deanox

Wow that was an essay! Sorry guys...

Fan, I understand your point here about why the players may be performing like this now, but that doesn't excuse the last 10-15 years. In all that time we have always had players who seem to be front runners, who only run one direction, who lay on the ground looking for free kicks instead of getting up and chasing. Essendon in 2000 didn't do this. Brisbane the next three years didn't do this. We have had a player culture at our club for far too long which was never going to make us successful. Talent doesn't get you there, hardwork and committment does. This is why ALL the senior players (bar Junior) were moved on. All thought they were better than they were, and while they may have been great servants of the club, that doesn't mean they were going to be the players to lead us forward.The fact that none of our players had further careers at other clubs speaks volumes for the fact that we made the right call. Junior was a mistake, and I believe that decision was based on the clubs opinion of his body coping with another season, not to do with other factors. Stirling Mortlock's presence at the Melbourne Rebels this year has been an example of why Junior should have been retained. When Hawthorn hit rock bottom, who did they turn to to lead them? Richie Vandenberg, a no frills, but uncompromising player. He wasn't their best player, or their flashiest, but he set an example, he worked hard, and he did the right things. I completely agree with your point about the players being human, and feel sorry for them. I love watching them, and I've shared in their highs and lows all my life, but can anyone really point out a player who was moved on too early, other than Junior? There has been a lot of hate for the coaches and love for the players lately, and that really surprises me. I've made the following observations, and these are what tells me that the problem is with the players. I may have missed some obvious things, so happy to discuss if anyone has any observations other than "we've gone backwards" because that is clearly for other reasons. - Whenever we get smashed (pretty much every loss) the players with the worst stats are normally a bunch of senior players. Check out Davey, Green, Jamar, Sylvia this week. Even Moloney was down on his usual output. These players are rarely seen to work hard in games we aren't winning. Ablett, Hodge, Hayes, Ball, etc still play well when their sides lose. Our 'senior' players lie down. - We have a virtually whole new footy deptartment this year. The new coaches had 3 months to watch the players and work out who they thought were the leaders. They chose to disregard almost all of the existing 'leaders'. Clark, a newbie to the club, was judged a leader. Jones was the only player retained in that group. No one could dispute the onfield leadership shown by these two this year, but I would argue that Green, Davey, Moloney and Jamar haven't shown any. And they didn't show much most of last year either did they? - The new conditioning staff (Misson and Craig) have repeatedly stated how poor our fitness levels were. We were doing half of the other clubs conditioning. Even this season we couldn't do a full load pre-season. This shows on the field. Time may prove Neeld to be a poor choice for head coach, but you cannot convince me that between Neeld (Collingwood), Misson (St Kilda and Sydney) and Craig (Adelaide) time at successful clubs, the three of them could be the problem? All were highly rated at successful clubs. If one wasn't good enough, I could believe it, but to suggest that the coaching panel is all wrong and that the players are write is preposterous. - How hard is the game plan? OK, I know it is different. I undersatand there will be mistakes. I also understand it is the job of the coaches to teach. But our players seem unable to run with their man and cut off the option. We are loose and lazy. We don't work hard enough. You can only carry so many players, and at the moment we are carrying ALL of the senior players. The current coaching panel has been put in place to turn around the culture of the club. For those young enough and willing enough, they can all be part of the next tilt, but if you aren't up to it you'll find yourself out of there. Remember, Cameron Bruce was one of our fittest, and one of our best trainers, and he looked average at Hawthorn. Every player that has left for another club has talked about how professional they are etc.compared to Melbourne. If we don't have the senior players to lead the change, like they did at Hawthorn and Geelong, then we need the coaches to lead the way. McLardy's statement didn't seem like much, and Presidents often backflip, but I feel his move was to quell the rumours of coach sacking. He backed the FD and hung the responsibility on the players. If the players don't want to perform, they will be out of there at seasons end. The group that wants it (see the leadership group) will stay and make it happen. Edit: spelling

Why is that dangerous territory? Monkeys at key boards has long been used to describe ineffectual people doing there work, in this case, as stated in the original post, whoever is meant to be moderating the NMFC website. Why is that dangerous??

I actually think his physicality in marking contests has improved. Doesnt mean it is now outstanding, but it has improved. And point 2 is the best point anyone has ever made on this site about Watts! He isn't that type of player! He wasn't that type of player! He probably never will be that type of player! Now we just need everyone to judge him against his abilities and not against what they hoped/expected him to be without seeing him.

I actually think he does pretty well in the air for someone his build/weight and he even manages to snare the odd strong body on body mark. What he doesn't do is crash packs. And he won't. Maybe late in his career, bit atm he is better one on one or on the lead: and when was the last time we kicked to anyone on a lead?

