stevethemanjordan

Glad people are starting to realise that his 'effort' or lack thereof is absolutely pathetic for a guy who is apart of our leadership group. LEADERSHIP GROUP. Players who are meant to be leading our club towards a positive and successful place. That effort with the ball against the first year player in Bontempelli who I'm sure weighs at least 10-15kg less but still manages to win the ball, beat a couple of defenders and kick an amazing goal is astonishing. How anyone still continues to believe that Frawley is worthwhile keeping when we have the opportunity to grab another first rounder or potential trade bait for another player who wants to fight for our club is out of their minds. The issue is not about contract talks. The issue is his effort. And it's [censored] pathetic for someone of his age and experience.

There's a line in my post above that I should have re-written.. Of course fatigue will effect decision making and skills. However, for Garland, and the examples I can remember, none of them were in the second half of the match and they were decisions made and skills executed where there was time and space afforded to him. Those particular errors were not from a lack of fitness. They were from a lack of ability to some degree. Made to standout because many players that day were making similar errors.

Shiel would be amazing. I would have Vickery ahead of Fitzy and Spence when it comes to attributes. Jaksch would be nice too. We really need some elite kickers though, whoever mentioned the half backline with elite skills was bang on. We're crying out for some players who cut through sides with their skills and running.

He is definitely not highly skilled.

Nev's an interesting case. Really happy he's found a spot/role in which he looks comfortable playing in. I reckon he can go another level or two as well. Seems to be very much a confidence thing with him. All in his head. Hopefully that happens over the next few years. Congratulations on playing 50 AFL games Nev.

Well if fitness was an issue, I have no doubt Roos would still be playing him in the twos or he would have been a sub no? He's playing deep in the backline. He's played his third or fourth game now I'm pretty sure. I don't want to hear that rubbish RP. Basic decision making and kicking skills are not a result of lack of fitness. Maybe if he was an onballer and he was making noticeable errors in the last quarter but thats not the case. I rate parts of Garland's game, but again, we have TOO many players who display the same weaknesses.

Thank heavens for you Ron.

Nabbing Fyfe or Dangerfield would change this club monumentally.

Experience. Another one of the more overused and frustrating terms thrown around at demonland from time to time.I'd love to know what's so valuable about Frawley's experience? Are we talking games played? Being used to losing? Are we talking about the fact that he is a big body and they take years to build? Or fitness base? Or what? If it's games played, I could provide a long list of current players out there who've played less games than Frawley but are three times the player.. The point is this. We are no longer coached by clowns. We no longer have a recruiting team of clowns. We are no longer run by clowns. All the offield stuff is spot on and the environment is clearly a lot better. Chances are we'll be getting our hands on two of the best mids in the draft and they'll be coming to a place to learn from the best coaches in the business as opposed to the most laughable. They'll be coming to club who has now got it's [censored] together. It's a no brainer for me but obviously the ball is in Frawley's court. Our problem still remains deeply imbedded in the midfield and not our KP stocks.

There's the ol' demonland special. 'Injury interrupted pre-season' I'd love to know how that has anything to do with footy smarts, decision making and kicking skills. Not saying he should be dropped, but can we please refrain from those sorts of comments.. Garland is part of a worryingly long list of players who have questionable kicking skills and decision making skills.

Interesting, and something that I hope eventuates. Out with the old, in with the new. Frawley is still conditioned from our dark days, he is not leader material, he doesn't set a great example onfield and his capacity to think is very limited. The opportunities for us to develop our own batch of star mids under the right coaches and environment is here and now. Posters are just too scarred by the past when clearly not every star was aligning. I want to see a new breed and a new club born over the coming years.

But if it's running, there has to be a reason why there's a lack of movement, and what I alluded to was that I think there are players who don't have the ability and therefore trust in their skills to hit up leads and they're constantly bombing to a contest. And because of this predictable play that's been going on since Neeld was there, it means other players don't even bother running hard to create space or lead because they already know what the individual will most likely do.

Nobody else seems to have an issue regarding post, it's emphasis or lack thereof. But no, good contribution Axis, really good.

