titan_uranus

I agree. What I was trying to say was, if we were struggling to run out games every week, I'd say there's an issue with our fitness. That's not the problem though. The biggest issue facing the club is, and has been for years, mental, not physical.

You do realise West Coast is one of the most inaccurate sides in the league, right? The fact we've beaten Richmond, the Dogs, Geelong in Geelong, and Collingwood (worst record of any of those sides is 9-11), but lost to St Kilda (twice), Essendon and Carlton tells me the opposite. The talent is there. The killer instinct, the drive, the endeavour, the vigour, the winning culture, are not there.

Not being able to run out games would suggest to me Misson and our fitness team more broadly are struggling. However, every week we see us pick and choose which quarters we want to play. The issue is much more likely to be an unwillingness to run, not an inability (that doesn't mean our fitness levels are good enough, I just suspect that what we're seeing is really a lack of effort rather than a lack of conditioning with players trying their hardest to run but not able to). Caveat - I know nothing about sports science.

Done a better job of coaching Melbourne? Roos is struggling with what appear to me to be some pretty fundamental aspects of coaching. But no point 'comparing' him to newbie coaches at different clubs. You might not like it, but you have to consider our club in light of our history, and the damage the previous two regimes did.

I'd go into 2016 without Garland, Howe, Lumumba, Cross, Dawes or Grimes in my plans, and I'd be wary on Dunn.

Garland, Lumumba, Dawes, Dunn, Howe, Watts, Garlett, N Jones, Vince, Cross, Grimes, Jamar. We continue to drop and delist fringe players. But the issue is the core leadership group. Jamar was dropped, Grimes was dropped. Watts dropped himself. The rest continue to coast through games and seasons, untouched. Big decisions need to be made at this club to fix the real problems at our core.

I can't stand Garland's half-assed efforts.

The margin may be smaller but that is mainly a reflection on our opponent. They are last for a reason. Playing one quarter of good football is unacceptable but we continue to do it and Roos has not worked out why it happens, or how to fix it.

The embarrassment continues They're down to one on the bench. We had all the momentum from the third quarter, but blew by kicking 5.6 when 8.3 would have had us in front. Yet we remain 4 goals down. Edit: Newton playing for his career, you'd have thought, but just jogging down the wing when we need desperation.

They didn't score for the last 20 minutes of that quarter. We scored 4.5. We've had one more scoring shot. Even when Carlton turns off we can't bury them. Edit: seriously though, nothing to be excited or pleased about. We're -37 in disposals but still -6 in tackles.

I don't want an apology. I want the club to actively work towards fixing the deep-seated problems that persist.

I'm not watching, but when you read through the comments, notice which type of players are the problem. Senior players. Garland, Howe, Grimes, N Jones, Cross, Lumumba, Dawes, Dunn, Garlett, Watts. We have a deep-seated, cultural problem in this club, we all know it, and it comes from a bunch of insipid, awful, team-harming 'leaders' who do not lead. We have more young talent than St Kilda, I will never back down from that argument, but their kids are able to be led by true leaders in Riewoldt, Montagna, Dempster, Fisher, Gilbert, Steven, Armitage - all aged over 25 and who never give up. Same with the Dogs - Murphy, Boyd and Morris are better leaders than the 10 MFC players I've named above, combined. Roos' job, in part, is to motivate and lift the team, which includes identifying what is going wrong with these senior players and fixing it. He's failed to do that. Two years into his tenure and we have the same leadership and cultural problems. He didn't start the problem, a combination of Bailey and Neeld, back-to-back, did that, but he's not fixing it.

Haven't seen a second. Doesn't look like I will want to. It might not mean much for 2016 but after last week and after Vince and Roos said things about how important it was for us to fire up and respond, for us to be down by 30 points at quarter time, with fewer disposals and fewer tackles, is a disgrace, and an embarrassment. Roos has to take blame for failing to have us mentally up for that first quarter. That's three consecutive weeks of limp first quarters. Roos must take blame, along with our infuriatingly insipid leaders.

Current figures of 4-4-0-1. Hazlewood was supposed to provide this kind of control but failed, which resulted in Johnson and Starc being less effective. Losing 3 Tests to a side with such weak batsmen (Lyth made 96 runs in the entire series, FFS!) is a major disappointment. Our batting has cost us this series, but Marsh and Lehmann have not assisted with their poor selections.

Five of their current top six possession getters - Steven (25), Riewoldt (32), Montagna (31), Gilbert (29), Geary (27). They're playing well, exceeding expectations, but let's not forget they are being driven this year by a much older core which contended for flags 4 years ago (add to those players Fisher (33), Dempster (31) and Armitage (27); Scheider (31) also played well when on the senior list).

