Radar Detector

All this heat on Bailey is a tad rash in my opinion. Firstly, no game day coach, genius or otherwise, would've been able turn the tide on Sunday. The simple fact is the players couldn't lay hands on the ball. It was first and foremost a clearance issue and any game plan or tactical set-up will crumble under the sort of seige our clearance "work" allowed on the weekend. That in itself was not necessarily a coaching issue either. While we had Sylvia, Moloney and Jones, the core of our young midfield that we hope will take us to a flag was not playing and are still probably too raw to match it with teams like the Hawks consistently anyway. Scully, McKenzie, Morton, Gysberts and Blease were all missing on the weekend. In time we hope this core plus Trenners, Sylvia and maybe Grimes will be our Ablett, Bartel, Selwood, Corey etc. but they are a way off yet. And realistically, the midfield stocks yesterday were thinner than they were for most of last year against a top four team with a gun midfield. Bailey is not a miracle worker guys. He has driven improvement in the side in each of the years he's been at the helm and put together a talented list that is still several years away from peaking. Let's not jump the gun Richmond style before we see some real evidence that he's no good as opposed to some of this over-emotive scape-goating that seems to come up every time we lose a game.

Agree. Jurrah has been crusing in both games so far this year. Good for a couple a game but never really looks like he's out of second gear. I'd love to really see him tear some sides apart. That said, it's hard when the ball doesn't get forward of centre.

I agree Maric was on a hiding to nothing. Not blaming him for his relative lack of impact but think it was a tactical error to have him as sub. Agree on all your other points - midfield is where it is won or lost. Forwards and Backs are almost powerless when the midfield is so comprehensively slaughtered. I can't remeber ever seeing such one-way traffic at stoppages before. I als can't understand how anyone can draw conclusions on Bailey's ability to coach a game plan when the team couldn't get hands on the ball. I re-iterate that when we one first use in the first half, our game plan looked good. It all comes crumbling down when the mids can't lay hands on it.

I don't think you can say on form that we SHOULD beat either WCE or Adelaide, the Crows in particular. We should beat North but they're a real bogey side for us. While we certainly have the ability to win against any of these sides, I wouldn't be surprised if we only win two of these games.

FFS Buddy did the same thing running into an open goal. Next topic.

Agree on the experience and that Jones should play more time, certainly with those currently available. Highlights our lack of tough midfielders. When Jordie and Sculls are back we'll have more options. I just think it needs to be someone who can go in and win their own ball in any situation. Would be great to have the luxury of Jordan Lewis in that role.

I agree that Maric was on a hiding to nothing. The ball wasn't getting down there which is my point. A midfielder in reserve is a safe bet (barring injuries) cos you can always shuffle a Sylvia, Davey, Bennel forward or back depending on the flow of the game. But a specialist sub (i.e. a small forward) can only have an impact if the flow of the game allows it. Midfielders are always in the play. Not sure that Gysberts is the right guy though. I think we'd be better starting with him and bringing on someone like Jones who can provide 45 minutes of grunt.

Great post RR. I agree with all that you have said. The key to this team will be time to develop and we are unlikely to see the rapid improvement some expect. I'm not sure that this should spell the end for Bailey however as some are calling for. Some further observations based on the Hawks debacle: 1. It's hard to criticise Bailey's game plan based on yesterday's game. We looked pretty good with the ball in our hands but just could not get a clearance or win a hard ball. Our game style actually allows us to attack quickly and score from good positions, hence our scoring efficiency last year and again yesterday despite miserable i50 stats. Hawthorn, on the other hand, attack wide and often have shots from tough spots, hence the inaccuracy. BUT... 2. Surprisingly, given our focus on drafting key forwards, the midfield remains our weakness. Jordie and Sculls will help when they return but our midfield rotation is light on numbers. I'd like to see Joel Mac or even Strauss back in the side (Morton could play the role too) and Grimes moved into the midfield for a few weeks. It's almost impossible to win games when the defence is under siege and the forards are getting no ball. 3. Our kick-ins rely too heavily on hitting Jamar which is very predictable and easy for opposition teams to counter. He was often competing against Hale/Renouf, Buddy and a third tall... he's not superman FFS. 4. Our use of the sub yesterday was terrible. Hawthorn injected Lewis who had an immediate impact. Maric was never going to.

