regard to comments by a player and assistant coach that 'we are on the right track' is the height of naivety. What do you expect them to say – "we are clearly on the wrong track"). The old "it's not showing on the field but the club is going in the right direction" - I can't believe you fell for this one. Classic Neeld spin. Saying a club is going in the right direction is absolutely meaningless without some sort of action to back it up. Again you say it's bowing to media pressure. For the second time, let me state that it's not bowing to media pressure if the decision is made for the right reasons. I'm really not sure why you are assuming that a decision will be made owing to media / supporter pressure when there are at the same time clear grounds (which you agree with) supporting the decision to remove him. Ok, so let's get this straight. My opinion is based on performance, something that is clearly ascertainable from watching Melbourne play each week. Yet your whole argument is based on "your opinion" that the board is bowing to media pressure. How on earth would you know what grounds the board are making their decision on? You are just going on a hunch. I've got no issue with you stating your opinion, that's fine, but it doesn't carry much weight in comparison to the clear undisputed evidence that Melbourne's performances under Neeld have been absolutely horrible. Yet it's me that needs to bring a better argument? Extraordinary.

Why is it that you associate the sacking of Neeld with bowing to media and supporter pressure. Can you not see a rational argument for sacking Neeld based on his performance? He has presided over possibly the worst first half of a season I've ever seen, which has followed on from a year in which he won four games (three against GC and GWS) and produced largely uncompetitive displays. He has the players confused and lacking belief in their style of footy, has completely failed to implement a working game plan, has taken the team completely backwards, has handled situations poorly, has repeatedly changed his tune on where the club is at and has given inconsistent and self-serving messages to the supporters. It's no wonder the players are confused and lack belief - I am confused listening to what he says in his press conferences! To say a decision to sack Neeld would be bowing to media pressure is just completely failing to acnkowledge the strong performance based grounds supporting his removal. One 25 goal loss, three 15 goal losses, one 13 goal loss and two 10 goal losses. All in half a season of footy.

This thread is a great indication of just how bad we've been for so long and that some are so conditioned to getting absolutely thumped that even the slightest hints and glimpses of competitive football are discussed glowingly. Let me put these facts out there: - At half time, the score was 12 goals to 1. Last week it was 13 goals to 2. - In three quarters of footy in perfect conditions we kicked 2 goals. The opposition kicked 19. - In the two first halves the last two weeks, when the heat is on, we've kicked 3 goals to the opposition's 25. - If we take out the third quarters of the last two games, when Freo and Hawthorn switched off, we've been outscored 36 goals to 5. That's right...36 goals to 5. This says it all really. I know we've played two top sides but that is downright shameful and embarrassing at the highest level. Yes, I saw some positives yesterday, but they were purely from an individual perspective. Frawley, Jones and Dawes were great, Garland kept us his solid form, Kent showed some good signs, etc. But from a team perspective it was just another woeful performance, one we now expect week in week out. To come away even remotely pleased with what we dished up yesterday is just a sad, sad tale of how far we've regressed since the end of 2011.

Couldn't agree more with this comment. This inconsistency gets to me and I think most supporters just see through his self-serving comments. It's the old 'we know exactly where we're at' comment. Well we don't believe this because pre-season the talk was about seeing improvement quicker than outsiders thought and now it's about not expecting anything at all until at least next year! He says we're a little bit behind where we thought we'd be...a little bit! I'll add this pearler from recent interviews which quite clearly shows his inconsistent and self-serving comments. This from after the Fremantle game: Neeld refused to accept his team's work rate was lacking after the Dockers feasted on uncontested possession to open a 71-point lead by halftime in the 19.16 (130) to 6.4 (40) defeat. "I don't think the effort was too bad ... when you put three guys behind the ball, those numbers get skewed quite a bit," he said. This from during the week: Neeld said he was not looking for short term measures and was determined to develop his youngsters for the long term success of the club Neeld said he choose not to flood the backline last week, when Melbourne was being dominated by Fremantle, because it wouldn’t help his team’s development. “It would have been an easy thing to go and put all these numbers behind the ball, but we aren’t going to learn anything from that ... we are coaching to develop these players,” he said. Absolutely extraordinary.

Footballers aren't robots. They are ordinary people who will respond to different coaches in the same way people at work respond to different bosses. Why are Fremantle a much harder working team under Lyon than they were under Harvey? The playing group is largely the same but Lyon has been able to extract more out of them and get them believing in him and his methods. I cannot comprehend how any one who has watched us this year can honestly say that our game plan is working. One of the coach's most important objectives is to instil the belief and confidence in the players that the way he wants them to play is the right way and that it works. At the moment I've never seen a team as lost defensively as Melbourne. Our guys don't know where to run, they block irrelevant space, they allow chain after chain of uncontested possession, they don't tackle enough (because they are caught out of position) and they have no idea how to maintain defensive pressure on an opposition. Of course the game plan might work "in theory" but Neeld has shown no ability to get his players to implement it properly. Jones, Viney, Toumpas and Terlich are in their first years at the club, so how can you rate their improvement / development and Neeld's influence on them? What about the lack of development of Watts, Trengove, McKenzie, Blease, Strauss, Tapscott and Bail? No one is saying it's just Neeld. But at the same time I think Neeld is a part of the problem. This is currently THE WORST footy I've ever seen Melbourne play. No one is expecting miracles, but we are not expecting to witness the absolutely dire performances that we've seen this year. Put simply, it appears that the players have absolutely no belief in the message and what they're doing out on the field, and Neeld must be responsible for this. It is the coach's job to get the players performing as a team and at the moment we are a disorganised rabble disguised as a professional football team. Changing the culture and producing reaonsable performances are not mutually exlcusive. I can't accept as justification for keeping Neeld that he is changing the culture, as I'm sure another coach could also try to change the culture but at the same time not produce what's bordering on unwatchable performances.