Let me preface this by surrendering to the fact that this topic may seem/be self-indulgent, but I feel a strong desire to spit it out and I'd also like to generate some discussion surrounding some of these problems that I see and I'm sure many others see. As our list stands today, I feel as if Paul Roos has been able to squeeze everything he can out of each individual which is clearly why he's regarded as one of the best coaches in the league. He has been able to get our players to compete hard and has instilled a 'defend hard' attitude which is evidenced by many of the drills we've seen at training during pre-season and our ability to make it more difficult for opposition teams to score. However, I would argue that we've also been extremely lucky in most of our wins as well as some games we're the difference in score was only a few goals. With the exception of the Port Adelaide game, the Western Bulldogs game, Carlton game and St Kilda game, here's a breakdown of the scoring shots both teams had in games previous as well as contested possession and inside 50 deferential. GWS: 29 scoring shots MELB: 12 scoring shots Contested Poss: -9 Inside 50's: -20 GC: 31 MELB: 23 CP: -2 I/50: -3 SYD: 24 MELB: 13 CP: -5 I/50: -20 ADEL: 22 MELB: 15 CP: +8 I/50: -23 RICH: 29 MELB: 21 CP: +17 I/50: -9 COLL: 21 MELB: 13 CP: -11 I50: -14 ESS: 27 MELB: 18 CP: -32 I/50: -33 NM: 32 MELB: 16 CP: -11 I/50: -12 There are some very worrying signs when you look at the scoring shots of both teams and here are some things that come to mind when I look at that: 1. Clearly we've been extremely lucky both in games we've won, (Essendon, Richmond and Adelaide where really those teams lost the game themselves), and games we've lost by honorable margins but really they could have been frighteningly similar score-lines to some of last years games. (Collingwood, NM, Syd, GC and GWS). 2. The Contested Possession stat vs Inside 50 stat is a great one. Especially for us because it gives us a great understanding of where we break down as a footy side and what our weaknesses are. We are clearly, and I mean CLEARLY not struggling with winning the inside ball anymore. That's blatantly obvious by looking at the Contested Possession deferential above. Only in the Collingwood game is there a big CP difference. However, looking at the inside 50 count in games especially when measured against our disposals per match screams out the obvious. Ball Movement! (Or lack thereof). Let's break ball movement down into these three categories: Decision making, kicking ability/skill and player movement/spread. These are the three areas that absolutely kill us and are the direct causes of all of our losses and where we breakdown when trying to move the ball forward. (Decision making can clearly be anything from deciding to switch a pointless ball when there are clearly a number of opposition players already guarding space on the switch side, or something like three Melbourne players going up to punch a ball and two opposition players staying down ready for the spill, or kicking long to a 50/50 contest when there are a number of short options available*) * I'm sure this goes hand in hand with players who clearly don't possess great kicking and therefore are not willing to go for the shorter option. Something pretty much our whole backline suffer from. Kicking skill and ability is also a massive concern. I almost can't comprehend the amount of players on our list who possess below average or average kicking and decision making skills. We have three elite kicks in our best 22 side who can make great decisions and execute the kicking skill beautifully and those three are Watts, Vince (who is obviously in his first year) and Salem (who is in his first year!). That is deplorable. Running/spreading is the third category and it's still a work in progress but I still reckon it's secondary to being able to make great decisions and being able to kick well. If you look at our kick-outs you'll see we breakdown immediately as a side trying to move the ball forward. Sure Dunn has a great long and penetrating kick, but he clearly doesn't have the ability to hit up a short pinpoint pass as nearly all of our kicks are bombed long to the boundary and to a 50/50 contest. It's disgusting we are doing that. As for running and spreading in general play, of we had more players who could kick well and make sound decisions, we'd be moving the ball a lot quicker as those players trust in their abilities and it means games would open up and our players would be forced to get the spread and run as they would be rewarded for their running and spreading. When you have players like Grimes, McKenzie, McDonald, Frawley, Garland, Bail, Matt Jones and a host of others who either bomb to a contest because they don't trust themselves to hit up short targets most of the time, of course you're not going to notice other players push hard into space on different sides of the ground because it's as if they already know the players with ball in hand will not even attempt to kick it to the for fear of turning it over!!! It's clear to me where our problems are. It's clear as [censored] day. We, the MFC, have far too many players who do not possess critical attributes such as decision making and kicking ability. We have a host of them from deep in the backline right through our midfield and still on our list at Casey trying to get a game. Roos has been able to get the most out of individuals when it comes to 'effort' but effort has got nothing to do with something you're naturally gifted at which is why I don't have an issue with Frawley leaving. Because our problem lies within the midfield and through a compo pick for him, we'll be able to bring in some class. Which is also why I refuse to congratulate players like McKenzie, Matt Jones, Nicholson etc. Players who give their all but absolutely cannot be on the list if we want to be there in SEPTEMBER one day. Skill and decision making are traits that need to be shown from day one. Within the AFL, a club can't afford the time nor resources to be teaching nearly a whole list of players how to kick or giving them better advice about how to make the right decision. Posters and supporters who keep bringing up the fact the 'X player is only 21, he's got plenty of time to develop' need to understand that it's not the way the cookie crumbles at this level. Sure we'll have some players who are afforded the team to develop areas of their game that are weak if they are valued highly. But not every player. Some will go. And need to go. We should expect more. We should look at the bigger picture. Holy [censored] that was long.

So what was the point of pointing out his age?

