rpfc

Now that's sarcasm... I really don't believe my attempt was 'lame,' but I had a disclaimer at the bottom that said if anyone disagreed with my interpretation they should contribute. I also asked if anyone knew a better gameplan to suit the most undeveloped list in the AFL, and if they could point out its virtues as opposed to the one Bailey is using. I wager that any gameplan would be undone by lack of run at crucial times, inability to hit simple targets, and poor delivery into the forward fifty. And finally, if the players didn't do skill work (kicking and hanballing) they would be even worse than they have been. 'Week in, week out' kicking at training is one tradition that won't be leaving us any time soon.

This is how I see it. Didn't get to see it much on Friday. Saw plenty of it against NM, Rich, WB, St K, and Haw.

I have nothing against the guy but circumstances have made it difficult for him to be offered another contract. We have to have three deletions, I think 5 or 6 would be the go this November and the older you are the less chance you have of staying on the list.

Our fixture is like a poorly managed golf course. The front 9 is effing impossible and the back 9 is filled with 120m par 3's. We play WCE, Port, Rich, and Freo at the G. And NM at the most awful stadium in the world. This back 9 is going to be problematic if we hit too many greens in regulation. We really only want to hit 3 good shots... Maximum... Hopefully our putting is terrible...

A style that requires players proficient in handballing, and can pin-point short kicks, and players that have good vision, decent speed, and a large aerobic capacity. I explained what I believe to be our gameplan a few posts ago. And if you were being facetious, I don't see how it is constructive...

With his indiscriminate kicking he is going to struggle to stay in the best 22 from next year on, however the thing that gives him a chance is that you need a good stopper, and he is that. Unless we can find another dedicated shut-down player with better skills and vision, Clint Batram will be at the MFC.

I will give you than inexperience isn't a unbreakable ceiling. But you have to agree that Bailey came to this club with a list that was dominated by players older than 28 and younger than 24. Without no-one in their peak (25-28) he had to look young and redevelop the list. And if he is redeveloping, he may aswell mould the list to play the style he wants. And if Morton, Grimes, Maric, Cheney, McNamara, Martin, Watts, Blease, Strauss, Bennell, Jetta, Bail, and Jurrah were brought in to play a certain style then the rest should coalesce or play for Casey. I would say by 2011, 10 of those players would be first 22 for the MFC.

We lost 7 games last year by 60+. 2008 was an awful season of adjustment and bloodletting. I refuse to concede there has been no improvement in 2009. The team has more promise, the style of play has more fluidity, and the skills are better. They are still poor on many occasions in all these areas, but that is because we are coming from so far back. Rather than the past two games, think of the games against NM, Richmond, WB, WCE, St K (1st half) and Haw (2nd half).

Insightful. Explain to us why. So Brock, Brent, Brad, Cam, and Nathan cannot hit a forward target because of a crisis of confidence?!, and because they are unmotivated to kick properly by Bailey?! You are searching (if one can call it that) for simple answers and blaming the coach is the simplest answer there is. And I don't think the players are letting the MFC down - I think a lack of run at crucial times, an inability to hit simple targets, and poor delivery into the forward 50 is letting the MFC down.

Since Rd 6 we have played Geelong, WCE (Subi), WB, Hawthorn, St Kilda, Collingwood, and Essendon (Etihad). We have looked bad in the first half against the Hawks, the second half against the Saints, the entire Collingwood game and the 3rd quarter against the Bombers. I expected to win none of these games, I expected us to look awful in some of these games. We are, after all the worst team in the league. The narrative, which the more malleable of you easily buy into, has been moulded by the games with the most TV exposure and the most recent games: both of which happen to be disappointing games against Collingwood and Essendon. I see next season in the games against WCE, WB, the second half against the Hawks and the first half against the Saints, and the brave effort against a very good Geelong.

I think GC17 have 3 or 4 PP's so the team that finishes last will get Pick 4 or 5. I am not sure though. We really need a sticky up the top about this stuff.

It's 'over-complicated,' it's breeding 'indecision,' the players don't know it, and Bailey should 'realise there is something wrong with his gameplan.' You have written a lot and said nothing. What is wrong with the gameplan other than its 'complexity'? What gameplan should Bailey employ? My personal view on this is our midfield cannot kick straight, and doesn't run hard enough. And we average a three goal loss of the third quarter because the entire team seizes up and doesn't want to be the one to eff up and so we just get blown away. The gameplan becomes moot when players can't execute basic skills and seizes their run when tested.

I would agree that you have to change your style in line with your players strengths IF you have a settled experienced group that could challenge for the top 4. Bailey came in when we were in the bottom 4 with 1000's of games worth of experience retiring or nearing retirement. Given this relatively 'clean slate' he should stick to rebuilding the list emphasising on the gameplan that he believes will win a flag. Finally, I would argue that the talent is raw and young but it suits Bailey's vision: the defense and midfield looks quick and attacking with good vision and skills (Frawley, Cheney, Grimes, Morton, Maric, Bennell, Strauss, Petterd, Garland, and, from all reports, Blease). I certainly agree that skill errors (especially from senior players: Green, Bruce, McLean, Moloney, and McDonald) are costing us, and there is no doubt that our forwards are kick chasing on a wing too often.

