Tony Tea

We beat WC in Perth in 2002.

They are not too bad, but they will beat us on Thursday. Patterson's Curse is set to continue.

This is what I wrote on March 17: Swan is out of the calculations, but the other three are still heavily mentioned in dispatches. Murphy also, allegedly, has contract snags with Carlton and Visi.

I hear what you are saying, especially about our development and potential on-ball brigade, but I also think defensive footy beats attacking footy when it matters, in big games. Rebound footy might be awesome to watch, but bare-knuckle footy will prevail. When a coach allocates match-ups for a big game he says "stop your bloke getting a kick" and no matter how skilled your bloke, if the stopper is similarly fit and bigger/stronger he will win.

I wonder... when Bailey came to Melbourne he introduced a style of game similar to Geelong's: players behind the ball, move the footy down the ground quickly en masse, hurt the opposition on the rebound. To achieve this aim Melbourne drafted skilled, but lighter bodied, running players: Morton, Bennell, Jetta, Scully, Blease, etc. In the last 14 months we have seen the maturing of the press, which uses man-on-man pressure with players quickly getting in the face of their opponents in their own backline so that they can force turnovers within range of goal. Collingwood have done this beautifully, but they also have a side capable of carrying out the press, with a tidy mix of skilled goal sneaks and, more importantly, strong pressure players. In light of the shift in the dominant game plan from rebound to press, is it possible we got our recruiting wrong. If the FD had their time again would they have targeted heavy bodied players? (Hurley, Darling, Martin.) Or, do they believe that there is still a lot of physical development in the players? If it's the latter we are still very much a work in progress and expectations should be lowered as we wait for the above mentioned Melbourne players to fill out. If it's the former, we are stuffed. Having said that, can I now say this: Nathan Jones is an excellent example of what hard work and practice can do for a player with perceived weaknesses. His kicking was initially pants, but over the last three seasons it has improved markedly. If the improvement in Jones can be extrapolated to the improvement in the rest of the side, both in skill, strength and how to approach a physical contest( let's face it: a lot of our players are, ahem, timid), we are heading in the right direction.

I remember that game very well, too, but for another reason. I played with Dean Kemp in WA and knew he was a gun. I was spewing Melbourne had not known about him and that WC had managed to scoop him at 100+ in the draft. All Australian, premierships, B&F, Norm Smith, captain, Hall of Fame... sigh.

I'm sorry, but I can't help laughing every time I see "change tact" - one of the classics.

Just read today's Age to discover that Caro has had the same article printed twice this week. I had assumed everyone here was talking about the article printed on Tuesday(?). Granted there was the odd discrepancy inserted to disguise the ruse. Caro stuffed up the chronology when she wrote Scully quit the junket, then "ominously" put off contract talks as if one caused the other. Scully put off his talks in August - the junket was in October. If I was as creative and mischievous as Caro I would call that "imagined causality" - where a trickster attempts to imply one event causes another. And you will get a fiery argument from many at Melbourne circa 1999 that Schwab was "shabbily" treated towards the end of his previous stint at Melbourne. Many felt he got off light. But anyway, nice to know Caro doesn't have to work too hard to earn her pocket money at the Age. I mean, while many journalists cut & paste press releases, not many get to cut & paste their own articles (and within one week).

WYL, Surely you don't think Scully is going to slate the Demons at a heavily promoted Demon press conference? At any Demon press conference?

Grrrrrrrrrrr... we won 16 games that year, but still somehow managed to finish 4th at the end of the home and away season and beat top of the ladder Essendon twice and beat third placed West Coast twice including in Perth and beat 5th place Hawthorn once (but consecutively in round 22 and the elimination final). It's the Black Cloud, I tell ya.

There is no "years behind in tactics". Game plans come and go and few last more than a year before other sides work them out. Hawthorn won a flag in 2008 based on their zone. Collingwood won a flag in 2010 based on their press. St Kilda almost won two flags with their ultra defensive tactics. Hawthorn's zone was countered (although they had a lot of injuries and retirements), St Kilda's zone/press combo is falling apart and Collingwood's press will be countered. If Collingwood win the flag this year they will have done marvelously. I will eat my hat if they win the next two. Next year a new tactic will come along and catch the competition by surprise. What matters is man-on-man pressure and the ability to execute skills under pressure. That will never change. The Demons' footy department has been assiduously preparing the players for the time when they will be able to compete with the heavy hitters, but we aren't there yet, not by a long way. My major concern is player size: can we make our slight players bigger? But I don't have a problem with the continued development of our skills. Nor do I have much of an issue with our supposed lack of a gameplan. By the time our players are ready to grind it out with the big boys, any gameplan we develop now will be out of date. What we need are hardened bodies, good skills & experience. When we have that we will be well placed to introduce or deal with the gameplan du jour.

How did Morton and Frawley go against the Gold Coast Schoolies? Reasonable, I would have thought, and also reasonable vindication of the selection policies.

Never trust an ectomorph. Right, Caesar?

Jack Watts spoke impressively at his first presser. Scully was impressive a few weeks back at his presser. The extension of which is patently obvious: Jack Viney will cops heaps for not living up to his potential and will then leave for GWS after eight weeks at Melbourne, citing "a new challenge after giving Melbourne great service" as his reason for leaving.

"Paul is dead."

So Mahoney & West wanted to leave last year? Was Wellman also a long way behind in footy knowledge?

WYL, My comment was directed at those who will be tempted to knee jerk all over Rielly's article, and start hammering the review process.

No match ratio for the bye. The AFL ruled it out pre-season. They said it was a pointless (my joke; boom, tish) addition to the stats since every club ends up the same. After all, they don't have it in the EPL where "games in hand" are readily acknowledged.

Before you jump to confusions over the core essence of that article, read this: And don't worry, it's not too long, it's only a summary.

Roos did not invent the flood. What he did was look at his list, arrive at the conclusion that it lacked the talent to play expansive footy, resolve to lock down the match with full ground man-on-man and turn the every contest into a wrestling bout. Circumstances favoured the Swans, too. If West Coast had a forward line to complement their stellar on-ball brigade and solid backline, the Swans would not have won any flags and we would be talking about Roos as an "almost" coach. "How good was Paul Roos to 'almost' win two premierships with his average list?" And then there was the Swans' astonishing lack of injuries. Still, if my aunty had balls... Eade has a greater claim to inventing the modern flood, which he introduced at Sydney in 1996 with players sweeping off half back. Even Kevin Sheedy "flooded" players back whenever Essendon's opponents got on a roll, but that was a contingency in case of emergency, not an across-the-board tactic. Whatever the genesis, the flood or the full press or whatever you want to call modern trends, are inevitable consequences of improved fitness and plundering other codes.

Work. In. Progress.

Green is the king of the "captain's point".

Yes, he did.

Mind you, the following two paragraphs, both containing unattributed and nameless allegations, suggest Crawford's articles are being ghosted by an experienced* journalist. * Experienced: Capable of inciting debate.