heartbeatstrue

I'm the norm mate, plumb in the middle of the bell curve. All the rest fall to one side or the other. There you go, I've said it

I was not at the meeting last night, but it will take a lot more than fine words with lashings of optimism (even spoken "honestly and passionately") to convince me that the current coaching group is the right one to solve our horrendous problems, going forward. Neeld may well be a good coach under certain circumstances. What we spectators have seen last year and particularly for the 9 games this year provides no assurance that MN is the coach to take this group to success (and in my books, success equates with winning games). A young team will always risk getting hammered, but defensive structures in the game plan go a long way to minimising the size of those thrashings. So far, either effective defence is not part of the plan or it is, and the playing group aren't putting the structures into practice. For 9 weeks! Where is the learning? Can MN motivate the players? These are the questions I want to see answered on the field. And not in 2 or 3 years time, but starting this Sunday. No one's saying Neeld is responsible solely for our current deep problems. But on the evidence (not words), is he the coach with the necessary solutions? Because we should be seeing signs of learning and improvement by now.

Well said. Thanks, I share your views.

I can see that this is a good post from the accolades, and I agree that it's an emotionally charged issue for all of us who passionately support MFC each week. Below are just some thoughts on the above lines in the post. My own view after watching them for 8 weeks (I didn’t see the Freo game) is that Neeld is not the ONLY problem. But I do have doubts about him being the coach with the solutions that are necessary going forward. Watching Footy Classified last night, maybe I was dreaming but when the discussion got onto Alastair Clarkson, I found myself wondering how the year would have panned out so far if we were coached by Clarkson or Malthouse or Roos for instance. Or even Gary Ayres. The thing that is missing from the coaching in all the games I’ve watched is defensive pressure and the structures that bring that (and go a long way to preventing huge thumpings). That is a coaching issue which all the sides coached by Clarkson, Malthouse, Roos and Ayres have as foundation strategies. Lack of effort. Can Neeld motivate this group? On the evidence, there are doubts. Fitness? Maybe more it’s an issue of young bodies, but then for 25 years we’ve always been the weaker bodied side, up against the giants of the comp. But we were told that Neeld’s pre-season had worked wonders. No disagreement that Neeld (or Clarkson or whoever else had taken over) inherited a totally dysfunctional set-up. I question whether Byrnes and Rodan will contribute much to the necessary solutions. The cultural issues are deep-seated and I agree that Neeld has had the guts to begin to tackle them. Other hard changes within the club and its recruiting unit are essential and will happen because it’s now clear they must. Yes the players share some blame, but the reality is these are the players we’ve got going into the future, more or less. Wholesale changes aren’t possible, so we need to coach the absolute best out of them, and build game experience and competitive structures into them. Plus motivate them. Jobs for the coach who will be part of the solution. Yes the problems are largely in the past, but the solutions lie ahead. And is Neeld the coach with the solutions? Probably not on the evidence we’ve got before us. And we absolutely cannot risk keeping going down a path that does not contain the solutions. Your post is thought provoking and a good basis for dialogue, whether we agree in total or in part. Thanks for the cool-headed thinking.

Quite simply, because the team isn't religiously putting in place the defensive structures at stoppages that prevent this from happening. Why that is so is more inexplicable. The obvious answer would be that the coaching staff aren't enforcing this and practising it as an absolutely essential part of any game plan that aims to prevent huge thumpings. But these are AFL coaches, so that doesn't exactly ring true. But clearly Neeld isn't able to get the players to do this, every stoppage in a totally disciplined and accountable way. Which is what I would blame the coach for. As your daughter sees very clearly, something's seriously not working with the current setup. What can we change? Like you, I will never stop loving and supporting this frustrating club of ours. It's in the blood!

