Johnny Karate

I'd keep Rivers, he's not a star but is fairly under rated by some Melbourne supporters. I'd keep Joel Macdonald & Dunn ahead of Strauss though, FWIW.

Cool story bro

Nutshell. It shits me no end when posters say we lack experienced players therefore we should keep every under performing or finished experienced player for that reason. We lack QUALITY senior players, hoarding all the crap on our list that has played 100+ games will not change that. Trading in quality experience & giving the inexperienced but potential quality players the opportunities to attain that experience will.

Given my avatar isn't Hardnut, tonatopia or arsepantsman it would seem that I fall under the blanket of 'sane poster' ergo I'm not off my head.

Hardnut/tonatopia: "This club is pathetic, the board & coach must be held accountable." Sane posters: "The coach is 5 minutes old & while decision making from the board has been a mixed bag they have had to deal with some pretty sticky circumstances." Hardnut/tonatopia: "What is it you like about Neeld & his gameplan?" Sane posters: "Pretty much nothing at the moment, but hopefully with a good off-season we'll see improvement next year. Sacking the coach now is not a viable option so I'm prepared to back him in. Give it time." Hardnut/tonatopia: "We've heard that for the past 6 years. How about some results now?" Sane posters: "Yes, it is frustrating how long it has taken, but there has been poor recruiting, a leadership vacuum & a general lack of experience too." Hardnut/tonatopia: "Heard it all before, more excuses, excuses, excuses. Coach A of Club B said that x must be done in order to be successful. Neeld isn't isn't doing that." Sane posters: "Well, while Coach A may've said that did you know that in his first year at Club B he actually did y NOT x?" Hardnut/tonatopia: "I'll have to look into that further... Didn't this, this & that happen?" Sane posters: "So? That wasnt your original point. Coach A actually did y NOT x as you suggested." Hardnut/tonatopia: "Was just trying to have a discussion, no need for the venom." Sane posters: "There's no venom, you just seem to have adopted a misguided, bordering on the nonsensical agenda. Every time somebody calls you on it or debates the issue & wins you cry about being picked on by a horde of unthinking plebs who aren't letting you have your say. You hijack every thread possible with this circle jerk & wonder why there is such frustration towards your posts. We all know your opinions by now, you're entitled to them, can't we just agree to disagree?" Hardnut/tonatopia: "But this club is pathetic, the board & coach must be held accountable."

I went to the VFL on the weekend & the umpiring (or perhaps more aptly the way the umpires were allowed to officiate) was a much better standard. It was almost like watching a different sport. No ticky touchwood freekicks, goal umpires were allowed to make decisions without there being a 5 minute muppet conference, no holding the ball when there was no prior opportunity, no hypersensitive 50m penalties (I think the players on the ground were talking in some kind of code involving the f & c bombs), no hands in the back, no arm chops, incorrect disposal was paid & there were no horrible rolling mauls. Unfortunately none of the Umps could bounce the ball to save themselves - under AA & the Giesch's watch that probably means they have no future.

The fish rots at the head, MFC boards past and present should not be immune from criticism. However I struggle to think of an incoming chairman who hasn't had extreme challenges (probably moreso than other clubs) or been handed a poisoned chalice by their predecessor. In short Gutnick inherited a club divided by the merger battle, Szondy inherited a club divided by Gutnick, Gardner inherited massive debt, Stynes inherited worse & McLardy has to deal with the corrosion of goodwill from a botched rebuild. The sniping from the cheap seats from whoever has been out of power at the time hasn't helped any MFC Board from 1996. FWIW I think the Stynes/McLardy board has done a good job. They didn't hire the failed rebuild crew, it's too early to judge whether Neeld, Craig, Misson & the re-signing of Schwab will be successful or not but either way they will be club defining decisions. Ultimately though, misery fills column inches, airwaves & fuels forum debates. Until the club is successful, posters will circle jerk over past mistakes & the mass debate will continue. Until the club & most importantly the playing group stands up & owns the present; we are doomed to be owned by the past.

I was probably a bit flippant with my initial comment. I believe that Moloney and Davey are downhill skiers & that Green played some extremely dumb footy last year as captain. I have no doubt that all three are top blokes who've done a lot for the club. However, I get the feeling that all 3 probably enjoyed the title, status & privelidge of being leaders more so than the actions required to be good ones. Moloney is very good at barking instructions but only runs one way. Ditto Davey who also loses his cool & gets sucked in by taggers. Green demands the football from younger team mates (even if he is in a stupid position) and chastises them if they ignore him or make a mistake. I can't remember the last time any of the three laid a shepherd. All 3 display poor body language when the chips are down. I also feel that winning the B&F was bad for their careers because they all had the personality type to get big heads from it. By contrast I think individual reward for Jones will encourage him to consolidate his hard work. He's a guy that's had to fight for his place in the team, even his career, he never gave up & I doubt he'll ever get complacent.

