beelzebub

well Melbourne wanted to make a statement with this game....they have !!!

who are these fwits and what have they done with our tean?? honestly this is embarassing.. Bailey...just walk !!

homage to miller

took a change of coach !!!

Wtf is Bailey doing auditioning for the media !! Your job is coach not boundary rider. Wake up to yourself

Spot on.. In spades ; unfortunately

To sum Melbourne up .. They're all waiting for someone else to do the hard work. PATHETIC

I hate to say it but were f-ing useless . Bailey your arse is Worsfold's and we are the great pretenders. Slow to the contest , no leadership , green ... Is a pale variety . Please make this but a bad dream we can wake up from!! Laughable

Talk the talk ... Can't walk the walk Melbourne grow some ... Bailey , yours are on the block!! All up to you

Brocken McLean....you must be kidding. Hes made his bed...good riddance

I treat tipping as a contest in itself.. you can only apply logical reasonings and discerned expectations. I love all the wallies that back their teams in week in week out religiously.. They probablywonder why they never get a prize !! Ill tip Melb every week when their good enough....Somehow thats not this year

No

yes..the rebounding defender...thats the oppsotion player...ffs.. as many now like to use the basketballanalogies of half court and full court press. Those instrumental in that are instigating an "offensive" play...they are not defending, they are not applying defensive presure thay re applying OFFENSIVE pressure. SO in the footbal equivalent DUNN who is a forward if 'gauarding' his terrioty and applying pressure to the rebounding defender , then he is attacking..he is in offence. He's not defending anything.

Actually this...and not the directives of messres rpfc and rr sums up th esituation far more candidly. Yes there wasa lot of fluff and padding in the Caro article but she did attend to the crux which was surrounded some curious communications ( or lack there of ) between board and coach. I actually find it somewhat refreshing and proactive for the club to be engaging in thorough reviews..even if the timing is a bit left filed/maverick It has been been noted by many learned scribes as well as some posters here that other clubs with similarly young lists seem to gett hings happening far quicker than us. I have in my mind no doubt this goes to teh core of the "rumblings" thatare occuring currently. Tomany observers we arent progressing.. some are kind and suggest weve stalled, others suggest we're sliding backwards. I know many of my footy mates think weve got a good list but not the right coach anymore.. He was right for the suration to get us to where we needed to be at the start of 2011 but think he hasnt got the game to deliver us any further. Imnot sure whether theyre right or swrong in that final assessment but I sense the clubitself is wondering the samething. Bailey has shown much and deserves the opportunity of delivering on his ideas etc for the rest of this season. He undoubtedly had a plan in mind when he came to interview for the job but i sense this is crunch time. I think the club is frustrated......that is where the rumblings are occuring as would any stomach if hungry !

oh..dear...you like Rogue in his answer below/above abnd others seem to over look the simple premise...A foraward is a forward..his not there as a defender simply relocated to teh front line. All forwards need the mongrel to get teh ball.. to regain the ball and do something with teh ball in a positive maner...i.e push it between the sticks preferably off a foot. The idea of a forward is to inflict scoreboard pressure... Thats how we win this game.. So much sh!t is spoken about an offensive defence or defensive forward etc that many seem ( again ) to happily invest in the gobbiediegook that purports to represent higher understanding of this relatively straightforward game. What many dont want to come at is the notion that it ought to be in the nature of all players to defend thir turf...ot offer resistance to any rebounds to negate your direct or for that matter indirect ( if closer ) opponet.. Thats just part of the menu of skills and ideals of the player.. Its not hte raison detre of that position ( ie, forward ) to DEFEND...its to attack. To place a precedence of defence over attack for a forward is to surely nullify his whole reason for being there. Its very clever of some to profer the notion that its a new game..the moden game...or this is how its done today.. Its wafle.. The minutae of the style may have changed over the years.. Theres no doubt the speed has picked up but teh rest of the game is essentially like its always bben...one team kicks one way the other also..but the opposite direction. For mine when you start paying more attention to what your opposition is doing when your the attacker..i.e forward then its to surrender the higher ground..the psych game is lost as youre already pandering to the game the oppositionwants to play. Forget alll this guuf about a prioiry of defensive presure what its really about is applying forward attacking pressure. The bigger blokes are there to use their bodies to assert their pressure in offence...if the ball goes to teh oppostion then they apply more offence in order to get it back..its not defensive pressure.. as logical argument surely shows you defend in defence..you attack in offence. Too many people are buying into too much psychobabble thats happily pushed by those that would have you believe the rubbish theyll write at the behest of either their media boss or not to look like a wally in their foorty peer world. When youre going forward youre applying forward offensive pressure. Its fine to stand your ground where ever you are on theground and dowhat yo can to stop the opposition advancing...when youre in their half of the ground..youre defending..when youre in yours your attacking...whetherh you have the ball or not. When people start suggesting a forward is out there to defend..then for mine get him off the ground as hes a useless forward..Hes missed the point.. ( no ..not me..him ) the best forward over the years didnt defend..they attacked..always did.

