RalphiusMaximus

Surprisingly upbeat from you Joeboy. Not that I disagree. As I keep saying, that was about the best 95 point loss I've ever seen.

Mods? Do the Mods come on these boards anymore? Hello? I feel so alone....

I'm sorry, which elite midfielders did Neeld sack?

It's an emotional game for the supporters and the players. The board are there to make the right call, to take the emotion out of the equation, run the numbers and make the best possible call for the club's future. I've looked at this every way I can think of, and I can't find more positives in sacking Neeld than I can in keeping him. If the board do, then they are not doing their jobs but instead are caving in to perceived pressure coming largely from the media who sense an easy kill to boost their stocks. A logical and dispassionate assessment of the situation does not support moving him on.

Can this be merged with the identical thread from last week? Mods? Any Mods? Are there any Mods left?

Funny, when I pointed this out people told me it wasn't important and shouldn't be a factor. I guess if it's said on THE RADIO that makes it more valid. I say again, Sacking yet another coach mid-term is THE WORST POSSIBLE move this club could make. Pull the rug out from under the players, show that contracts mean nothing to this club, put doubt in the mind of any prospective coach to look at applying for the job, and for what? The team won't win more games for a new coach. The problems with the midfield won't go away. All it will do is set us back another couple of years as we begin the Rebuild of the Rebuild of the Rebuild. The percentage play is to let Neeld see out his contract and see if he can't do what he was hired to do.

Cook was a flop from the moment he got to the club. After two years he couldn't even get a game in the Casey firsts. Sheahan (and Williams) was a victim of the shortened rookie list. With rookie spots dropping from 7 to 4, it was a choice of upgrade him or cut him, and you and I both know he didn't warrant upgrading to the main list given our depth of talls. Moloney had a massive dummy spit and tried to take his ball and go home. He was given chances to pull his head in and act like part of a team and he wouldn't take them. As for Watts and Davey, I keep hearing htat he has treated them badly, but not from anyone connected with them. I'm really not sure how he has done so. Is it by mentioning that they needed to work harder in his media conferences? That's the truth. Davey has played some of his best football in years recently. I don't see disgraceful treatment there.

Minimal changes. I say again, bring in Magner for Bail. If Sylvia is ready to go then maybe he can have the Bail spot instead. Nothing else needs to be changed.

Would that be the players he kept on the list for a full year before cutting so he could have a proper look at them and see if they could play the game his way?

You can't put Gawn in against Jolly. He'll be smashed.

Shows the difference between a Member and a Supporter. For one thing, Member can be used as a synonym for Dick.

McKenzie is OK when he plays within his limitations. The set-up handball to Davey for a goal was perfect. He just needs to avoid kicking.

Don;t bother. It's not just that they are incapable of providing an analytical post, but that they think the comments they are making are in fact valid arguaments. I've tried to explain that their complete and utter failure to provide any evidence to back up their claims is basically conceding the point, but they respond with "Neeld is crap and we keep losing" and not much else.

The Pies have a hard midfield core, but not a lot of pace in their veterans. I'd think Magner for Bail is about right. I don't think anyone on the park this week deserves to be dropped.

Hugely encouraged by what I saw today. Yes, the scoreline when taken in isolation is damning, but it in no way reflects the game. That is some of the best football I've seen us play in recent years, let down by poor disposal when we were attacking. Why was the score so bad? The inability of many of our players to kick properly to a leading target and the fact that when passing to a player running past they tend to pass it TO them rather than AHEAD of them. The number of times I saw these two things mess us up is astounding, and they often don't even count as clangers, because they do reach their target, but in such a way as to destroy their attacking momentum. TWO THINGS to fix and we would have seen a more competitive score today. I'll take that over some of the other games we've seen this year.

This is my point from earlier. We went toe to toe with them and for long periods broke even, but we never had the ascendancy and never hurt them on the scoreboard. They on the other hand took full advantage of any lapse on our part to score. I mad a sandwich at one stage and came back to find three goals had happened. The margin really does flatter them and says more about our poor F50 entries than it does about their domination.

Agree, but he has a nasty habit of sprinting to a contest and then hovering over it rather than trying to win the ball. This could be an instruction, as in be the outside receiver and use your good disposal once someone like McKenzie has won it, but it looks really bad. I also question his chasing. A guy with his pace should be able to run his man down.

6 - Dawes. Worked hard all day and gave us a chance at getting useful F50 entries. 5 - Frawley. Held Franklin. Had a couple of unlucky calls or it would have been Thrashed Franklin. 4 - Garland. Had an awesome battle with Roughhead, who has been in very good form. At worst broke even. 3 - Jones. As always, he kept fighting no matter what. So influential they used Sam Mitchell to tag him in the last. 2 - David Rodan. Easily the best he's played for us. Hada real influence on the game, even if he did make a few poor decisions. 1 - Jeremy Howe. Was in everything, taking good marks, getting the ball, smothering. One of the real shining lights this year.

Honestly, I don't think I've ever been more encouraged by a 95 point loss. We matched them for periods, but they kept it up constantly and whenever we slipped off them they scored in bursts. Had our usual problems getting good forward 50 entries which translates as a low score, but you would expect a loss of that magnitude to be far worse than it actually was in terms of the play. Of note: Dawes really stepped up. He worked hard and gave us that vital link between HF and wing. 21 disposals and 12 marks is a huge effort. Nathan Jones continues to be the man carrying our midfield. 28 Disposals, 16 contested and 11 clearances. So good they used Sam Mitchell to tag him in the last quarter. Col Garland and James Frawley can both take a bow. They were awesome on the best forward tag-team in the competition. Not only did they hold the twin towers, but they got involved the other way as well. Dean Kent showed a bit today. He is going to do very well for us in the next decade. Love his confidence to step around some of the stars of the game and take them on. This is his third game people. I wish Fitzy hadn't looked so nervous. Had a chance to take a few telling marks and fumbled them. Could have had a few goals if his hands had been better, but he did enough to keep for another week. David Rodan had his best game in our colours and probably his best in a few years. Burnt his teammates a couple of times, but he was heavily involved and had an impact.

Defensive involvements I think.

I tend to think bring them in against the weaker sides and see if they can make a difference at all. Much better that trying to blood new players against the Hawks or Pies.

It would be pretty awesome to see Blease and Taggert coming into the side after the bye.

Can I just add to this. GWS just lost by 94 points! OMG, THE SKY IF FALLING!!! SACK SHEEDY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

According to THIS article on the AFL website, Melbourne are the 9th best side at winning away from home. I just find this funny.

I think perhaps the relationship with the City of Casey has been more harmonious than that with the football club.