Unlike the others, Jones isn't a well documented & certified headcase - he'll take it in his stride with no delusions of granduer.

He does make some valid points. However, pointing out poor decisions at the MFC is kind of like shooting fish in a barrel. Does Melbourne have a poor culture because of tanking? I doubt it. I'd say it's more because of bad leadership & the failure to recruit leaders. Recruiting has been key in Melbourne's demise. Scott Thompson, Luke Molan, Daniel Bell, Colin Sylvia, Matthew Bate, Nathan Jones, James Frawley, Cale Morton, Jack Watts, Tom Scully, Lucas Cook - all of our first pick, first rounders this century. Jones & Frawley aside, has there been a pick that hasn't been disappointing, disastrous or not bitten us in the arse? Give us hungry footballers in Sam Mitchell, Sam Fisher, Cyril Rioli, Michael Hurley, Dustin Martin, Jack Darling & that goes a long way to solving the talent & culture problem. Geelong have been great at recruiting talent & building culture. A little luck goes a long way though, they've gained Gary Ablett, Matthew Scarlett, Tom Hawkins & Mark Blake through the father-son rule, all who've been pivotal in premierships (Blake 09 only). In the same time period Melbourne got Chris Johnson. A bit of financial & political stability goes a long way. Melbourne has a set of unique challenges in that respect which should be kept in mind before pushing the line "Club Y did this, Club Z does that, why can't the MFC?" Benchmarking has its place but the best clubs are successful because they can find a cutting edge, a competitive advantage or adapt to their surrounds. To my mind Melbourne has too often been a follower in that respect. The reasoning behind many of the decisions made by Melbourne since Daniher finished has been sound, the execution pox. The cultural problems of today stem from a lack of leadership & are compounded by the failure to recruit leaders. Schwarz is more than entitled to his opinion & should be commended for the way he has turned his life around. However, The cultural problems of today would be better if former players & leaders had left a legacy of professionalism, dedication to club & cause. Not a legacy of getting on the [censored], the punt, hanging out with gangland figures & introducing that lifestyle to young, impressionable team mates.

Same old. Get blown away at the start, go ages without looking like scoring, work our arses off to get back in it & blow it conceding countless soft goals during a collective 15 minute brain fart. The endeavour is good, the decision making & execution still appalling. How many times did we ignore an overlap runner in the corridor to switch backwards across the face of goal? How many unnecessary 1 metre handballs to a 50/50 contest? How many unforced errors in the backline resulting in goals? Grrr. The scoreboard at the end was pretty flattering & we were lucky Riewoldt necked himself, he was looking good. There are some cracks of light at the end of the tunnel. Was rapt to see Blease finish well. The overall competitive effort was good considering the gulf in class & experience. It's just so damn frustrating that we bust our nuts to even score & then hand it back so easily.

Rhino, you forgot Joel Macdonald too! GWS need key defenders. We love Coniglio co's he's a Victorian

Personally, I don't blame the umpires. Like the public they are often victims of rules on the run. It isn't an easy game to umpire as it is. Having a thousand middle management wankers making up spurious rules & interpretations to justify their positions or 'improve the game's aesthetics' makes it an awful mess.

I don't feel duped as my expectations haven't been massively high since 2007. I can accept that we're crap & hope that some day we'll turn it around. I have been angry that we seem to have effed up just about every high draft choice that we've had. That we've failed in many aspects of player development. That we thought that copying & pasting Hawthorn's list mgmt, Geelong's gameplan & gifting games to kids come hell or high water was some kind of panacea for success. That there has been barely anybody from our club that hasn't been tainted with some form of incompetence the past 7 seasons. That we've had some shocking luck along the way too. That we still display pathetic skill level & go ages throughout games without scoring. 186. There are reasons for all of that though & I still have hopes we can turn it around. Duped would imply being mislead or letdown, yet I don't think we were ever promised a rose garden. We were promised pain now, gain later - if we're still in the same [censored] position come 2015 I'll feel duped.

I didn't take you for the type to tolerate 5 year plans. You should demand results now, lest you be accused of making excuses.

Tool being the operative word.

