rpfc

Credit where it's due? But none to Moloney for his own failings? I have gone over my views a couple years ago when it was relevant, if you are interested enough - go for your life: http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/29309-brent-moloney/ We needed him to stand up in games we lost, did we not? 21 touches (I took out the Geelong game when he was ill) in losses and 28.5 in wins in 2011.

I would agree that there is a difference between the fundamentals and the gameplan, and that the first is what Roos is looking for before anything, but I would disagree with your last 10 words there; your list should evolve to suit your plan. Look, if we are talking tactics - yes, kick it long fat side to Hogan when he is up and going. But the game plan has to be Roos driven - and it should surround how he thinks footy games will be won in the near future. Designing a game plan around a faulty list is fraught. Constantly changing the 'system' as your list changes would be frustrating for a player looking for consistency and predictability. Roos has already said the players were amazed that they will play one style for 100% of the game they have been thrown so many different ideas in the last few years. I see Roos having a clearly defined game plan surrounding possession footy if quick movement forward is not possible, I don't think that is suited to this list, but I don't think we should be making concessions for this list - there will be another turnover at the end of 2014.

Where is that happening?! Maybe I am skimming over posts from certain posters...

The problem was not that he didn't know good systems or gameplans, Neeld's problem was that he couldn't sell it. Roos has proven he can and that is what I mean in the OP when I say that talent will not get you a game, persistence with the system and the fundamentals will get you a game. He could have chosen a style of play more accessible to this group but I am glad he didn't.

Such as? I find it funny how people are reacting to how bad we are still because they thought it was all Neeld. As for Moloney - he was averaging 10 touches less in losses than in wins in 2011. Neeld was a terrible coach but he didn't wish Brent ill will, he tried to tell him how to expand his game and he didn't want a bar of it. Neeld wasn't the right messenger to say the least but the song remains the same as we have seen with Roos; he is also making defensive fundamentals the cornerstone of our 'system.'

I don't have kids, but from discussions with them at cricket training (I used to coach juniors) the experience of the footy was mainly about their dads, uncles, older brothers etc. and how they felt/reacted about the game. ie. 'I don't like going because my dad gets really angry and sad.' I went as a kid as saw plenty of losses, one out at Waverley when Lockett went nuts sticks in my mind, but I still remember it fondly because my dad got me pie and let us stand up where it was hard to see undercover (it was raining). I don't want this to come off as some sort of childless know-it-alls rant about how you behave at the footy - only that your boy loves your team because you do and he just wants to got to the footy with his dad. (Until he is a teenager and then he will go with his mates and he will become a little sheet...)

Why do you have Daniel Ricciardo in your avatar? He's had as many posium finishes this year as he did last year when he wasn't with Red Bull...

But give 'em hell Shannon! Woo!

Lovely. Or someone who can't play in the cold I presume?

He had one kick, it was an absolute ripper in the first minute of the game against NM at Etihad.

With due respect to Beamer who played some good footy against bad teams, if those were the choices I would leave empty handed.I loved the Moloney that played with us for 5 years, then he played against us for a couple, and then he went to Brisbane. He is welcome back anytime, but Neeld wasn't wrong to ask for more, he was just the wrong person to be asking.

You do realise that Hogan's career is not over? Or do you think Dr Barrett is onto something? He's injured, deal with it.

If you wanted to get games into players would you 'carry' them against good teams or play them against bad teams you look down upon as a backwater of football civilisation?

Another team bringing back underdone players against us. At some point we are going to make a team pay for this BS.

You don't 'sit out' players who are holding out on re-signing their contracts in this modern era of FA. You have to just deal with the fact that players are going to sign later and later.

He might retire... They should have let him go last year - this is no way to end a career like his. Cross is a specimen, you would want to see how is body is but I am all for getting in leaders to drive standards.

He obviously feels his development would be harmed if he plays...

The clock got wound back three years over the summer, OD. And, once again, 'Yay, we have Paul Roos as coach! Everyone gets a clean slate... except for the players I don't like/rate.'

Roos is a man after my own heart: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-04-24/systems-first-then-personnel-roos There are some who would say you should coach for the list you have but Roos is saying that the players we have are going to learn the game plan he wants to implement. And I sense the implicit point that those that play the system will be preferred to more talented players that don't play the system.

It may happen but it isn't acceptable. Getting dropped isn't the end of the world. I honestly think that some fans see a long term injury in a better light for a players career than being dropped. Players lose form, they lose desire, they get dropped, they change roles, they lift after a spray, they get inspired by a teammate, et al. I hope he bounces back because he was having a promising start to 2014.

Excuse me? I am not hanging anyone here, I have already maintained that it is an understandable error. But it is a frustrating error and one that continues to annoy me for the fact that they did not tell us that he had a sore back before the game when he evidently did. Nothing is ever black and white, Billy. But this is a dark shade of grey - he shouldn't have played.

You don't know that however... He's a good player now. Haven't you heard?

Agree with Cudi. Outside of a couple wilfully blind rah-rah merchants Landers can see the light at the end of the tunnel. To the bandwagoners that will make up the 36k-45k members we want over the next few years - all they see is more darkness that we are travelling through. We need a big statement to get half of them onboard this season. Otherwise we will have to continue the small improvements and get them next year or the year after. They want to rock up to a QB game and have their friends and the voices on the radio tell them we are a chance. Until that mindset happens - our support and membership will stay where it is.

Kept Dunn 2 years ago.

I didn't see that hit, did you? I think that is BS. He exacerbated an injury to his back and it was a mistake to play him.