its fallicsious to use our selves as the real benchmark. Size him up against like players through the league. I say this for at times some players have poled well even in teh Bluey and quite frankly by the games standards they werent much chop. How is done doing as a AFL player against his peeers...not the MFC.. its a bit like calling your wife beautifull...she may well be but youre sure as sh!t going to be biased

define infoirmed ?? and whos the arbiter ?? at what point in your opinion is it legitimate to discuss improvement.. 5 , 6, , 7, 8, 9, games...end of season.. where ...by what markers ?? I wouldnt call any improvemnet since 08 as steady..or even easily determined... spasmodic and inconclusive would be more accurate.

Someone ..or all answer me this WHy would you have 2 attacking forward and a defensive forward if you could have 3 attacking forwards who were a pain in the butt for an opponents backline ? By negating your ferocity by dedicating more eforts to defendingh the forward line than utilising better attacking forwards you are al but conceding the game. Football is very much between the ears.. Taking an overly defensive stance is playing a negative game. I await

The Elephant in the room speaks

Both Dawes and Mooney are types that exhibit a bit more mongrel and desperation ( intensity, application call it what you like ) than Dunn. Again he could look at those and learn.

this can all be put in the glass half empty/half full category. Some rate a forward by the wonder-effect of defensive pressure.. others look to what hes actually doing with it. i.e the ball..or efforts to get it. etc. In Basics Dunn doesntdo enough to get it..or then do something with it. He puffs that chest buts lets a bit of the game go past him. I think many a printed appraisal from the coaches flatters him somewhat. Dunn isnt Mooneys bootlace ( unfortunately ), happy for him to morph in that direction though.

I have no problem with having a different game plan to most others. Its all a bit like fashion. What may suit one team ( its players and abilities and fortes ) may not be the best for another. Sometines different is good. Its not teh being different that for mine is the measure but simply the ability to execute your plan/game. If team A with plan X is 80%efficient and you with plan Z are only 65%efficient then youll lose. If youre 90% effeicient you'll in all likelyhood win. Its not hte difference but the ability. We simply dont seem on top of 'our' game at present.

its interesting in a way.. Bailey laments the lack of intensity...esp for 4/4 . Roos is reknown for his teams' intensity. Roos also I think a very good day game stategist. Still ...very early to be discussing Bailey's demise. Maybe mid season's a better idea....should it so pan out. I hope not.. But contingency is well within the scope and due dilligence of the club.

yes...have a defensive side to their game.. no argument...but thats augemtning their role.. The idea is a forward ought to worry the backs not the other way around .. That plain and simple is the logic of the game.. if you are focussing on your defensive game at teh expense of your attackign game your 3/5 of 2/3 of f-ing useless. You are a forward to kick goals not bother the backman

hey old man... just explain where what i said was wrong instead of glib remarks...are you capable of that in between taking your meds ?? Give and you will get ...capische