Well, it's fair to say Neeld is not the ONLY problem. Neeld probably can coach, under certain circumstances. Like, taking Ocean Grove to a premiership. He perhaps could coach Geelong quite well. But the evidence clearly indicates that Neeld can't coach the current Melbourne list. Just look at the abysmal lack of defensive pressure and structures we've been watching for 9 weeks now. Ineffective defence equals big thrashings. It was evident in Rnd 1. What has changed? Whose job is it to put effective defensive structures in place? The only alternative is that the coach is demanding it but the players are not obeying orders, week after week. Even that would not reflect well on any coach. Or they're incapable, which is the worst nightmare thought imaginable because this lot is what we've got, more or less, for the foreseeable future. Going back over the past 10 years or so, you can reasonably point the finger at recruiting, boy's club culture, inept boards, some ordinary presidents, morale-sapping staffing decisions, Garry Lyon's fiddling, some poor coaching staff, etc. Now I share the view that we are at crisis point. We need to change some things that can be changed, quickly. Perhaps Gary Ayres would come across? Or else the AFL will step in and take over. I am just gutted with where we currently are, and it's fundamentally not Neeld's fault. But he's shown that he's not part of the solution. Supporters can't have any faith in Neeld stemming the thumping losses by effective defensive structures (it hasn't happened in 9 weeks although the need is patently obvious), or in Neeld motivating the players to play hard, tough accountable footy. So, change nothing and what are we prepared to accept against the Hawks? Will losing by something between 60 & 100 be seen as a respectable loss "considering where we are"? Perhaps much more than 100 would have Neeld "on shaky ground"? For my part, going to the 'G on Sunday expecting anything less than a win is unacceptable. For the players to run out knowing that the only expectation is to not lose by too much, is pathetically objectionable. But without change, that's the awful reality.

Thinking about yesterday, maybe dreaming (OK, nightmare actually), the players play like they're frightened of something. There was one passage of spontaneous footy in the 3rd qtr that was so out of the ordinary that I commented to my wife beside me, they just played on instinct and it was exciting. It resulted in the ball with Howe directly in front about 40 out. He missed but it was what I go to the footy to watch. The rest of the day it was like frightened rabbits drilled to try and do things that don't come natural, don't make sense and are destined to abysmal failure. If MFC keep this up, nobody will want to watch let alone endure the embarrassing beltings. What are they afraid of? Not getting a game next week? Is Neeld such a pathetic manager and motivator that he thinks having them all afraid of him is the recipe for success? The coaches box is the same, the whole lot of them looked uninspired and unemotional all the way through. It was a pathetic passive bunch in there. If anybody had any clues about what to do, they too appeared too frightened to speak up. A culture of fear is not the way to get results or to play footy that is attractive to watch.

It needs to be quick so we can start moving on asap. Quick so the players can feel good about their footy and their futures again. The longer this inept Board delay, the greater the damage and loss of support.

Why delay the inevitable? Get it done and move on. The longer this inept Board of ours delay, the more long-term damage.

Sitting in the members today, under the Melb coaches box, here's a summary of the comments and feelings. A dread of the MFC v Hawks game,several commenting that they'll be anywhere but the 'G that day. Frustration and at times anger at the box who all sat gazing out impassively into space, helpless to do anything. Why are they helpless? Has Neeld got them all cowed into submission to him? No sign of much if any emotion, except for a few rolled eyes at some of McBurney's pathetic display. If I knew nothing other than what I saw in the coaching box today, I'd assess the lot of them as totally uninspiring. A few members waved fists at the box (unfortunately Neeld had left for the boundary) and shouted at the glass. Quite a few comments too along the lines of the game plan is so convoluted and impossible that the players will never understand whatever Neeld's expecting of them, and it's never going to work anyway. Quite a lot of empathy for the players, who weren't being blamed over all. In my opinion if Neeld stays the year out, our club will be totally stuffed beyond recovery. We have seen 7 weeks of absolute crap without any real improvement, they still don't have defensive accountability anywhere on the ground, and the players seem too frightened to play instinctive, risk-taking exciting footy. It's always handball back, head for the boundary, avoid the centre corridor if possible. If the players had bought into whatever this spud is trying to do, they would play with far more intensity and tackling than we saw today. We are currently pathetic and hopeless and no obvious way of improvement, except for a complete change of coaching direction.

No it was the sandwich lady. I would like to see what Todd Viney could do with our players for the rest of the season.

Last time we tried something like that, they fined us $500,000.

Timely thread, thanks DF26! Big Max Gawn is a positive. My biggest worry (and I believe our big liability) is the quality of the coaching. If you were a player with your whole career (or what's left of it) before you, once you lose confidence in the coach and his style and game plan (such as it is), then you'd be stupid not to bail out. We simply can't afford any more of that. As a club we need to nurture our positives, and ditch the liabilities.

