Howard_Grimes

I've been guilty of writing off players early in their careers or at least not buying the hype. Every case is different. But let's look at some important details in Kolts case. I'd argue his body coming into the AFL system was already behind many of his peers in that draft group. Never had a full season at under 18's level. Played VFL last year and then straight into a modified off-season at the end of 24. Following the modified off-season, scans showed a stress fracture which meant he's completed virtually no serious pre-season training. Now for him particularly, this is having an enormous impact on his game-day performance imv and would be the main reason behind why is in and out of the sub role and not playing full games. It's completely management related. Any young player who developes stress fractures that early on in their young careers would be treated the same. And perhaps his 'annoyance' at being sub is due to his competitive nature and his desire and want to play. I'm willing to wait until we see him have a full off and pre-season before making a serious call. I agree with others that he hasn't shown a standout trait but again, a lot of this can be down to low confidence coming off no pre-season. I for one love his engagement, energy, celebrating of team first acts and his competitiveness. And I've also liked some snippets I've seen around his decision making in general and his smarts. Now I'm not in the slightest saying Kolt will become Cripps. BUT, he was similar in that he needed to grow into his body, lose the puppy fat, get his body right and complete a full-pre season before anyone saw glimpses. I don't think anyone would have seen much to be excited about in his 2014 year. Go and have a look. I have a feeling Kolt will bounce after he gets his body in order.

You may want to look up the definition of Troll. I don't listen to the podcast although I listened to the intro of the latest one and when I heard the rhetoric around the media attention put on us vs a team like Essendon, I had to chuckle and stopped it there. There's just far too much of a Melbourne bias when it comes to this media vs Melb nonsense. I mean Essendon lose a close match to GC with about 10 of their best 22 out? No [censored] the media will let them off the hook. We lose to the Gold Coast and produce one of the most pathetic opening quarters after coming off a bye with how many premiership players playing and injuries to our best? I mean come on. Common sense! We're 14th and have had the best run with injury out of all clubs just about! I've read your reasons for our losses and some of the excuses used over the years and they were never what you've just listed. Perhaps you're coming around, which is great. Although I do disagree about your point regarding the need for a quality half back flanker with kicking skills. I think that is a complete waste for us and it's odd you'd say that given the stat that listed us as in the top few from moving the ball from d50 to inside 50. Our issues again are around a chunk of the list being too one-dimensional and sharing similar weaknesses. And I'd say those types of players are more problematic through the mid-forward part of the ground. Our midfield group, our running wingers and half forwards and our forward line in general lack greatly in execution, decision making and creativity. Having a defensive hard running half forward or winger with bad skills vs having a player who perhaps doesn't possess the tank, but uses the ball well and creates shots on goal from their decision making/is dynamic is more of the player we need. Look at the best forward lines and midfields in the AFL right now. Attribute diversity, players with points of difference. A dynamic a complimentary group of players is what all the best sides have. Look at Adelaide's forwardline around ANB. Look at Hawthorn's. The Dogs. Collingwood. Etc. And as I've said so many times before, it's taken far too long for Goodwin to make the hard calls that were needed when the tides were turning. They've turned and we are being left out at sea.

I mean, it's pretty simple. The happy clappers just ignore the thread if the negativity is just too overwhelming. Not that hard!

3 frees against, 5 turnovers and of those 23 disposals, 16 were handballs. He also had 15 uncontested possessions. Meaning 82% efficiency is expected from that makeup. I mean for god's sake, scratch the surface a little here. He is absolutely shocking at taking care when disposing of the ball and has been for years. No care when kicking. Use your eyes for christ sake.

Why do supporters like you draw a positive conclusion from the fact that we happen to be the one of the fastest at transitioning the ball from D-50 to inside 50 yet the net result is exactly the same as when we were playing a slower transition game? Is it just because you like the idea of moving the ball quickly? Collingwood who sit first on the AFL ladder are 13th on that list. Fast to move the ball with handball but slower by foot. Again, the zoning in on these types of stats is for what reason exactly? You casually point to the actual problem. Which you've been casually pointing to for some time, going on to say that if we improve our our accuracy at goal and efficiency inside 50 the gap between us and the best teams will close. I mean, how many times have we heard this? So why not share your thoughts, (three years on and perhaps less casually this time) on what you think needs to be done to address it? Would you agree that some significant chess pieces need to be moved to get us on our way? Or are you (similarly to many on here) too attached to the individuals that make up our list?

Great post and you clearly are a good enough observer. List/personnel issue and not enough has been done over the years to make meaningful change. Regardless of what people say on here about yesterday's drafting.

A player who has played under 50 games and you're using his goal to point ratio as the evidence to suggest that he's not necessarily a smart goal kicker? He's a baby and has natural goal kicking sense as is evidenced by those numbers as well as the EYE test. Sure he's not in GC best 22 atm but they're stacked and these are the types of players we should be looking at.

Haha what a ridiculous thing to say. 47 games is nothing. And he's dynamic, skilled and can finish. Gold Coast have a high level of talent and these are the kinds of players that get squeezed out. I'd have home over any of our current smalls right now, (aside from Kosi).

