Nasher

I love how "he didn't say no" equates to dancing bananas (and believe me, I felt the same). I can't wait to see the reaction when we get some actual, real good news.

Our form was hardly red hot before these two games though, was it? I'm with you on the board needing to go, but this decision was a no brainer and it wasn't just because we lost to Collingwood as you are making it sound. I honestly can't see your angle on this one.

My empathy is generic and indiscriminate, Robbie. My loyalty also lies with the club and I too agree that we're better off without him; that doesn't mean I can't also feel bad for a guy who now faces an unclear future and the feeling of failure that must accompany this. I am able to separate club from person, that is all.

Your class is showing.

haha really? You have to wonder how some of these people find their way out the front door every day. Wish I could see this live; trying to follow it on my phone isn't proving much fun.

I know, but knowing you'll probably fail doesn't make it any nicer when you do.

Anyone else find this banter really tedious?

Neeld won't be happy - let's not try and convince ourselves that this is a win win for everyone. It might be a weight off stress wise, but he's now unemployed, and, and the thought that he's failed in his one shot at success at the highest level will burn. I really do feel for him, but that's not to say I don't think it's the right decision.

Agreed. I think a new turn of events deserves a new thread.

Already a thread on this.

I laugh at the idea that this is knee jerk. I've never seen a knee take 11 weeks to jerk, you must have the slowest reflexes ever.

Why is Jones such a better candidate than Grimes?

Pointing out that ordinary player X is getting a game is not a good justification for giving poor players Y and Z a game.

Not sure what you mean by that. I'm a long way from the club. I live interstate, I have no ties with the club, I don't know anyone that works there, and the last time I was even at the MCG was in 2008. Hell, I hardly even know anyone else that supports the MFC. It's why Demonland is so important to me and why I invest time and resources in it.

First time you've ever said anything on the forum that made any sense, Tone. Well done. I, too, can't believe we are considering selling our soul to the devil like this.

It's Biffin. You've been tricked by that weirdo who posts on here.

Even if Frawley is unhappy now and does want to leave, a year and a half is such a long time away that absolutely anything could happen in the mean time. His contract expiry is such a long way off that it isn't worth even thinking about, let alone worrying about yet.

It had the side benefit of forcing Watts to hit the ball at full tilt as well. It really was a beautiful passage of play. For those few minutes, I actually felt alive watching the footy*.* Sorry for the nauseating hyperbole.

So every player other than Jamar is either as good or better than they were before, yet we're losing more often and by more? Justify this, please.

I challenge you to say with a straight face that the injury to Dawes didn't have a drastic effect on the functionality of our forward line. It was almost a carbon copy of what happened in the first round of the NAB cup, in fact.

This question is clearly a trap. My money says this will end in a "ner ner, you don't know it was Neeld's coaching" sort of post.

So what's the reason for us having so many turnovers? It can't *just* be skill - the number is too high. I reckon for every time I saw a turnover through a skill error, I saw two occasions where we turned it over by handballing it to a stationary player who got cained, or just hoofed it to a pack of Collingwood players. These aren't skill errors, these are decision making errors that can be a direct result of the team either being set up wrong, or players not working hard enough to put themselves in a dangerous position. I'd like to see a breakdown, or at least some analysis of the cause of the turnovers before I accept it as a reason to exonerate the coach.

Doesn't he work overseas?

Psychological. Our skills and decisions looked fine in the first quarter.

Clearly the difference between "keep Neeld" and "keep Neeld until August" is too subtle for you. The only argument that is at all compelling for retaining Neeld until seasons end is that all the people eligible for caretaker are just as culpable for our performance as their boss is. I don't buy it though; I can't see how getting rid of him is going to make the situation any worse than it already is.