So, with two rounds down to observe the use of the sub rule, I thought I'd guauge some views as to how we're using the rule. For what it's worth, I think we have taken the wrong move both weeks. Round 1: Whilst Petterd had an immediate impact off the bench and the move looked like a masterstroke, it was convenient that the logical player for us to sub off at the time was a small forward. This was made to look even better by the fact that Sydney completely botched their sub by bringing on a dinosaur when fresh legs were needed. Round 2: Having a small forward as the sub is not a good idea and those asking for Wonna to be the sub this week should consider the balance of the team. Forwards rely on ball from the midfield which is where most of the gut running (and fatigue) happens. Jordan Lewis came on and smashed us and Maric had little impact. It would appear that the most effective use of the sub is having a player in reserve who can come into the guts and make an immediate impression on the game. The question is, who is the midfielder that can provide this for us? Would Jetta or Jones have been better as sub? Who plays the role when McKenzie and Scully return? Is there another way to use the sub more effectively that I'm missing?

Also gave it a go: Rank Team 1 Collingwood 18w/1d 2 Hawthorn 18 3 Geelong 16/1 4 St_Kilda 16 5 Sydney 14/1 6 W_Bulldogs 12 7 Essendon 12 8 Carlton 12 ---------------------------- 9 Adelaide 12 10 Melbourne 10/1 11 Fremantle 10 12 Kangaroos 8 13 P_Adelaide 8 14 Brisbane 6 15 W_Coast 6 16 Richmond 5 17 GC Suns 1 Tipped us to lose a couple to the likes of Kangaroos and WCE again as I think we'll still be a bit up and down. Won't be anything like the final ladder but I wouldn't be too disappointed if we finished on 10 wins. Just hope we can start to win the "shoulds" and pinch a couple of "maybes". Surprised myself with how high I have the Swans finishing - don't really rate them that high on paper but I guess they have some good games at home.

Absolutely. There will always be a spot for a quick, reliable small defender. In terms of a negating role, he is the best of his type that we have and that is his key responsibility. Hope he gives it to Cyril on Sunday.

I agree with this - even your use of the word "whom" was correct in this instance.

FWIW a mate of mine's father in law is a recruiter at the Eagles. He said last week that even taking exposed form into consideration, Jack Watts will be the best player from that draft. I still can't comprehend how many people, journalists and supporters the worst, were prepared to say that Jack was a four or five year proposition when he was drafted, yet continue to write him off on an almost weekly basis. The kid has serious skills, pace and vision. His physicality is clearly improving despite him still having an undersized body. The impatience is unbelievable.

I wouldn't change much about the team from round 1, but I Nathan Jones could be a good sub option this week. A bit of toughness off the pine could be just what the team needs in a close last quarter against the Hawks' big bodies. Failing that, Jetta or Bail but I think Bail should get a run-with role on one of their mids. I think Maric should start on the ground as we need a small forward at the feet of the bigger guys and Bennell is the only other in last week's 22 that offers this but I feel he's better used elsewhere. Petterd should start on the field, no question.

Whilst I don't have any real issue with the loan, I disagree that the club is getting a commercial rate of interest. It is not a true arms-length deal, as typical commercial loans of this type would attract a margin of at least 2% over a base rate of about 5.2% for two years. That said, the club describe it as an investment in one of their key people which is important in retaining quality employees like Cameron. The loan is therefore not worth all the fuss Caroline Wilson is trying to stir up.

