Chook

Hawks were afraid to win that game. Geelong were absolutely brilliant, and completely got into the heads of the Hawthorn players. As a Melbourne supporter, it was great to see the Hawks make fearful mistakes at the hands of their bogey side, just as has happened for years at Melbourne Hawthorn games.

". . . Workmanlike." - Neal Daniher, c.2005 ". . . Competitive." - Dean Bailey, c.2007 ". . . Professional." - Mark Neeld, c.2012

Therefore you are biased and your opinion on the matter should be taken with a grain of salt.

Boo. Bad post. Nobody should wish death on another Club.

Whatever it takes.

Mark Neeld placed too little emphasis on our own players. He kept going on about how good the other side was, but he never said anything about how he went about curtailing the opposition's effectiveness. He seemed content to let them do their thing and cut us up. He called them "slick," but he refused to do anything to slow their ball movement. He put no sand in the smooth West Coast machine, and let us chug along like a broken old engine. Not good enough. Last week he also mentioned how great the Lions midfield was, but he never tagged Black. He never moved Frawley onto Rockliff, and he never rotated anyone interesting into our midfield. How can you criticise our players' lack of effort when the coach gives them no in-game impetus to change. If I'm playing, and I see my coach make positional changes, I start to feel like my coach still believes the momentum can change. If the coach does nothing, then I do nothing. Nothing changes if those with the power to change things do not exercise that power. I was one of Neeld's staunchest supporters last week, but his unwillingness to make positional changes in two consecutive games illustrates that he hasn't learned from his mistakes. Dean Bailey didn't learn from his mistakes either, and look where that led him. Similarly, he kept Bate as the sub two weeks in a row. No coach ever does that, particularly when the sub actually show something in his limited time on the ground. 10 possessions in a quarter in round one, and yet he puts him on the bench again, despite bringing in four new players and having a 32 year old play the entire game, and Jordie McKenzie (who nearly missed the whole pre-season) too. Worrying signs from a man who I'm quickly falling out of love with. My concern for Neeld is not based on our losses, but on his seeming unwillingness as a young coach to learn from his mistakes, or to change things. Change is good. In the AFL, nothing successful remains stagnant for long.

There is a phenomenon whereby a person presented with a negative potential outcome and a positive potential outcome will choose the latter as being more likely. But we as Melbourne supporters have finally wised up enough to buck that trend. We've finally broken through the delusions which have blinded so many of us for so many years. We know how disappointing we'll be, but we're still just as [censored] off as ever about it. We're realists now, but that doesn't stop us from being jaded by our crappiness.

Agreed. Possession stats are said to be meaningless in modern footy, but that's only because teams so often wrack up heaps of do-nothing touches. Not so for the Demons. Therefore, bringing in players who can find the ball is critical. Jamar is fast becoming just as useless around the ground as he once was, and his taps go nowhere. Why, then, is he in the side? He can still take a mark, so he should be moved forward, with Martin moved into the ruck as our main man in the middle. Jamar is better as a forward than Martin, and Martin is better around the ground than Jamar, so it makes sense to switch their roles. Green can't find the ball to save himself, so he should be dropped in favour of someone who can. Sellar, too, has no ball-winning ability, so he should be dropped. He was only brought in to cover the extremely tall WCE forwardline anyway, so it's no big loss. The problem is finding someone who can figure out how to get the ball. Can Morton still do this? I seem to recall him providing options in his first couple of years and wracking up a few over 20 possession games. While he's probably gone backwards, I still believe there is significant upside to his game. Why not give him another opportunity? Bate should have played the whole game this week, and the fact that he wasn't selected on the back of his good quarter last week as a sub has me dumbfounded. It is actually an indicator that Mark Neeld is actually far more clueless about how to manage a football side than I thought he might be. It is a cardinal sin to make a player the sub two weeks in a row unless he is significantly underdone and can't run out an entire game. I refuse to believe this applies to Bate. Bennell is another person who simply has no idea how to find the ball. It appears that Couchy can pick up uncontested possessions (which we lack the ability to do), so he should come right back into the side. Tapscott should come in as a running backman to free up Grimes to go into the midfield and give us some vision and class where we need it most. There are probably four or five more guys who could come out of the side, but there simply aren't enough people pressing up from underneath to warrant many more selection changes than this. However, as long as there aren't any attitude or "buy-in" issues with Brent Moloney (which has been sugested), he is still worth putting in the team, particularly against Richmond, who he regularly plays well against. He still draws the harshest tag and can help free up another player (such as Trengove or Jones) to play a looser, more attacking brand of footy. In all, I am worried about our dearth of players who can effectively rotate through the middle, and I would be trying practically everyone in short bursts in the midfield, if only to see who has potential in this most critical of areas. Even James Frawley should be given a run through there, because at the moment his value in our defence is questionable. He has the physical assets to kill it in the midfield, and should at least be tried there. He gave away three goals from poor defensive play against the Eagles, so his form as a backman should be seriously questioned. I could write more and more and more, but my post is already TLDR. Mark Neeld does have options, and does have things to work with. I can only hope he is more creative than he appears to be. I was one of his staunchest defenders last week, but his press conference this week and (more importantly) his refusal two weeks in a row to conduct any positional experiments with our players has me worried about his inventiveness and creativity. Mark my words: Innovation is key to success. The game is constantly evolving, and trying to copy Collingwood of 2010 (as Neeld appears to be doing) is going to be just as ineffective as trying to copy Geelong of 2007 (which Bailey got sacked for).