The benchmark of progress is right before our eyes every week. You don't need to play someone at your level to see how you've progressed. Your performances against the top sides can give a very good indication of progress. For example, no one would have expected us to beat the Dons or Dockers, but a reasonably competitive showing would have shown some signs of progress. However, the way we were systematically dismantled in those games shows how far backwards we've gone. Even if we are to look at sides around our level, I think our performances against Port, GC and GWS again highlight just how far we've regressed under Neeld. These are sides who finished near the bottom last year. We have played these three sides AT HOME and have been smashed by Port and GC and were 3 goals down to GWS at 3/4 time. I don't need to wait any longer to see how far we've regressed - it is there to see each and every week of this miserable season.

Am I correct in hearing Neeld say during the press conference 'I can coach now' in relation to the discussion that the effort showed by the players this week was much better than last week. I'm happy to be corrected as I couldn't quite make out all the chatter, but if that is correct then I think that is an absolutely astonishing thing to say. Despite what Dawes might say, effort is not solely a reflection of the players and the coach must accept at least some of the responsibility if the players don't show the required effort. Neeld's comment that 'I can coach now' sounds like he is trying to absolve himself from blame for the insipid effort against GC (and other previous similar efforts). It would also be contradictory to his comments last week that he would have to focus on coaching 'effort' during the week. If you previously couldn't coach due to a lack of effort and that lack of effort was entirely the players' fault, how can you then say you will coach 'effort' during the week. Being able to coach effort means that you can influence it! I hope I'm wrong (and I may well be as I couldn't quite hear the press conference clearly) as if I'm not this would have to be one of the most ridiculous things I've heard a coach say.

I made the following comments back in October last year in regards to the Pedersen trade and was criticised by a few. It summarised my thoughts on the decision (and still does).

So the fitness was so behind the standard of other AFL clubs in 2011? It might well have been and probably was, but we still managed to win 8 games. So if we can win 8 games with poor fitness, why have we gone backwards with superior fitness levels? As for wanting to be a finalist now, I'd love to be, but I'm a realist and clearly the list is not finals material. Personally I'd love just to be bordering on competitive right now.

If Barrett is correct and Neeld really said he would not change anything he has done and that we are on the right path....wow. Of course I wouldn't expect Neeld to come out and go on and on about every mistake and every problem. But there'd be nothing wrong IMO with saying 'yep, we have made a few mistakes along the way, all coaches do, but we are learning from them and the players are learning and we feel we've made progress in other areas'. Coaches are human and will make mistakes and I recall one of the Scott brothers admitting they coached poorly in a game and made errors. There's nothing wrong with that. Now if Neeld is just too worried about saying he has made mistakes given his current predicament then I question his perception and his understanding of his audience – no one in their right mind would feel that he has done everything right. But if he actually believes what he says and that he really would not change anything he's done...that would be one of the most unbelievable things I've heard. Barrett also reported that Neeld said he had done everything asked of him by the board. Assuming the board said to him 'we want you to take our team so far backwards that the Gold Coast Suns make absolute mugs of them on the MCG', then I would have to agree with him that he has successfully achieved this.

Poor example. 95% of the time the Swans' effort is impeccable. No team is ever going to have 100% effort 100% of the time - we are talking about human beings here. Based on this year alone I reckon our effort levels wouldn't even be at 50%. My point is that effort is not solely a player thing, and that a coach has a big influence on effort. Given Melbourne's inability to consistently put in the required effort this suggests to me that there are problems with the coach and his ability to instil the belief in the players.

Tom Scully was pretty adamant that he loved the MFC and wanted to be a one club player early in 2011. I for one am not blaming the players for what they are saying. I don't believe they have any choice but to be supportive of the coaching regime in the public. I'm not saying they are lying or that deep down they are against Neeld. What I am saying is just to pay very little attention to what is said in the public as no player is ever going to say anything bad about the coach in the public. IMO their performance on the field is the best and most accurate indication.

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.

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.

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.

Agree with this – that's what has annoyed me too. The mixed messages and the inconsistency. There's a core group of players to take us forward but we just need to reshape the list has moved to we are in the basement and are rebuilding. I think they might know where we are at now, but I would be pretty confident in assuming that they didn't know where we were at during the pre-season.

pm24: I said that we had gone backwards this year and you strongly disagreed with me. I wonder if you still think that way.

Neeld has been banging on recently about games experience like it is the only important thing in footy and that it is the sole factor in determining a team's fortunes. I'm not sure if it has been mentioned earlier in this thread but other than it being totally infuriating hearing the same thing over and over again (which I guess is understandable given it's probably the only excuse he can offer up), how does it sit with his decision to appoint two captains with less than 50 games of experience each? If we take him at his word that games experience is so vitally important, why on earth would he appoint captains who lack what he considers to be the most important ingredient for a player and for a team – games experience? This is not at all to question the captains but rather is just to illustrate the inconsistency in his message and his misreading of where the team is at. And that's what has been concerning to me. There is little doubt Neeld expected big improvement from the team this year. He has not got it so far (in fact we have gone backwards) so he is grasping onto a convenient excuse, games experience. One of the worst thing a coach can do is overestimate their list as they make decisions on where they think they are at rather than where they are actually at. For me Neeld is guilty of this.