mo64

Exactly. If 1 or 2 senior players were underperforming, you can rightfully point the finger at them. When almost every senior player has underperformed in the past 18 months, you rightfully question the coach.

Why is it time to move on? This thread is about Morabito, who by all reports, is your classical tweener. Brennan and Goddard aside, how many tweeners get picked up with a top 5 draft pick? And it's taken both players alot longer to establish themselves as good AFL players than was expected. I agree with Freak's point that we shouldn't use a high draft pick on a player because they are supposedly versatile. Early draft picks should be used on players who can lock down a position for the next 10 years, and you build your team around them. So assuming we get Scully, give me either a legitimate key position player or another gun midfielder with our 2nd pick.

Nah. I reckon the Roos will go through a long-winded selection process in order to keep the media happy, and then Brayshaw will select a high profile person like Buckley.

Staggering decision. Over his tenure, Laidley has got the best out of an ordinary list. He deserved to see out the year. He probably isn't as charismatic as Brayshaw would like.

In the NBA, the weighted lottery system is appropriate because one player can make a team. Kobe Bryant and Lebron James are cases in point. In the AFL, the difference between pick 1 and pick 4 isn't going to make a huge difference to a team. The only way to stop tanking is to get rid of the priority pick.

Agree. Adelaide have been decimated with injuries over the past few years, and have a list of ageing stars. Craig has managed to keep the side competitive simply because he gets the best out of them, regardless of age. He could've taken the easy option of rebuilding, gifted himself some high draft picks, and given himself an excuse for the teams poor performance. And Adelaide are a club that can financially sustain being on the bottom for a few years. And Craig's smart enough to modify his gameplan when the need arises. They are now playing route 1 football to great effect, despite the so called experts on this site believing that it's outdated. Craig is a coach that I'd love to have in charge of the MFC.

If you apply the same standards, Miller shouldn't have a guaranteed spot in the seniors as you suggest. You're overly critical of Newton. He missed a substantial part of last season through innjury, and to suggest that he showed nothing in the meagre 2 senior games he has been given this season, is unfair. I'm not sure if Newton will make at AFL level, but we'll never know unless the coaching dept. show some confidence in him, and give him an extended run in the seniors.

Shane Wakelin made the point on the radio this morning that pace (footspeed) is the most overrated aspect of football. It's quickness of mind that's important. And he pointed out that Geelong aren't a quick side, but move the ball quickly, which comes back to quickness of mind. Neither McLean nor Jones had issues with their finishing skills in their formative years. I believe that alot of the problems that our midfield are having comes down to not playing instinctive or confident football. It's all handball, handball, handball when under pressure, and I don't think that that's the natural game of McLean, Jones or Moloney.

No difference to the promise that McLean, Bate and Jones showed in their early years under Daniher. And every club has a bunch of youngsters that show promise, and in some cases, are having a direct impact on the result of the game. And those clubs would also believe that they have improvement in them. The difference being that they are developing youth whilst continuing to remain competitive. And you correctly mention that we don't have any elite midfielders. Well Daniher had the same issue during his reign when we regularly made the finals. The difference being that bar 2007, Daniher had us playing a gameplan that suited our personnel. I said before the start of last season that our midfield wouldn't be suited to Bailey's gameplan, and nothing's changed. Most posters on here like the idea that Bailey is coaching for tomorrow, not today. I don't, because you can do both.

The whole youth thing is overhyped. There are no guarantees that the young players that you've mentioned will reach the heights of the players that retired last season, and those that you consider expendible. And it p#sses me off no end when posters factor Scully and Butcher into their equations. They are not on our list. The notion that we're a young side is merely a crutch that is used by supporters to justify our poor performances in the past 18 months. BTW, I've never heard anyone on our coach panel use youth as an excuse.

100% agree. When the games been on the line, we've shown very few signs of improvement. And many on this site take solace from Richmond's plight because it deflects attention from the realty of where we are as a club. The media has been easy on us, but when a journo rightfully questions us, supporters have a whinge. I'm hoping that more journo's apply the blowtorch to us, because it may awaken us from our slumber.

I'll give you Gibbs, but he's still allowed to roam unchecked racking up stats, because opposition clubs tag Judd and Murphy.

Griffin aside, who are the good midfielders that learn't their craft on the half-back line? And I'm expecting Morton to be better than "good". Half back is the easiest position to rack up cheap stats, but that doesn't mean that you've had an impact on the game, and learn't your craft. Morton's stats this season flatter him. I'd rather see him being used in a midfield that's struggling. And to the other posters, I wasn't implying that Maric is being played out of position. I was just pointing out how difficult it's been for Petterd and Maric to be playing as a medium sized forward in our forward structure.

It was grazman who suggested that we should extend his contract now, but even mid next year is too early. The Roos are handling the Laidley coaching situation the right way. At the moment, it's 50/50 whether Laidley will get the gig next year, so the club is waiting till round 16 before deciding on his future. Laidley's management are making noises that other clubs are interested, but if the Roos finished the year poorly, no other club will be interested in him. If they finish off the year well, they'll probably make the finals, and he'll want to stay, because it's unfinished business at the Kangaroos.