I actually liked what I saw from Jack yesterday. Didn't kick four goals but took a great contested grab, looked much better in the marking contests than I had seen him before and appeared more willing to accept physical contact. He also did some smart work that won't appear in his stats like repeat leads that weren't honoured and a terrific tap on. Held on to the ball a little long once or twice but rarely wastes a possesion and I'd prefer the ball in his hands than many others. This game was a step forward and I think it showed that he is working on those areas of his game that will help elevate him to the next level.

No Adam Cooney, James Frawley, Matthew Scarlett, Mark Jamar. Moloney ahead of Davey is ridiculous. How Daniel Connors made this list is a mystery. No credibility and will get no more of my attention.

Brendan Goddard was a ready made star. He just took about seven years to prove it.

I've always felt that Dunn plays best as a forward target and struggles further up the ground where he has no outstanding attributes. Bate IMO has actually played his best footy as a high half forward/wing where his massive boot gives us an attacking weapon into the F50 but he struggles as a key forward target. Now that our forward line is starting to take shape and we have several targets up there, I'd like to see Bate played a bit higher up the ground again in a Ryan O'Keefe kind of role before I write him off. On Watts, I missed the Essendon game but thought that he looked ok in the Adelaide matches and he kicked a couple on the weekend. In fact, aside from Maric I'd be interested to know which of our forwards have kicked more goals than Watts in pre-season? Or how he stacks up on goals per game averages. Anyone have the info? I don't doubt the validity of the source but I'd be a little disappointed if Watts doesn't run out round 1.

Sylvia Davey Scully I think that if Sylvia plays a full season and we are in the mix for finals, he is a serious Brownlow chance. Davey, I think, will relish the formal leadership role and Scully has the goods, it's just a matter of when he explodes onto the scene. I think Green is the real danger to upset my top three with Jamar and Grimes if he stays fit.

I agree with you in the main but in the same way that I don't consider Garland a KPD, neither do I consider Morris to be one. In any event, the point is really moot as in any given week, it's more about match-ups than some archaic notion of positions.

Given that I usually find your posts to be well considered I will put the "video game" jibe down to a momentary lack in concentration. The question as you asked it was "is he a key position backman". Not, "is he one of Melbourne's best key defenders?" or "is he capable of playing a key position role?". I prefer to use a wider frame of reference than MFC's current list when evaluating the question and come up with a different answer. Big deal. As Daisycutter (I think) said it, if Frawley goes down our backline is very exposed as he is really the only one on our list capable of playing genuine KPD week in-week out. That is not to say Col can't do it effectively given the right match-up, but he doesn't inspire the same confidence playing on the true gun KPFs as would Scarlett, Lake, Frawley etc. I would be nervous relying on him to tame Riewoldt, Brown, Pavlich, Franklin etc every week but have no such reservations with Chip. Garland is a fantastic defender and definitely has more weapons than other tall backmen on our list like Rivers and Warnock. That again doesn't mean he is best suited to the role - it merely implies that necessity would have him fill it at times givn he is better equipped than others we have at our disposal. I stand by my original assertion that he is capable of playing the role at times but IMO is better suited to the third tall role which, among other things, would allow him to zone of more and be creative with his drive.

I tend to agree with most of this. It is a bit of a misnomer that Garland 'plays on Franklin' or 'is a good match-up for Franklin'. We keep getting this argument on the back of one game three seasons ago. Don't get me wrong, I rate Col and think he's capable of playing a KPD role at a pinch. However I don't see him most suited to that position and wouldn't want him playing it long term as there are a few big forwards who could probably expose him in this role. I think we would be a stronger defence with another genuine KPD releasing Garland to play the role Rivers currently does.

This is a pretty fair effort DA! Cracking side.

Thanks for the info. Always a little averse to judging players solely based on a 3 minute highlight reel. Sounds like he ticks a lot of boxes though and could be a handy prospect. IMO we ideally need one more big backman to assist Frawley and release Garland to third tall defender. Had originally figured Stef Martin for this role but doesn't seem to have panned out that way.