Then I think you have it wrong. Watts is not Mitch Clarke. He isn't that build, he isn't that player. If that is what you want (or expected) Watts to be then it is you who has the problem, not Jack Watts. I'm not having a dig at you here (as I don't even know your overall stance on the issue), I'm just suggesting that instead of judging Watts against what you want him to be, judge him against what he really is. The same as anyone who wanted Jeff White to be a Stephen King type ruckman (strong marking ruck/forward, as opposed to agile jumping tap ruck/kick behind play), or anyone who would expect Clint Bartram to be an Andrew McLeod (they both play back pocket right?). And I disagree RE the game plan. The real Watts can't play as the Watts you want in Neelds game plan, because that role is for a gorilla forward (for want of a better term). The real Watts can play any number of roles within Neelds game plan; midfielder at centre bounces, on the wing, flanker forward, even a little bit of time as a KPF. I am not saying he is set to be a star, nor that he is doing enough right now, but it seems pointless to derail a player based on unrealistic expectation of what role we would like him to play.

Add to some of these our quick delivery into the forward line. Our forwards played in front today, they needed the quick kick into the forward line to be a chip kick into the space in front of them. Too often we bombed long blindly to the space behind them, resulting in a geelong mark. This needs to be cleared up between the forwards and the flankers/mids. The guys getting the ball need to know where to kick it to if they have to kick it blindly. Maybe they should have known and just executed poorly (i.e. moloney only ever kicks long regardless)? But either way, that is the sort of game plan issue that needs to be sorted out. Potentially 5-10 of our inside 50's were wasted by this, and I was surprised how many of geelongs seemingly blond/rushed kicks into forward line they marked. They obviously knew where their own team hotspot was.

In perspective, Jack was one of the youngest players to be drafted in his year, and during that first season only trained at the club once a week while he finished his schooling and only play 3 games for the season. Effectively this is only his 3rd season as a full time footballer... He had a great run between round 8 and round 15 last season where in 8 matches he averaged 21 touches and kicked 12 goals. As a young developing player, I would argue he has been reasonably consistent rather than the usual rollercoaster ups and downs; maybe one of our biggest concerns is that he hasn't dominated games?

I feel this is the crux of it; the senior players were worried about job security and it may have been the administration side pushing some of those senior players out not the coach. The question is should the administration be involved in list management decisions,? Arguably though, maybe the administration was truong to weed out some if the soft colette we have been talking about. There are two sides to the story, and while this article details events it is very unclear on the motives of either side...

If you had of said Trapper I think everyone would've known you meant TJ, but roller? RE watts, I am certainly not defending his game last week but I do remember him try to tackle but none stuck! I think he still had a long way to go in upper body and core strength, as well as tackling technique. Atm it think he doesn't know how to tackle, he is probably used to getting the through superior size and skills, and we haven't him this yet.

You don't speak latin? Ah well, I've fixed it for you!

Watts for me. He has been ok to good at afl level, the drop in intensity and pace (ernesto in intensity enberg pace) should allow him to assert himself. Hopefully he has a blinder and realises what he is capable of at afl level. It is Jurrahs first run in a long time, I don't expect much from him, just enough to get a feel. He will play two games in the vfl I would've thought. Petterd did ok last week, I'd like him to surprise me. (edit: fixed auto correct gibberish, now in brackets!)

Ricky didn't have his own thread, and given there has been a bit of talk about him I thought I'd start one up. Ricky has obviously shown a lot off promise in his time at the mfc but has not been able to cement a spot. I think we'd all agree he can play when on song but he is inconsistent. For me, I think one of Ricky's strengths, his strong marking for his height, is also his biggest weakness. Ricky needs to play as a small forward, a crumber. He is surrounded by taller players, yet he is inevitably the one who tries to go up instead of staying front and centre. I'm not saying that he shouldn't use his marking; it is a dangerous weapon when one out or when you have a clear sit, but in pack situations he should be playing the crumber role. Add to that his forward pressure and courage I can see him making it, but of he doesn't adjust that aspect of his game he will continue to struggle.

Any thoughts re greens return? Assuming, given he was dropped and out of down when injured he will be coming back through the scorps? That being said, it is a finger injury so hopefully he has been able to work hard on the track at fitness and he may be ready to slot straight back in. Making a senior player earn their spit through Casey upon return from injury would send a strong message. Perhaps it will depend on performance of the 22 this week?

If anyone disagrees grab a copy of the richmond game; it is actually funny how badly our players are drawn to the ball, almost like watching under 11 football! Even in open play, if there is a handball all heads turn and bodies drift a few steps towards the player now in possession. We never follow our direct opponent ore mover into space, we always get sucked towards the ball like a moth to the flame. In the first half against richmond there was usually one of watts or howe or another outside style player in the guys at the bounce. In the 3rd quarter it was almost exclusively mckenzie, jones and magner. What happened in the third quarter? We got smashed in the centre clearances...