It's the same issue that you raised with Morton, Bail and Buckley being played as defenders rather than midfielders. Playing Petterd out of position in order to teach him something, has destroyed his confidence. Maric is another player who's confidence is on the decline. You have to be a pretty special talent to be able to play in a forward line that is starved of opportunities, and is generally outnumbered.

I agree. I've never understood why clubs extend a coach's contract mid-term. In the AFL, It's very rare that a coach will leave a club to go to another (Wallace excepted), so it's not like the club would be worried that the coach would be poached. You sign a coach to an original term with specific expectations, and if he's exceeding all expectations, you can't imagine why he'd contemplate leaving the club. If he's not meeting expectations by term's end, you have the option of replacing him without a termination payout. It would be senseless to extend Bailey's contract at the end of this year.

I agree. The best way to develop a youngster is to instill the confidence and belief that they belong at that level. Allow the kids to play to their strenghths. Let them show what they can do, rather than having them focus on the negative aspects of their game. These will come once they've adjusted to the pace of the game. Over the past month I've been starting to question whether Morton will become the elite midfielder every is banking on. Give the kid a chance to show his stuff by giving him an extended run in the midfield. It's not as if we're inundated with attacking mids at the moment.

List management is one small part of a coach's responsibility. The fact that he's cleaned out the old brigade and is bringing in kids does nothing to prove that he is a good matchday coach, nor has the ability to inspire the players. Read my posts from the start of last season. I've said all along that his gameplan was doomed for failure because his core midfield were incapable of making it succeed. Nothing has changed in the past 18 months to change my view. Our core midfielders in McLean, Moloney and Jones struggle with running the lines, and nothing will change in the next 2 years unless Bailey intends on trading them. And don't give me this sh#t about being young, and needing time to develop. It's generally accepted that games are won or lost in the middle. In the games against Hawthorn and Collingwood, our midfield was older and more experienced than both of these sides. The fact that Bailey couldn't work out that Mitchell and Pendlebury needed to be shut down, says alot about his matchday coaching ability. At the start of the year, I said that our percentage, rather than win/loss record, would be a true guide to whether we have improved. A percentage of 70-79% is ordinary, and anything less than 70% is pathetic. We are bordering on being pathetic. With the exception of Garland and Wona, we have our best 22 on the park, and according to the coach, we had a far superior preseason compared to last year. So we should have improved on last year. Certain individuals may have improved this season, but where is the collective improvement in the team? I don't see it. Contrary to most, I actually think our list isn't bad, and that's not taking into account unseen kids in Strauss, Blease and Jurrah. That's why I believe that we should be performing better than we are.

Watts was the least of our problems today. If we continue moving the ball through ridiculous handballs to stationary targets, as a forward, Watts will be pulling out his ample blond hair. And speaking of our young messiahs, why isn't Morton given a run in the middle?

Give me an easier question. In a year and a half, he's shown no evidence of being a good matchday coach, nor an ability to inspire the team. The Bailey apologists can't use an interupted preseason or injuries as an excuse this year. I wonder what excuses they'll come up with now.

Ha, ha, ha. You beat me to it.

Brilliant post. When our opposition are playing at an intense level, as Collingwood did today and Hawthorn did a few weeks back, our gameplan falls to pieces. Bailey will inevitably come out and say that turnovers killed us, as he does every week. FFS, it's obvious that we turn the ball over because we overuse the ball by hand. We dominated the ruck, but couldn't win clean possession. Why? Because when we win possession in a contested situation, we bl##dy handball it backwards to someone who is standing flatfooted. The only player that we should handball it backwards to is Davey. He's the only one who can extricate himself from a tight situation. And Sylvia was the only positive for the day.

That depends on how you perceive the VFL. For people like Phil Cleary, and I'm sure KC from Casey and Barry from Beach Road, the VFL is a legitimate competition, not just a reserves competition for AFL players to regain form, in Miller's case. Why would you expect Cleary to know everything about Miller, when Miller's rarely played at VFL level? Would you expect an AFL specialist commentator like Malcolm Blight to know everything about a mature aged player like Priddis when he entered the AFL? Cleary is merely commentating on what is happening on the ground at the time, not it's relevance to an affiliated AFL club.

You have to have some football nous to be a successful coach, so your comparison of Cleary to Hawkins is ridiculous.

Absolutely, because Phil Cleary's been commentating on VFA/VFL games for over 15 years, and whilst he hasn't got a silky voice like a Dennis Commetti, he knows what VFA/VFL football is all about. For Cleary, the VFA competition was ruined with the introduction of AFL reserves teams. And I feel the same way. Whilst I followed the progess of the Melbourne players, I didn't support Sandringham, and I don't support Casey. And I can't support Coburg because they're aligned with Richmond, who I despise. Cleary would care more about the players that aren't aligned with AFL clubs, than an AFL player that was dropped like Miller. He wouldn't have a clue what Miller has done in his AFL career. For those who actually followed the VFA, it was compelling viewing when Cleary and Sam Kekovich where doing the special comments a few years back.