There is no venom thrown at posters who question Neeld. There are plenty of questions, reason & logic put towards muppets who believe we are somehow better than complete [censored]. There is frustration directed at people who can not articulate a sensible critique of Neeld's coaching methods & advocate the irrational position of sacking a first year coach based on their own set of unrealistic expectations & assumptions. Not to mention further frustration when said cabal of nuffies deflect reason & logic, are called out on it & then accuse their opponents of being Neeld lovers who can't accept criticism (as though they have no agenda & are fighting some heroic holy war against a bunch of sheep & their false idol). Patience gets tested to the limit when said group of nuffies can't agree to disagree & hijack every single thread or clog up the main board with their own stupid threads on this pox agenda. Some of this numbskullery includes: - "We won 8.5 games last year" - "Neeld said he would make us the hardest team to play against & it hasn't happened yet!" - "What is it you like about Neeld as a coach? He's proven nothing!" - "We should sack Neeld & appoint Malthouse!" - "Herp de derp, der tiddly derp, der herp de derp de dum!" Oh noes! People aren't all calling for a first year coach with a [censored] list to be sacked. What a bunch of extremists! I suspect from this garbage you're not operating on the full 3 bags. At least you've admitted to being a sheep though.

A few times when I've moved house or just been having a bit of a spring clean I often come across weird & wonderful trinkets that I forgot that I had. Sometimes the throwing out of these things is delayed under the misguided notions "oh, that'll come in handy" or "I bet somebody, somewhere could make use of that, so why not me?" The next time a clean up comes round these things often get thrown out anyway with me musing "what a load of junk!" There are many television programs that document people who are swimming in their own junk. I guess they just can't bring themselves to throw out anything based on factors including sentimentality, a little bit of jealousy, selfishness & an overwhelming notion that having all of this stuff somehow makes or will make their lives better. It is a very human thing to want to hoard crap but ultimately your life is much better without useless clutter. This trading & drafting period will tell us whether or not Mark Neeld is a hoarder. Hopefully he can get rid of our crap without ruining it by picking up more junk from the neighbours' hard rubbish.

I'm surprised with Rivers being told to wait when we seem to be awfully keen to tie up the likes of Jake Spencer & Rohan Bail.

50 out of a possible 106. From the same draft Cyril Rioli played his 100th the other night. Grimes has had a terrible run with injuries. Good luck in your 50th Jack & fingers crossed you are injury free for the rest of your career!

Thank God, I thought you were making a pass.

There's not much I can argue with there timD. I've said in another thread that in some way that 2012 is probably an extension of the rot that set in during 2011. I agree that Neeld has inherited a litany of issues to do with personnel & past coaching practice. That said I believe he needs to shoulder some responsibilty for the bad things we are seeing on the field. It comes with the territory.

It doesn't offend me as much as my suggestion has clearly offended you. I wasn't potting your thread any more than the litany of others on this topic. So why take the bait? Let's be honest though, your topic is hardly groundbreaking stuff & may've been better used in another thread debating Neeld. I take it from the thread title that was your intent? I agree that Demonland does become a repetitive circlejerk at times but why join that cabal & start new threads on well versed topics? That was a specific critique of your thread not an off the cuff comment regarding the e-corporal punishment of nuffies. Yes I'm being condescending by spelling it out to you. You now have my permission to be offended.

I like your post robbie. I do disagree with some of what you say but there are some really good points in there & you've articulated a good critique of Neeld at this stage. This is much more refreshing than other posters who yell "but we won 8.5 games last year" or "Neeld said we'd be the hardest team play against & we're not yet." I have no doubt that resistance to change is a real challenge for Neeld in his approach. But he needs to set some standards & non negotiables if we are to have any hope of success. Ultimately a coach's job depends on his ability to get the players to buy in to his vision. If Neeld can't do this (I hope he can) he's doomed.

With so much crap clogging the boards may as well bump a good thread. My blue sky scenario: Draft: Grundy, Toumpas, Garlett & Viney Recruit/Trade in: Cloke, T Banfield, L Greenwood Moloney & Jamar to return to form. Clark & Jurrah injury free as well as Gysberts & Taggert to be most improved at the club. Team B: Greenwood - Frawley - Garland HB: Rivers - T McDonald - Grimes C: Trengove - Moloney - Viney HF: Howe - Cloke - Watts F: Banfield - Clark - Jurrah R: Jamar - McKenzie - Jones I: Sylvia - Gysberts - Taggert - Garlett Depth: Martin, Gawn, Grundy, Toumpas, Blease, Strauss, Nicholson, Sellar, Evans, Tapscott, Davey, Davis, Bail, Bartram, Tynan, Magner