Garry Lyon?

What can we imagine him doing with Geelong? Trading Paul Chapman & Stevie J perhaps? Getting them to play the boundaries?? The thing is, the "zone" we watch each week which in MN's world is "not a zone" would probably work with Geelong because the players are faster/tougher/less lazy and would force the contest. Something called "winning mentality". Ha ha, don't worry, it's an experiment that will only ever happen in our imaginations!

One thing is sure from all we've seen over 5 weeks, Neeld can't coach this team. Maybe he'd do OK coaching Geelong. But as has been pointed out, to a fair degree Neeld has shaped MFC into the team it currently is. And when he took the job, he bought into the list at the time (knowing he couldn't make unlimited changes). So, where does that leave us? The biggest indictment is what somebody said, under Neeld & the other coaches, they've got us to the point of being virtually unwatchable. Which is a recipe for looming disaster (surely for Neeld, hopefully not for our club as well). I don't think when Neeld took over, that it was inevitable that we would become so bad as to be unwatchable. What will happen if Malthouse's blues thrash us by 100+? Ironic if Mick's boys costs Neeld his job.

Here's what a quick google turned up on the therapeutic efficacy of the drug AOD9604. Easy to see the attraction for the doc treating Trengove: AOD is a peptide 15 amino acids long which mimics a small portion of the growth hormone that has the fat reducing effects (increases fat metabolism). It works by mimicking the way natural growth hormone regulates fat metabolism but without the adverse effects on blood sugar and growth that is seen if unmodified growth hormone is given. It stimulates lipolysis (break down of fat) and inhibits lipogenesis (non fat food being stored in the body as fat). AOD has been shown to target abnormal fat stores, and to prevent fat from being stored in the cells. Studies have shown that it reduces the most stubborn fat regions (like abdominal fat). It also has other benefits including increasing muscle mass, increasing IGF-1 (insulin growth factor) in a positive way to metabolise fat, and increase the amount of energy burned for the same amount of activity. Other benefits which have been shown include an improvement in osteoarthritis. It does this by increasing cartilage and collagen production in the joints to increase the thickness and repair some of the damage. It has been shown to improve muscle, tendon and ligament repair, improve bone density which may have positive effects on osteoporosis. AOD is given daily either as an injection or transdermal cream. The effects are accumulative and continue to improve while taking it. As far as ASADA's concerned, it won't matter whether it's administered by injection or cream. Just injecting sounds worse when emblazoned across a Caro headline. The cream is the sort of stuff the Top Gear boys rub on their tummys each night. It was discovered by Monash Uni scientists and is subject to a US patent.

I think you can be pretty certain that no such letter exists and that it's simply part of Dank's salesman's kit. In the pre-2013 atmosphere where it seems likely many clubs and players (and fitness gurus and club doc's) were flirting with such substances, it would have been very easy for all of the above to just go along with the euphoria and imagine that because something's not on the banned list and lots of others are trying it, just do the same. Which doesn't excuse what seems to have happened, certainly at Essendon, in any way. I just hope not at Melbourne. But as Rhino keeps saying, either way at MFC (if the doc was a lone wolf, or if he's the scapegoat for a wider involvement) there have been serious administrative failings.

Exactly. I'm still puzzled why AD came out so quickly and strongly in condemning MFC after that 7.30 report (which he claimed upset him so because he was "blindsided"), but there's not been a peep out of the AFL (that I'm aware of) in condemning this "other" club who were clearly exploring the possibilities. At the very least, they must also be subject to the ASADA investigation (along with Geelong & Gold Coast, and how many others?). Maybe AD wasn't "blinsided" (meaning, he already knew all about this "other" club). Or maybe it's a much tougher club for AD to put the boot into? Dunno. Puzzling.

Yeah, heart goes out to the Bannister family. Who knows, maybe Jordan umpiring the Dees game was the best therapy for him, at that particular time. Under the circumstances, who gives a stuff about the quality of his umpiring, we can be certain that Jordan was doing his very best on the day. Thanks and best wishes, Jordan. WYL, I hope I'm misreading your comment above totally - if so, ignore this. But something in it struck me as ominous - I have 2 cousins, one already gone with MND and the other with its inevitable sentence just progressively weakening him. It's an insidious disease and I just hope none of you here who I regard (like Nasher said above) as my "Demonland friends" have anything like this hanging over you. Anyway, best wishes mate and we've both got the determination to keep going until that glorious day in September does actually happen. Meanwhile, winning up in Brisbane will be especially sweet!

