Goodvibes

You guys are all wrong. Richmond are building a winning culture. From Harry over at Punt Road End: what's everyone complaining for we got a win and we're gonna build a winning culture from it. our list is thereabouts and all it needs is a few wins, some confidence, ben cousins and a new coach. finals here we come in 2010 and beyond. geez some of you "supporters" are hard to please, the boys had a red hot go and dug deep and got the win in the end, mcmahon was brilliant. we don't need stupid draft picks, we need wins and a winning culture. we have a good list. it doesn't matter how you play its the win that counts. winning isn't everything it's the only thing. melbourne were out for a win and we showed them who's boss. can't you see how happy mcmahon and the boys were after the win. they'll grow an extra leg from this win. gotiges. It made me giggle.

I can't watch this. This is the most blatant tank in the history of tanking. Carlton look like amateurs compared to us. Surely there will be ramifications during the week. I feel for Richmond fans.

Let's hope he's had a Steve Johnson epiphany as opposed to a TJ epiphany.

Ummmmm yep. Melbourne flag Girls Melbourne flag Night at the pub Melbourne flag Going to gigs Melbourne flag I've quoted Nick Hornby regularly on here before. Unlike other teenagers who've seen their childhood idol hold up the premiership cup, it's those like me in their mid thirties to mid forties who've never been able to fully shake off their childhood ambitions. Sure other things change - job, marriage, children, responsibilites blah blah blah but thinking about a Melbourne flag still occupies way way too much of my time. Has Melbourne's failure to win a premiership inhibited the ability of many of us to properly grow up? In regards to your original intent, however, history has shown that it matters little who a young player once followed. Can anyone name more than a couple of examples of a player who has stated that their reason for switching clubs was to play for the team they followed as a boy?

How about you answer my question. How does the club orchestrate losing 6 of the last 7 games of the season? Please consider the impact of any football department decisions that are perceived by the playeing group to be made in the hope of losing games rather than winning games. What stance would our sponsors be taking? How would individual players react to being told that they need to have a rest?

Mate, I apologize if that offended you but your posts often make alot of sense and a couple of the things you posted in the moments straight after the game didn't meet your usual standards. It's been a strange day with some strange emotions. I didn't want to win today either but I'm yet to hear from anyone how we can actively go about tanking without destroying the fabric of our club and sending a pretty damning message to our playing group. Nothing would give me greater joy than to see Scully and Trengove/Morabito at our club next year but some of the stuff that has been posted on here since the win (yes win) has been amazing.

Mate it's a simple question, how? If it's not hard, explain how it should be done.

You've officially become the Demonland voice of reason. We do, indeed live in interesting times. If we are to lose a priority pick (and probably Tom Scully) because we win too many games then we want to see young players emerge to win those games. Jurrah and Petterd did emerge today and in the former we have a potential champion that will sit in our best 6 players that Hannabal has rightly focused on recently.

How exactly should we make sure we only win 5 games? Everyone talks about playing people out of position, resting players and implementing new gameplans as a means of ensuring you don't win games. As Jaded pointed out Bailey did throw the team around dragging Davey and Grimes out of the play, resting Jurrah when he was clearly our most dangerous forward threat. What else should Bailey have done? Who should be rested for the rest of the year? Who's going to tell a 100% fit player with bonus-driven components in their contract that they should have a rest for a couple of weeks? I'm sick of people wheeling out the old 'ruthless' chestnut and linking it to losing games of footy. I'm really intersted in how you'd go about orchestrating loss after loss without the rest of the football world knowing, alienating large sections of the Melbourne membership in the process and probably pissing off a group of young footballers who are paid to win games.

We won the game with Petterd and Jurrah kicking 4 each! They've played 23 and 4 games respectively. So, let me get this right, we need to play a load of young kids to make sure we don't win but we've got to make sure we send out the right ones in case they end up winning you the game. I think I get it now - easy! And you're suggesting we should be playing Bennell more. He's missed only two games all year! Why don't you have a little holiday from your computer before you lose all credibility. I didn't want to win either but venting your frustration with incoherent drivel is going to help.

Unless the alternative was losing him for nothing in the pre-season draft. Can't see a professional club like Adelaide letting a quality kid like Dangerfield go but I'd like to think he's exactly the kind of player we'd have a crack at - even if it was a long shot!

Everyone is forgetting that Sylvia didn't have access to the "it was only Josh Carr" defence.

