Choko

I've never watched netball but I would guess I understand it better than you do the plight of the MFC at the moment. We are the second youngest side in the AFL. Fact. We are missing 8 - 11 of our 22. Fact. Our list development is not at the stage that we can cope with losing 11 players. Fact. You said you wanted us to play an attacking brand of footy last night. You mean like Essendon did? They were very exciting to watch. They would kick 16.... and their opponents 26. No-one got their hands dirty. The players are clearly playing for the coach, contrary to your belief. They tried to execute a game plan, they competed, they lost. Rabble is the word that emotional keyboard heroes use to deal with their bad childhoods.

But let's keep Todd Viney.... because he played for the club once.... you're smart....

For the last time, the game plan is only as good as the team who are asked to execute it. We are missing crucial players at all parts of the ground.

If you would rather be Richmond, I think you should come out of the woordwork and join them. I am not sold on Bailey at all, but to say that he is dull and dispassionate is untrue. What you are actually saying is "I know nothing about Bailey, but he is calm in his press conferences and I want him to be breathing fire to satisfy my needs". You clearly don't know how he is around the club. Last night, we actually competed well. Contested possessions, hard ball gets, tackles, clearances were all OK. That doesn't match what you're saying. We matched Carlton in the endeavour stakes, despite being 11 players short of our best. We have no pressure on spots - compare to King who was almost delisted and is playing for his footy life and in a side that has hardly any injuries.

Another rubbish post. Essendon had the exact opposite problem. They attacked and couldn't defend. Hird called it dishonest. That attacking game is what you and others are actually calling for. Our arousal level, workrate and appetite for the contest were not the problem last night. We basically matched them in hard ball gets, clearances, contested bll and tackles. So get your facts right.

I love these posts. It's not that some of these players don't have ability, it's their relative ability. What defenders worth their salt in a side vying for top 4 aren't better than Newton? Especially with the lack of quality ball we supply. What other clubs would have Warnock in their 22? We wouldn't if we had a choice!

Ridiculous post. If we had played attacking footy, we would have lost by 100. Who exactly was going to deliver into the forward line? The midfield, without Jamar, Scully, Trengove, an underdone McKenzie, a second gamer and a 12 gamer? The half back line without Bartram, Garland, Grimes, Davey, Tapscott? I thought our endeavour was very good, but the reality is, both sides full strength, Carlton wins 7/10. Us without 11 players, we win 1/20.

Yeh, I get my footy insights from Mark McClure and Gerard Healy. Honestly. Roos said something different. Bailey responded by saying that we are not playing to the plan we have in place.

Absolutely, but not if they're not ready.

By pushing them up, we robbed Carlton of the overlap. You know how in other games we have been accused of giving away soft goals over the back? Well Carlton's number one in the league for scoring that way, and we didn't let them do it because we pushed up. It worked well for 2.5 quarters. There was no way to play the game tonight that would have resulted in a different outcome.

Listen. With 8 blokes out tonight and some spuds in their place, we matched Carlton for contested balls, hard ball gets and tackles for most of the game. That's desire and commitment. Our structure was different tonight because of the injuries and the lack of ball carriers and shut down players in the back half. We had a 1st gamer, a 2nd gamer and other kids in. I'm not a Bailey defender, but you just have to calm the hell down and look at this game for what it was.

Tre - we had injuries for North. The other thing is, Brisbane have been thereabouts all year. But that was a bad loss for North. Sack Scott?

Then they AREN'T better.

You're totally deluded. With 8 blokes missing, name which sides we're better than.

15th. Absolutely.

You got me on nit, I'll give you that!

We had a fullish strength side of KIDS against WC, and got touched up by an opponent who beat a fullish strength dogs outfit by 123 last week. We were shocking, but let's put it in perspective. The fact we were ahead of North doesn't mean we can sustain it for 4 quarters. Saints were beating Hawks by 5 goals at quarter time 2 weeks ago. For that matter, we are out-performing North, so Brad Scott should go?

You might like to learn English. It's just that I'm guessing you have English characters on your keyboard, so it might be easier to learn the language. Your post said that 7 - 8 players out is an excuse. You meant to say it's a reason, nit an excuse. No need to call people [censored].

It's actually sad how deluded you are. If we had played an open game, we would have been eaten alive. Their strength is small forwards and goal kicking midfielders, and we were missing Davey, Bartram, Grimes, Tapscott and Garland. That means we lost our creative kicks off the half back line, and our shut down players. The fact of the matter is, at half time we were 16 points down, and 2 of their goals came from shocking turnovers by depth players that are only playing because of injuries. I'm not saying Bailey did everything right, because IMO he didn't (Watts is not a backman), but if you think playing Petterd the Pretender and Jurrah the Weak in position would have helped, you need to have another look.

I think a lot of the blokes who consistently let us down are the fringe players who haven't earned their spots, but are in there because of injuries. Bennell, Warnock, Morton, Newton, Bate. Some others, eg Petterd are cruising because there is no pressure for spots ATM.

Is the trident seating OK? Does it get you into away games? Finals if we play?

It's funny, I don't see it that way. I don't see it as a compliment or otherwise to Bailey. I think he has a limited group to pick from, and he needs mid-sized backmen against Carlton's ant fleet. ATM, the only mid-sized defenders are Bartram and arguably Joel MacDonald. No tappy, no Grimes, no Bail, and you can't reply on Davey or Bennell to do a good shut down job... so I think it's a logical pick, but hardly a selfless one.

Please RR... give us a spell. You never waste an opportunity to bag the MFC supporters for your decreed lack of patience. As I see it, we have more supporters buying membership than every before, despite our lack of success over the past 4 years. We aren't doggies fans who don't buy memberships. We have supporters' absolute optimism in our president, and excitement in our youth. Sure, some would like to see our improvement come quicker, and some are worried that we are being sold a pup with the vision. But most supporters are engaged and cautiously optimistic.

I'll absolutely be there, but there is no way I am wearing the stupid ears.

Look, you're obviously stupid if you don't get why Richmond is better than us. Brisbane is older than us too. That means Bailey is a better coach than Voss.