Oh I deciphered it old mate. But I can't say I necessarily agree with it. Kicking ability and decision making are not things that can be EASILY changed once you reach AFL level. Tommy Mac defends admirably and has a real knack for spoiling and contesting well, but as I keep saying... Within the AFL, you need players that display a number of attributes at the elite level and tonight was yet further evidence that we are battlers of the highest order. Skill level and decision making change marginally with confidence and momentum. Not monumentally. We need to hit the draft hard and trade well again to get rid of the [censored] that is still on our list.

Cool fact.

Yes. It's called players being able to kick adequately at the level they're playing at. Hardly surprising. Only at the MFC. We have a team pretty much full of players who consistently miss targets and take way too long to move the ball forward.

Haha. Mate, you give everyone time. Not saying that McDonald should get the flick but jeez you have time for any individual who dons the jumper it seems. His kicking, slow decision making and brain fades are seriously concerning for a bloke playing at this level. That goes for most of our backling. Do people believe time will change these things? Roos has drilled into players the need to compete and none of us can question the majority of the team's 'efforts' at that. But holy [censored], we have some serious troubles with our lack of skill and decision making. Major concerns.

Really valuable player this bloke.... Serious loss if he leaves. Lols. How good does this bloke and his manager think he is? His efforts and brain fades are so incredibly comical for a bloke who is holding off on signing to maximize his pay packet.

I can't be bothered replying to the many rebuttals there have been to my posts regarding McKenzie. I don't mean to be harsh. I don't have a personal issue with either McKenzie or Frawley as some have said, (even if jokingly). I am happy for McKenzie to get a gig providing he is pleasing the coaches at the grade below which clearly, he had done. He did well to limit Stanton's influence last week which was well done and something that everyone already knows he can do. A run with role as a player. I don't believe he will be playing for us within two years, and I look forward to the day where we have a strong midfield mix of players who can play inside/outside and also mind opposition players. It will mean we're progressing as a footy club. I won't applaud efforts that in my eyes aren't worth applauding. Like handballing in the dying seconds of a match or being at the fall of a ball etc. I do appreciate his desire to play his role and limit the influence of opposition mids which generally, he does well. I hope he does a job on one of North's over the weekend. What I don't hope however is that he keeps getting games next year and the year after.. I don't believe he has the ability to improve the other aspects of his game enough to cement a place in a top 8 or top 4 side's midfield. Last post.

It means if he goes, we'll be in an even better position to inject our list with more class and that'll be through the midfield. If Frawley leaves, it'll be a blessing in disguise.. It will help us land a big fish. And one that'll provide a lot more for our club than what Frawley provides. Great news about Hogan though.

Field Kicks: Watts Vince Jones Salem Toumpas Strauss

Well I suggest you come and see some Amateur footy sometime. You'll see plenty of passages of play where those particular skills are executed time and time again without fail.

He is an ordinary footballer who gets a game for reasons I CAN understand at the minute. I've said this a million times. I'll never question the bloke's tenacity and desire to give his all and if that's all AFL football required, then he'd be up there with the best. I am more than reasonable in my judgement of McKenzie. I am what you'd call an unbiased supporter of a club which can sometimes make you standout on a place like demonland. Because of this, my view can be hard to acknowledge on a place where there's so much cognitive dissonance floating around. I've already said that McKenzie held Stanton well on the weekend without providing much himself. Here's a take of a non-biased Melbourne supporter's view on those passages of play McKenzie was involved in: 1. McKenzie happened to be the beneficiary of a ball that spilt off Stanton as he was trying to mark the ball unbalanced. The ball landed at the fall of the feet of McKenzie and he picked it up to fire off a handball. Haha. Are we serious here? Stanton lost his feet, Hurley left Watts to impact the marking contest which he didn't do leaving Watts free for the handball receive from McKenzie. Two mistakes by Essendon players gift us a goal. McKenzie was the beneficiary. There's your unbiased view of the scenario. 2. McKenzie gets first hands to the ball and shoots out a quick handball to a free Vince, (which is inexcusable at that time in the match), which results in a goal after a chain of hanballs. McKenzie had the opportunity to think more offensively in that situation which he did I guess... Got a handball. Should we crack open the champaign? I'm not so sure. 3. The kick to Pederson was most definitely not deliberate. I'll call that now. Whichever way you look at it, McKenzie hit a target in the forwadline which was absolute luck. I'm grateful it worked out, but again, are we really jotting that bit of play down on his CV? Unbelievable. 4. The last passage of play for the night where we happened to have some players free. Jordie in a lucky spot again, well done to him for executing two hand handballs that would be expected from any player that plays at that level. One-two handball from Frawley and then off to a free running McDonald. Now go and show your non-MFC supporter pals these passages of play, and then compare your notes to mine, and see which ones they agree with. Cheers.