31,500 members. How many, like myself, are interstate? How many are overseas? How many buy memberships as presents for those who are either too young or too old to go regularly? How many play football themselves on Saturdays? How many, like our president, were too sick to attend? If there were 2 - 3 thousand Eagles fans and the majority of the rest were Melbourne members, I think we did alright.

As opposed to the bad case of premature adulation experienced by thousands of West Coast fans after last weeks fourth quarter effort. Very messy affair.

How would you have felt if we'd lost? I would have been bloody disappointed given that our coach and members of the team publically talked about playing for Jim. That's why we had to win. I'm not downplaying the way in which we went about it. There were many positives. Grimes and Jurrah have proven to me that they have what it takes to be meaningful members of a premiership 22. Our key defenders were awesome and Jamar has shown that he has taken a significant step in his development. McLean responded after a shocker last week and Sylvia continues to shine. I was merely referring to the quality of our opponent. West Coast were missing their two biggest stars, were a rotation down all day and haven't won on the road in their last 17 attempts.

W=S is dead right. We can't be hypocritical. We're calling for patience with Watts yet willing to judge Nic Nat on 3 games. Nah stuff it. This made me laugh. From Bigfooty, "Take away his stupid haircut and he's a black Kepler Bradley".

It's hard to read much into this game. We had to win given the build up. No Cox or Kerr and then losing Jones early in the match certainly didn't help the West Coast cause. I think McLean, Jones and Moloney showed that they'll be important in the future as long as they're not all in the middle together. Jamar has played 3 rippers this year and has genuinely taken a step. If Grimes steps into the midfield as we're all hoping and Scully (should we get him) impacts as expected and Sylvia and Davey maintain their current form, our midfield will be solid. Blease, Strauss, Bennell and pick 2/3 rounds out a good midfield combination. Garland returning to an already solid defensive 6 and Watts and Jurrah maturing to lead our forward 50 and we're going to win some games over the next few years. We've just got to remain patient and understand that this group will get younger again next year and inconsitent performances will be a given.

An example of a good bigfooty thread: Matt Rendell on impact of GC and WS

Cheers. The point is simple - 4 of our previous 13 draftees from the last 2 years came from alternative pathways. If you think no one says it's the only pathway you need to read a couple of the posts above. Each year for the last three posters have declared who they'd like to take at each of our selections based on one day in front of the TV. I was just reminding people that we look far and wide and don't rely solely on this day of days where everyone (including yourself) consider themselves a drafting guru. If you want to score points against other posters with snide remarks go bully some pimply kids on bigfooty!

It's a long long way out. We also place a ridiculously big emphasis on the U18 National Championships - particularly this one telecasted day. How did Jamie Bennell and Laim Jurrah go at the championships last year?

Worsfold puts it really simply: "They have got a very clear focus - they are playing a lot of talented young players and unfortunately that means they go through times when kids lose confidence or get tired," It's hard to tell fellow Melbourne supporters to be patient given the last four and a half decades and it's often seen as a cop out to talk about inexperience and light bodies but sometimes the simplest answer for a drop off in "competitiveness" is the correct one.

Link here

Lecras wasn't getting near it and Selwood helped create some much needed forward pressure. Can't a team just be crap anymore.

Never has so much been written and so little said. Jamar is better in the middle, PJ looks good around the ground and picks up possessions. It's a simple debate. What do you want your ruckman to do? Pick up cheap touches or win/neutralise the ruck contest. Clearly Jamar has shown an ability to win more ruck contests. Those, like me, who feel that that is a pretty important quality for our first choice ruckman to have, will choose Jamar over PJ regardless of how athletic the latter is. If PJ was able to have more impact in the ruck contests he may have a medium term career as a 2nd ruck option. This year has shown that his development has stalled somewhat when it comes to his core business - winning the ruck contests! Two decades of Stynes and White have confused Melbourne supporters. We've forgotten what a good ruckman does first and foremost. If we had a ruckman that did both, we'd have Dean Cox and as we know, there's not many of those around. Have a look at the premiership teams over the past 8 - 10 years. The formula is simple; two big logs that compete hard at the ruck contest and give their midfield a better than even chance of winning the flag.

Don't follow the example of your senior team-mates? Seriously, what was the lesson? I thought he was fantastic. His composure, hardness, skills and courage were impressive.