It's just another conversation point to 'prove' that we've changed the way we're playing and that there will be 'teething' issues. All the while efficiency at goal, inside 50, moving ball from inside to out cleanly is the same. I wonder why... I'll give you the hot tip. It's nothing to do with game-plan teething, loading, not being fit enough or aliens.

I stand by my posts expressing and outlining that certain factors/excuses over the last few seasons have become the dominant and popular ones on this site, in part because the posters that spruik them are overly optimistic about our list which imv has been the number one issue behind the consistent and predictable nature of our failings. I hope that clears any confusion up for you and you understand the context and stop cherry picking words. Execution is only a problem because it's the same players who are incapable of executing on a consistent basis. And THAT is a list issue. So it's not just about execution on its own. Playing Viney as a pressure forward is also not the answer imv while we're at it. Adding another player inside forward 50 with poor kicking skills? What on earth will that achieve? We're beyond that and so is the game. The best pressure forwards across the AFL can also play strong offensive games and are dynamic. The problem is that many Melbourne supporters don't like the idea of moving on any one of our core but we're at a cross roads. And sacrifice has to be made for us to move forward and back up the ladder. And we absolutely cannot move back up and into contention if we hold onto all of those senior core players and play them as we have been given the way they're performing. If Goodwin can't make those hard calls, he is not the man for the job. Andnon top of that, I think the whole club would benefit from a change in voice and would be about the only thing to inspire some of those senior core players to get back to their best.

I don't understand why you're quoting me regarding your first paragraph. I was simply pointing to where much of the conversation on here has strayed to over the past four years and that I disagree with a lot of it. Maybe let's leave it. As far as your last paragraph goes, you're missing out again the most important factor in why we haven't been able to shift and why there are teething issues. It goes further than an 'ability or time to learn'. It's about execution. And again it comes back to our list. We simply don't possess enough attributes across the board to execute the type of game required to compete with the best sides. And as we've seen, if out contest and pressure isn't present against lower rung sides, we are also in trouble. That is entirely on Goodwin. Hasn't made the right calls or the calls he has made have been the same ones netting us the same result, the same predictable outcomes and the same types of losses. How many more times are we going to hear that our inefficiency cost us a game? And how many more times from Goodwin are we going to hear that 'we're working incredibly hard on it and the results will come', all the while playing and trusting the same group of core players who are the reason behind it all?

Mental fatigue was listed, it was never a centrepiece. You've stated that it's a centrepiece. I used it as an example of a factor that isn't talked about nearly enough around here due to the conversation being consistently steered in the 'loading' or the 'we're not fit enough' direction by a select few popular posters. Mental fatigue absolutely holds given our core group have barely changed and that's where most of your output as a side comes from. And that's part of the issue. And I also disagree re Binman always stressing that it's a multitude of factors. Perhaps more recently he's come around due to our now consistent and predictable shortcomings. But early days the main conversation and excuses for our performances were around 'loading, injury, not being fit enough'. Not list imbalance, skill execution and level being MAJOR issues, inability to adapt being a major issue, the consistency and predictability of losing the same way being a major issue. Which of course leads to mental fatigue, lower motivation levels, loss of confidence etc etc.

Something that goes on wayyyy too much on DL.

Putting a 'load' into the boys is completely different to the concept of 'loading' in order to peak at a certain time of year. Goody means we 'trained hard'. And there would have been a greater work-load given we had almost an entire week without training. And this is simply in order to maintain fitness levels and be 'on' for the next match. This is what happens when the loading topic becomes THE topic. People get confused.

It's a good question and again I think it's a multitude of factors. Some that all clubs experience when at the top which is the idea and psychology around consistently being the hunted and what comes with that after a period of time. Opposition sides figuring out ways to disarm and undo a game plan. A competition where you need to be constantly evolving. The thing about our game-plan back then was that we had built a core group who's strengths shone in that particular template and I would say definitely masked obvious weaknesses. But due to how well we were able to execute that game-plan, our weaknesses weren't as much of an issue during that time although they were still very much there. Whether that was the finals series of 22/23 or throughout season campaigns at different stages. Finishing skills, converting shots at goal, execution inside 50 when under little pressure etc. All the same issues. I also think we possessed what every club at the top goes through which is aura. And with that comes a strong sense of self-belief and confidence. And with a swell of momentum from the footballing world, media and our own supporters through that 21' flag year, you can see how morale, confidence and the psychology around knowing you're the best in it just plays such a huge role. I think Darren Burgess was another factor. His aura, the confidence he instilled in the players. Even if it was a placebo thing with his programs. These things are very real, especially in sport. It's no surprise to me that our game fell apart once our game-plan had been unravelled. I think out of all the great modern day sides that have won flags in the last decade, we've been the most one-dimensional which is why it's been much harder for us to adapt. Which is completely list related. Too many similar types, too many of the same weakness. All ultimately exposed once our system came undone. I could go on.

