titan_uranus

Rivers. Also Garland. Maybe McKenzie. That's as far as I can get. Jamar is nothing like he was in 2010. Moloney is woeful. Green is past it, Trengove looks like he has OP, Frawley is treading water (it's hard for him being a defender, though), Howe is useless so long as he can't kick, Petterd has gone backwards, as has Bennell...argh the list is just too long.

A goal! Brilliant!

You're saying the coach takes no responsibility for players not trying? I get your point, but surely the head coach has to be some sort of motivator or source of inspiration, or at least fear, to make players try. Agree with your list of triers though. All defenders, too, except Clark, who is our best player by a mile. The rest of the side, including the entire midfield, is just a total and utter disgrace.

24 tackles for the quarter to 11. That is shockingly bad.

The thing that I cannot tolerate is what seems to me (and most people watching or listening) to be a substandard effort. Once again we look lazy, slow and disinterested. It's one thing to be lacking skill, and trying to implement a new game plan, but it's another altogether to look like you aren't trying your best. Week in, week out, we should be giving 100%, and it doesn't look like we are right now. That is something that no Melbourne supporter should accept, however optimistic you are about our future. Right now, this is just pathetic.

I don't agree. We know Kennedy is their best. McKenzie is doing an OK job of stopping him, so let that work. We need to find another way to stop Jack. McKenzie can't do it all himself. It's not a solution to just move McKenzie onto whoever is playing well at the time

Rubbish. Kennedy is far and away their best mid. He's in Brownlow winning form this year. Putting McKenzie on him makes perfect sense. Jack is an average player at best. Kennedy is A-grade.

Our midfield is shocking. Just so bad. We will go nowhere this year with this midfield, and our efforts at the end of the year absolutely have to be based upon bolstering this midfield. Our defence is good but the best defence can't handle this many inside 50s, week in, week out, and I still have faith in Clark/Jurrah/Howe (he can't kick from set shots though) to score goals if we could get the ball down the other end at a frequent, semi-competent rate.

Bartram is playing on Jack, according to SEN. Parker screws a goal around the body. This is not going well. Sydney 3.0.18 Melbourne 0.2.2 We've got a loose man in defence, too.

Howe misses what SEN called a 'regulation' kick. Typical. His set shots are woeful. Melbourne 1, Sydney 0

I've had this sneaky little feeling all week. It's probably misplaced and simply ridiculous, but Sydney were awful last week against Richmond, and they're missing players. We, on the other hand, have pretty much as good a 22 as we're going to get all year. I don't think we'll win, but I do think we might be close. It would sure as hell be a great game to win, knocking off Sydney up there in Sydney. But I just don't think we're good enough to win anywhere except at the MCG.

It's not a gameplan issue. The gameplan works. What doesn't work is our players. They aren't gelling as a unit, they're not developing trust in one another, they're not learning as quickly as we'd like, some aren't putting the required effort in, and most are lacking in decent skills. With time, the idea is that we can fix most of these issues, and that they'll have been playing Neeld's gameplan for a while, and it will be second nature by then. So then it will all come together. Whether that happens of course remains to be seen. But right now, the issue is not that Neeld has picked a dodgy gameplan, it's that he isn't getting the most out of a lot of his players.

Why? Fitzpatrick was horrendous and should be dropped down to the Casey reserves. He was so unbelievably out of it it was funny. Sellar is either injured or just crap. Martin today for Casey did alright. He's our best option.

Silly thread. Of course it's boring. It's boring because we suck at it and we can't do it properly with any sort of consistency. But we're showing little moments where it works. When it works, and we are on song, we won't be boring. The first quarter last night was not boring.

6. Clark Daylight 5. Magner 4. Garland 3. Rivers 2. Jones 1. McKenzie

Fitzpatrick has to go. No idea who thought he was ready for AFL football. Clearly isn't. Petterd was rubbish, Sylvia isn't working hard enough, Bennell didn't show any improvement, Bail had a second bad game in a row (I'm still inclined to keep him in the side though), so there are plenty of options. Jurrah and Watts surely have to be considered.

Agree entirely with the sentiment of the OP. I thought Malthouse was great on Saturday. He stuck to tactics, coaching, player mindsets, and the game. He did not act like a know-it-all, arrogant, egotistical, Collingwood [censored], as he has done previously.

Agreed. He's not a protected species. He's not getting enough of the ball and he's not utilising his kicking to its maximum efficiency.

Interesting (sobering) stat: we've won 3 of the 24 quarters we have played. GWS (having played one less game) have won 4. Gold Coast have won 5. Port have won 7, Richmond 8, and everyone else has won 10 or more. Malthouse was all over this, and he was right. Incidentally, I thought his commentary yesterday was brilliant. Usually he gets arrogant, egotistical, off topic, and annoying, but yesterday he just talked about tactics and coaching and football. Thought he added a lot. As for the issue - our players still do not feel comfortable as a unit playing this gameplan. That will, hopefully, come over the next few weeks/months, as we continue to play this new style. It's why we don't really see Neeld moving players between the back line and the forward line. He wants them to settle into their roles and begin to learn how to trust one another; how to read where their teammates will go so that they know in advance what to do next.

I see your point, but Neeld did say it was about more than just the tackling. I'm not sure if he'll come back after just one week, but if he doesn't, I'm also not sure it will be simply because he didn't lay enough tackles for Casey.

You're dropping him based on one game. Last week he was great. I've felt he's had an impact in every game he's played this year except this week. He's been chasing, tackling, running, manning up, linking up in important plays, and giving an effort where others weren't. He had a bad one today, I'm not denying that. But that does not mean he should make way straight away. Others should go first (Dunn, Bate, Sellar, Sylvia).

6 - Clark 5 - Rivers 4 - Jones 3 - Frawley 2 - Garland 1 - McDonald

Not convinced with Morton. He's playing better than I thought he might, but still not sure if he's developing well enough to continue to be a factor in our future. Jones has improved this year. I also feel like we're getting better returns from McKenzie, Garland, Rivers and Howe, than we did last year. So there is some improvement coming through. It's not that pronounced, though, certainly not what I think we could legitimately have expected. And there are plenty of players who haven't improved, or gone backwards.

The negative comments towards Bail in this thread are unwarranted, unfounded, and pretty much just stupid. That is all I have to say about this.

People who are suggesting Bail should be dropped have rocks in their head. Yes, he wasn't terribly good today. But he's been one of our better players overall this year, including dominating last week against St Kilda. One bad game and we call for his head. Ridiculous. Sellar is struggling badly, but I'm not sure we have any viable replacements. Sylvia was poor today too. Watts, Bennell, Petterd and Couch are the possible inclusions, but I'm not entirely sure who makes way.