Did you hear? Scully's gone too, and Dean Bailey's been axed. He's the one who came after Daniher.

I think Russian's poor performances are getting under the radar. He's gone seriously downhill this year and last year.

Right. I think we had to, unless we wanted to pay him out.

I have noticed that too. Not a fan of Royal at all.

Bartram's selected on his effort. He was at one stage matched up against Dean Cox because he was the only one willing to do the work required to man up the forwards after yet another quick transition from the Eagles' defence. He'll continue to get games until people with better skills are prepared to do the work he does. Bail is similar, but he has more upside, more pace and slightly better skills than Barty.

Look, I agree. But we have bigger concerns than Jack Watts at the moment. I suppose he has the most upside, so he's copping the most criticism. I understand that, but we need to focus on identifying the players who have no future at Melbourne. Jack Watts is not one of those players.

Just a bit of push and shove from the Tiges. We're yet to see if it will pay off, but it's something the Melbourne players didn't show today when they were getting flogged.

Based solely on their performances this round and last round, I'd say Martin, Trengove, Watts, Magner from last week, and Clark, Bate and Jones from this week. Magner is the only one who performed well both weeks. Everyone else is either potential or has so far proven that they can't perform in this day and age.

I know of at least one demon who is a [censored].

Do you really think I'm satisfied with mediocrity? Four players played okay last week, and four this week. Jack Watts was one of them. Why consider delisting him when there's at least 26 players on our list who are performing worse than him.

Free agency might actually help sides like us, contrary to the belief of people like WYL.

Everyone bitching on Jack Watts needs to remember his performance last week. Don't be the typical reactionary supporter, to whom only the last week's game is of any relevance. Jack Watts wasn't very good today, but he was good last week. Obviously there's potential there, and anyone hoping for a Watts delisting is clearly not worth listening to.

The game has moved on and we have not. Run and carry is dead. Also, do not underestimate how bad Sydney were that day. That was probably their worst ever performance under Paul Roos. We kind of just got them on a good day.

Don't give up. There's entirely too much of that going on at the Demons right now.

I feel like assassinating Dean Bailey, Craig Cameron and Barry Prendergast for putting us in this mess. But that would be giving our senior players too little credit for the stunning role they've played in the complete and utter destruction of my beloved Demons.

6. Clark, for the goals he pulled out of his arse. He sure as hell can't pluck a thing out of the air. 5. Magner, for the hundreds of times he dove in for the ball, and for his disposal by foot, which was amongst the best in the side. 4. Jones, for the things he does every single week, but that nobody else in the side seems to want to emulate 3. Bate, for coming on and extracting the ball, running hard back and forward, and kicking it long and straight to targets. Contributed at least three goals in his limited time on the ground. 2. Dunn, for providing a bit of a forward option. Honestly though, he should have done more, as should everyone. 1. Howe, for giving us some leading options up the ground and for working hard back and forward most of the day. Again, made a hell of a lot of errors and goes the big leap too often.

OUT: Green, Macdonald, McKenzie, Sellar, Bennell IN: Tapscott, Moloney, Morton, Couch, Tynan Green is gawn; Macdonald is too slow, too short and his disposal is wretched; McKenzie can't dispose of the ball properly and is still not fit enough because of his injury; Sellar only came in to match it with the WCE talls; Bennell has no idea or willingness to get the ball Tapscott is hard at it; Moloney is still our best midfielder, and as long as he hasn't cracked the sads, and is one of the few senior players who has a shot of taking us forward; Morton is just a hail-mary, hope-he-shows-something selection; and Couch has had some good form of late; and Tynan should never have been dropped. Is Sylvia a chance of playing next round? If so, then he's straight in, perhaps for Colin Garland, who's been woeful all year.