Well I certainly am smelling some sh!t. Lack of a gameplan... As I said in an earlier post - BACK IT UP! Don't just insult me and tell me there is no gameplan, explain why you think that. All you have mentioned is that Bailey has a stale "hard working" meme, that he doesn't engender passion, and that Davey is too predictable as the bloke "quarterbacking" us off half back. THE GAMEPLAN The gameplan, as I see it, is based around quick movement through the corridor with a set up kick to half back as several mids and HBF's stream forward with sharing (and risky) handballs through the defensive corridor and deliver, preferably, a short kick to approx. 60-70 and then have lead-up forwards meet the ball. In the event of a crowded HF line the mids should continue their run and provide a handball option for the player with the ball 70 out and deliver to the top of the square over the top of the flood. This gameplan requires a willingness to run a marathon every week if you are a mid, and have good-to-exceptional handballing skills for all players streaming off HB. Forwards need to be able to double-lead, or triple-lead, as they may lead for a kick that might be a lateral handball instead and they must be able to adjust. I believe this to be similar to how Geelong move the football and requries a demanding skill-set that many are having trouble with, although some are improving remarkably (Moloney's handballing would be an example). Many say that you have to play the gamestyle that suits your players, but why? They should adjust to the coach, if he thinks that is the best chance of a flag, you change your style, work hard and be damn grateful for the opportunity to play for this great club. That is my read on what the MFC has tried to do throughout the last two years, if anyone disagrees, please discuss. If anyone wants to criticise, please point out what would be a better way.

I smell a troll... Why is it a wonder when the worst team in the AFL loses games and looks awful at times? I don't know whether Bailey can coach, he hasn't had the cattle to show us. He's developing the cattle and hopefully next year will provide steeper improvement, but do NOT tell me that we haven't shown more this year than last. I went to about 15 games last year and there is little comparison, other than wins and losses. And that 'dead wood' you are refering to? How is that Bailey's fault? Who, of the last two drafts, are dead wood?

Agree. Hate that effing stadium. I'm getting angry just thinking about my experience last night.

To all the whingers who say "You can't criticise Bailey, McLean, Watts, etc on this site" - you are kidding yourselves. You can say what you like, but you just don't like the fact that the smarter posters on 'Land tell you to back up your crap with facts or reasonable arguments and you just cannot do it. To this end: Watts is 18. Even tougher with the way we kick to our forwards. Bailey is a 'list manager' at this stage of his career; his coaching starts when we aren't easily the worst group of players (for various reasons: age, experience, injury, skills, or just poor performers) in the AFL. McLean will be better with a pre-season in 2010. He's been brave this year, but his kicking has been very disappointing. Averaging 7 clearances a game in the last 4 games is fantastic. Say what you like, but be prepared to back it up with an argument...

Agree. He is a baby at the start of his career - I'm just enjoying his fledgling career. It's gotta start somewhere, and it's gonna start slow... Just be happy to see the beginning of something special. And Captain Picard is right to be frustrated, some of you are losing my respect pretty quickly. And what other currency is there on forums like this? Just remember - Just because you think it, doesn't mean you have to come on here and type it up. Save yourself some embarrassment and keep it to yourself.

This year it is $7,693,750 and next year it will be $7,950,000.

No worries. Couldn't you have just said 'stop bagging injured players'? Beamer will never be injury free, and we all know Brock is behind the '8-ball' so I sympathise with where you are coming from. However, people can say what they like, doesn't mean that 75% of the posters on this site won't jump down their throat. As a 'throat-jumper' I will defend Brock and Brent (although point out they need to kick straighter), and all the others, but posters can say whatever inane things they want to.

One point I would like to make to those who don't like the idea of a 1 year extension at the end of this season is that if we were to leave it to later next year we would have to give a longer contract. You cannot say in August 2010 that Bailey will coach just in 2011 aswell, it will be 2011 and 2012 (possibly 2013). So I think the prudent thing to do is give him a 2011 assurance this September/October.

Norm Smith. And don't say it couldn't happen, we have all seen Kate & Leopold. Oh, we haven't? You're not missing much, actually... Very average movie... Oh, and I didn't vote. Very average poll...

Agreed. 1 year extension before the draft. Show of faith.

Just compared the MFC webiste and they may have got their Macs backwards. Tom McNamara is out with with a hip flexor, so I think it's a mistake.

If true, its a kick in the teeth; he was averaging 7 clearances a game for the past 3 weeks. Perfect opportunity to see if Valenti is up to it though.