The Age writer Jon Pierik has turned into the lapdog for The Age's "Chief" attack dog. His article on Eddie's outburst against the disgraceful Footy Classified of this week, reports that Eddie attacked GWS, Footy Classified, Garry Lyon and even the MFC. But not one mention, not even a whisper of Eddie having anything at all to say about Wilson! Disgraceful journalism as the whole point of Ed's outburst was to point out the bankrupt journalism of someone attempting to manipulate news agendas based on their personal campaigns against people like Swan & Brayshaw. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/mcguire-denies-plan-on-swan-20130423-2icer.html Perik's articles also drip with Wilson's hatred for MFC; for instance in his article in today's Age on drugs and Koch, he can't resist the phrase "The controversy engulfing Essendon and Melbourne...". Yeah, as if. Lumping us in with the Bombers deliberately injecting the team with who knows what, for whatever it takes. My advice - boycott Footy Classified and The Age and enjoy this week's Melbourne victory up in Brisbane! Which will annoy heck out of Wilson and her lapdog.

I don't know the answer to that either, and agree it will be interesting (very) to find out. You would imagine that Caro's "drug laboratory" at Windy Hill SHOULD be a much graver sin, but... One thing though is for sure, right at this moment we are a much softer target than the mighty and powerful Essendon FC.

If the good doc was prescribing supplements that had an effect on players' fitness (as has been indicated), then David Misson - who is described as "Melbourne's elite performance manager" - surely had a pretty strong interest in knowing what the doc was doctoring his players with. And while we're on the subject, once the Essendon/Dank stink happened and the AFL questioned each club on their dealings with Danks, if McLardy knew of the doc's dealings with Dank but didn't inform the AFL very openly and transparently (despite it maybe not being a speific answer to the particular question they asked) then he will be gone very quickly. If on the other hand, McLardy didn't know of the doc's dealings with Dank, then why on earth didn't he - as president - make damn sure that he had left no stone unturned in discovering what if anything was going on in the ranks in relation to interaction with Danks? Again, it's symptomatic of gross corporate negligence and he has disqualified himself as being fit to continue as our president. The only hope for McLardy is that he made strenuous efforts to discover any and all club connections to Danks, but was bare-faced lied to by the doc. This little gem surfaced after the GWS game: MELBOURNE president Don McLardy has urged the AFL to guarantee that only people with integrity and the highest of values are attracted to positions of power in football clubs. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/melbourne-president-don-mclardy-says-the-afl-must-guarantee-the-integrity-of-the-league/story-e6frecm3-1226625296519 Indeed!

The quicker these questions are answered, the better. One would suspect that the ABC have more exposés up their sleeve, and it seems that the bit they've already drip-fed about MFC is low on the richter scale compared with what they have on the "other" AFL club whose conversation with the compunding pharmacist was taped and re-enacted by them last night. How long will Vlad maintain his silence on the latest developments?

Also The Age (Richard Baker & Nick McKenzie who, apart from the fact they're journo's, seem to have credibility) are now reporting: Controversial biochemist Shane Charter claims he assisted more than 30 AFL players from six different clubs in using performance enhancing drugs. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/wada-declares-obesity-drug-illegal-20130423-2ibhh.html So, which are the 6 clubs? And in Sam Lane's report of the taped meeting between that other club ("not Melbourne or Essendon"): http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-club-officials-taped-on-drug-use-20130422-2iaqi.html According to a report on the ABC's Four Corners, the club officials - who were not from Essendon or Melbourne - were told last year that growth hormone was expensive but they were guaranteed it was "child's play" to avoid testing positive to the substance. The officials were not identified in the report, but in a re-enactment of the recorded discussion, one said of growth hormones: "I keep hearing lots of players are using it." Has there been any report of the AFL response to this astonishing claim? Which is this "other" club? Is the AFL investigating them? The conversation is taped and the ABC have it. Hardly likely to vanish under the carpet. Or is any investigation by Vlad being conducted in secret, and why?