The theory that we had/have 'the most demanding' game style as being a reason for our poor performances is just another excuse pushed out to the front of the queue, masking the more pressing issues that have plagued us for a long time. It's the same brigade that spruik the 'loading' talk. And whilst I value Binman's thoughtfulness, articulation and deep-dive into all things stats, I think this place has turned into an echo-chamber of sorts thanks to some of the same excuses getting far too much airtime. The idea and theory that we are not fit enough is just wild and flies in the face of the excuse of the last few years around not having our best players on the park. We've had arguably the best run with injury of all clubs this year, a much kinder draw and now the goal posts have been shifted by the same brigade toward 'mini rebuild/game-plan teething' issue. Every year an excuse is thrown up and pushed to the front and it's a rinse and repeat situation with a handful of the same ones on rotation. All the while, the symptoms persist and issues remain. Perhaps the idea of over-complicating some pretty straight forward corrections is just a more interesting pastime for some and is also a less painful lens to look through? That's how I see it. Now having said all of this, it's not that I'm entirely counting out any influence that these 'rinse and repeat reasons' might have had along the way. They're wholeheartedly interlinked to the ACTUAL issues that plague us. Take the idea/theory that we don't look 'fit enough' as an example. And perhaps I can insert myself into this example as I've experienced it in real time myself during my footballing days to a high level I might add. If you work your [censored] off all game both offensively and defensively, to create space, shut down space, support, become an option, be used as an option and your team mates more often than not butcher the ball around the ground but more importantly on transition/turnover and going inside 50, you are going to experience some pretty significant fatigue. Now the fatigue won't just be physical if this trend continues, (which for Melb it does), the fatigue also becomes mental. It makes you question whether or not you should run to make that space if a particular player who is prone to turning the ball over may be flying through the middle only to kick with absolutely no care. Now if you span this out over a season or even seasons, you can see how this fatigue can manifest in all sorts of ways. But. The easy thing to say is, 'oh we're just not fit enough'. No. The same entirely goes with loading. I would put far more emphasis on the idea of mental fatigue being the more significant factor game to game with us, in part because of what I outlined above. But not limited to. I'd also say match-day crowds at the G, personal life, motivation levels, belief in Goody, the system, each other. All of these factors I'd have ahead of loading. Yet they can't be measured so nobody wants to talk about them whereas the idea of loading can be used an excuse for a loss! Or at least contribute to the 'fatigue' posters see in a loss. Also no. Our issues are simply tied to our list and to the coach. Plain, simple, boring and some would say negative. List imbalance and a coach who has been too slow and too stubborn to move forward from what won us a flag. Of course it's easier to look at 'outside factors' because it feels better and it makes for interesting hypothesising. But it's just that.

Your first sentence set the scene. You suggested the bias is more than just perception. Except it isn't. It's what you are perceiving vs someone else. I am a die hard Melb supporter and disagree with what you've said entirely. It's just a convenient way for ppl to dump emotionally after a loss and divert blame from the club/coaches/players. As far as the May headline goes... Welcome to the world of click bait media. And of course there will be more emphasis put on sensationalising a headline when it involves a player who has a checkered history with the MRO. Would this happen to other players who like May, have a history? Of course. Are one-eyed Melb supporters thinking about this? Of course not.

Isn't it interesting that in our flag year, there were no threads like this? Were the media trying to drag us down then? I think it's more a case of some on here needing to take their glasses off.. There are some wild conspiracy theories going on in here..

All clubs have one-eyed supporters who believe this to be true against 'their' club. They can't all be right can they? It's the biggest load of tosh going on.

Ready for Goodwin to be paid out at seasons end. Lever out when he was never ready nor needed to come back. JVR out of form but also being played ruck constantly can't be helping with his rhythm and confidence as a forward. Caleb Windsor being played in the wrong position and has been all year. Viney, Oliver, Trac back in the midfield together. Petty up forward. Should be a cracker!

Was this sarcasm? Did I miss a previous post?

I mean no offence, it was a bit of sarcasm. Appreciate your training rundowns!

Didn't mean to quote @dazzledavey36 *

I'm not sureeeee but I get the feeling that the players might not be willing to tell die hard supporters that attend training sessions their true thoughts on things.. Just a feeling I have, I dknow..

No worries, happy to agree to disagree. I think just as important is to bring in a new voice, new ideas and a breath of fresh air, especially for the older brigade. And I think Buckley is one (of a few) that are available and that have that kind of aura about them. And I'm of the belief that he'd have learnt a lot about his time at Collingwood, mistakes he made, things he did well/didn't do well etc. Melbourne supporters get too caught up in his 'Collingwoodness' and all that allegiance nonsense. And I think just as importantly, some stronger line-coaches would help. Again, no idea whether or not anything of the sort is financially viable. But as one of many, I'm ready for change. Goody is just a broken record now. No substantial/consistent change in our weaknesses for yearssss and no serious pieces moved in order to keep up with the pack. The players feel it. You can see it. Many supporters feel it. There comes a time.