You definitely have this the wrong way around. Our players all get way too close to the contest, particularly in packs at stoppages, but also our crumbers at marking contests. To often we have ask our players either on the ground/in the contest our standing 1m inside their opponent. When the ball spills out, if it goes directly to us we are tackled immediately by the outside player, if it goes in a gap the opposition get the loose ball as they run out with a 2 step advantage. Watts and Howe do this better than Moloney, Jones, McKenzie or Magner, who ask get too close. These three are inside mids, we don't have any outside mids.

I'm pretty sure Stevie J has been pulled into line a few times at Geelong. And regardless, apart from Jurrah I don't think wer have anyone of that ilk (i.e. Able to rip a game apart regularly). I remember the Geelong players pulled Garry Ablett aside and said you may be an ok player, but of you want to be the best you need to step up your efforts on the training track. Do you think anyone ever did that to Sylvia? If they did, he didn't tasker it on board and it probably wasn't a requirement to exceed mediocrity.

And they'll serve up the same inconsistent tripe we've had for nearly two decades. Teams that are on top of the ladder but can't get near a bottom eight side. Teams that play in a GF but next year miss the finals. Give me a team with discipline and who are accountable, and then we will develop great players. Good kids need the right environment to make sure they become C. Judd not C. Sylvia.

My solution to the scrum/holding the ball on the ground crap is simple. If you aren't the player with the ball orthe tackler, if you jump into a contest you are penalised. So many players run in and dive across the contest to kill the ball. The third player in invariably is tackling/holding a player who doesn't actually have the ball, that's holding the man, you can't tackle the tackler! Or they just jump on backs. pay it against these infringements and watch ther game open up again.

Unsure about Jurrah suspension wise but we have said he is available this week. Only last week there was a discussion on the club culture. Well this is how you change it; leaders (neald) set the standards and them enforce them. If you don't like it, bad luck. If we had any on field leaders setting the standards for the past 10 years, a) we wouldn't be in this mess, and B) the on field leaders would set the standards and enforce them. On field, we don't have any one mature enough, respected enough, or good enough to set the standards, thurs we have recruited these qualities in our coaches to ensure there is leadership and culture change. Great decision. Out may be to late for sylvia, but it won't be for watts, strauss etc.

According to the MFC website, if Jurrah hits his targets this week he will return through the VFL when the Scorps host Nth Ballarat. Great excuse to get out to Casey! http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/133897/default.aspx

My 2 bob worth. Certainly not everything that was wrong, but a few points I noted. - Our disposal is sub-standard, and WCE smashed us in this area today. We could not hit targets by foot, and we rarely kick to advantage (i.e. in front, behind, to the correct side). This needs serious improvement across the board, and is potentially the most important improvement we can make. - We get sucked in towards the ball like a bunch of under 10's. When there is a marking contest, too many players go up, and those that crumb get sucked in to within 2-3 meters; it seems to me that spillages often fall further than this. When there is a loose ball, too many of our players get sucked into the contest, and then either any short clearance goes out to a waiting oppositoon player (who held off) or we appear not to have players in any direction. Similarly often a second player leaves their man to assist in a tackle, leaving a free man outside the contest, which then results in the following: - We don't man up correctly. When we had the ball, the ball carrier was immediately pressured by an opponent, any give off went to a player who also had an opponent pressuring them thus the turn overs and rushed big kicks out of defence that usually are not to our advantage. When WCE got the ball, often the first ball carrier would be pressured by a player who left his opponent (i.e. has to move towards the ball carrier leaving an open man). As a result, the new loose man receives the ball, and is pressured in turn by another demon who leaves his opponent. This chain continues until a plaer is free with no pressure. (I am not trying to point the finger but in the last quarter it appeared that Petterd was responsible 3-4 times, he appeared to be loose in the centre when the first eagle got the ball as a loose man and then the chain of leaving your man started as a result) - We need to leave at least one permanant forwad in the 50!

Typing on the mobile does that!

Unfortunately "contested" passion can also be a loose ball get. Any time the ball is in dispute i.e. a loose bouncing ball on a wing, that counts as a contested poisson, any time the ball is delivered by hand or foot that is an uncontested possession. The exception being when the possession is won while under direct physical pressure (i.e. Contested mark).

Great point I've heard before. The reason everyone things of Franklin as being a marking machine is because he is taller than everyone else, so he plucks some, but he rarely is the better contested mark. He simply isn't that strong over head if you take his size out of the equation. Unfortunately Watts isn't quite that big. He will need to improve his marking to be a superstar, but obviously his role won't depend on that ability.