We've started doing this more. In the last three weeks against Collingwood, North and the Dogs, it looked to me like we were making a clear effort for our forwards to stay forward of halfway, and when the ball was in the middle, inside the forward 50.

If you're essentially re-opening the 'top 6 vs bottom 6' debate, and you're arguing for the bottom 6 as being more important for us, I disagree with you. Otherwise, carry on.

In terms of A-graders, Brayshaw has displayed more than enough in his debut year to suggest he'll be one. Tyson showed signs last year, and Viney has added strings to his bow this year, but if those two don't continue to develop, we're stuck on one possible future A-grader. Petracca could well be a second. Trengove, if he makes it, has the potential too. Salem is playing half-back, not sure if long term he stays there or goes into the middle (I'd develop him into an A-grade half-back IMO). Add those to N Jones and Vince, and it's not like there isn't hope, but after this group there is no one else on the list other than unprovens (Toumpas, Michie, Newton, Harmes, Stretch, ANB) or those who clearly aren't good enough (McKenzie, Riley, M Jones, Bail). A lot comes down to whether Toumpas, Michie, Newton, Harmes, Stretch and ANB make it. I'm confident in the latter three, less so in the former three. If they do, then we're not desperately in need of drafting/trading for new mids. If they don't, then we will have to source them from elsewhere.

GWS losing today should mean they'll be out of finals contention by the time they play us in Round 23. Could give some meaning to the Round 23 game - with nobody watching or caring, could give us a chance to get a win at Etihad and start 2016 without that ridiculous hoodoo hanging over us.

Source?

Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Lake - these guys are, at their core, dirty players. Each has a nasty streak, each likes to be overly aggressive. Hiding behind the strength that is their super team (and I'm not criticising their abilities, each is an A-grade superstar), when the team is winning they don't have to be emotional or involved, the win will come. But when they need to fire up to get the team fired up, things like this happen. Hodge's was an intentional bump to a player's head, in circumstances where he had the time and ability to decide what he wanted to do, and elected to bump. That should be a minimum of 4 weeks on the sidelines, including any so-called 'guilty plea'. This is the kind of act we should be trying to stamp out of the game. The problem is, Wingard played on. The MRP could well say the impact was 'low'. According to the rules, an intentional bump to a players head, if the impact is low, is worth a 2 week suspension, down to 1 with a guilty plea. Ridiculous.

Also, ripping article on Cricinfo by David Hopps - http://www.espncricinfo.com/the-ashes-2015/content/story/911881.html When you read it, and think about how the series has panned out, it's hard to see how England have beaten us three times. Lyth is awful, Cook's reached 50 once this entire series, Bairstow/Ballance have been just average, Stokes started well with the bat but has faded, and Buttler's not scoring runs either. The runs come from Bell or Root, and each has only played maybe 3 or 4 great innings. With the assistance of Moeen, Broad and Wood making some lower order runs when required, they've done enough with the bat to hold us at bay and relied on our ineptitude with the bat. He also points out the no ball problem that's getting worse. Finn and Marsh both took wickets on no balls, and both times the gap between foot and line was enormous. Umpires are so worried about making the right decision at the striker's end that they seem to be missing regulation no balls, let alone tight ones. Bowlers are pushing the envelope with it because they're not being called through their spells, which results in more no balls occurring, and any time you take a wicket they're going to check. Bowlers obviously can fix the problem by learning to bowl from behind the crease but if umpires let them go aside from wicket balls, it's going to keep happening.

How about Lyon's ball to Cook! I had expected this kind of performance pre-series - Smith, Warner, Rogers making runs, then attacking bowling from Starc and Johnson with control from the other pace bowler(s). Neither Watson nor Hazlewood could manage it, and Siddle should have been playing at least one Test earlier. And, of course, the batting has been abysmal other than here and at Lord's. I wouldn't write Siddle's career off. Rogers and Clarke need replacing, so Voges could hold his spot simply because we don't have three good enough batsmen to come in (we don't have two, to be honest). But I wouldn't be continuing with Voges in the side on the back of a 70.

Hopefully we can learn something from Port's performance. They can, technically, still make the finals though - maybe that 0.001% chance has kept them going. Hardly matters really. Hawthorn's members are largely fake. They've signed up on the back of the club winning flag after flag. They're not real supporters though. We get made fun of for our supporters not knowing who the players are or going to the snow or not really caring, but IMO Hawthorn's supporters are much worse with that. It may be years and years away, but I long for the time when they fall apart.

As is normal for Demonland, everyone thinks it's either a meaningless game, or a game so vital that a loss will set us back years. It's neither of those. It's important - for a club like us, every game is important. But a loss will not ruin us, as much as it will disappoint and embarrass us.