The Chazz

I can't believe the question marks raised over Roos' comments. I think he is spot on with his views, and am glad that someone has started to focus on certain players. His concerns over Moloney (which seems to have gone through this thread not mentioned), were pretty accurate too. Hey Brent, you're the teams best clearance player, and a leader of the Club. Ok, your mate Jamar usually puts the pill down your throat at every tap, but now that he isn't playing, you have 2 options, play your same style but without regular feeding by the ruckman, or you can go and get your own footy. Judd couldn't give a toss what ruckman he played under, he just goes and finds it and creates opportunities. Ok, Judd is a superstar, but Moloney can be too. Same goes with Sylvia. They showed footage of a stoppage where Sylvia was right next to Judd, but by the time the ruckman had tapped it down and the crumbers were contesting, Judd slipped 5 metres away from Col. Roos' words were to the tune of if you are going to play man on man against him, you have to stay on him, not let him slip away. He said something like Bailey is getting the blame for his players being lazy (I think he used the word lazy), and that's not really fair. Col was given a job to do, and he didn't do it. Both players are former top 5 draft picks, one is a superstar, while the other is just showing flashes. I also thought it interesting to hear Scott say how there were certain things at Geelong that were non-negotiables, and that EVERY player has a responsibility to the team to ensure they play their part. If X player didn't make a stoppage, they were made aware of this and how it is unacceptable. Obviously Stevie J did some things on Saturday night that are not tolerated from a team perspective, even though he kicked 7. I'm all for giving a once-off error chance for redemption, but if any player, and I mean ANY, are repeat offenders, this is not what the Red & Blue jumper stands for.

More than happy for you to disagree with the rest of it DC. I just don't know how anyone can hand-on-heart say that Dean Bailey ISN'T the right man for the job, just like I don't know how anyone can say he IS. We have absolutely no idea what the players think of him, what he does/says behind closed doors, and if he has a game plan that can win a premiership. It is a very easy cop-out to balme the coach when the team isn't playing to expectations, especially if your expectations are high (and at times we should have high expectations). As I said, I will support anyone that Coaches the MFC, until I am advised otherwise. But at the moment, I have to sit on the fence until I am shown differently.

Where it is hard with Dunn is that we don't know what role he is given. As a forward, we expeect him to produce goals, but in that North game, he had to play backline which isn't a strength. I have a feeling he may be doing what is asked in certain areas, but it's just that some of his game looks second rate of late. I'm not sticking up for him, I'm just trying to understand why he may come straight back in! Anyway, changes this week, well, I'm buggered if I know. I have a sneaky little feeling that the players will flick the switch this week. I think the Club would've marked this one as our best chance during that Carl/Ess/Coll run to knock off a "top 8" side, and will play accordingly. I know I'm probably living in the dark ages thinking that Clubs, well, my Club, still do this, but who knows! Knowing who is available is also a mystery - Davey? Bartram? Jamar? In - Scully, Trengove, Gawn, Howe Out - Newton, Morton, Bate, Bennell Willing to excuse Warnock for last weeks efforts, his 2 weeks before that were very good. Don't have a repeat performance though! Petterd gets the green singlet.

I am of the belief that all the players taken in the draft that year still catch up for dinner once a week. I know that Tapscott is massive on ensuring the newer players are a tight group, and I can't see that Scully wouldn't be included in this. I have as much to back that last comment up with as you do your initial post! I'd be interested to know how many players Judd socialises with.

I think that Bailey went in to the game thinking that if we put an extra man back right from the start, it would achieve 2 things, firstly, it would ensure the Carlton forward line was more crowded which in turn would restrict the openess to score, and secondly, having that spare man would hopefully give us better run out of defence (hence him using Watts who is one of our better users). Some will say this is defensive play, and my initial reaction was just that, while others will see it as an attacking option. Where it turned out for the worst, for Bailey that is, is that our forwards needed to work a lot harder than what they have been, as they were a man down. Guys like Jurrah and Petterd have righfully been criticised in recent weeks for their work ethic, but the style of play that Bailey brought Friday night meant that they had to improve much more than normal. Sadly, they didn't, and because of this, it didn't compliment Bailey's plan. This may be a way in the future to be able to beat the forward press - play a loose man right from the start, and create extra drive from half back. But, like any game plan, it will only work if executed perfectly, and we are just not doing that at the moment. While most wont want to see that style again, I'd be interested to see if it can be successful. In future, I don't want to see Watts do it, maybe this is what Tom McDonald can offer? In response to the opening post, I was at Metricon Stadium Saturday night. This is the third GC game I have seen live, and they contine to impress me with their attitude. They knew, like everyone at the game, that they were fighting a losing battle right from the start, but the endeavour they showed in the first half was excellent. I have supported Dean Bailey ever since day 1, and will continue to do so while he is our coach. I'm not saying he is the right man for the job, but I'm not saying he is the wrong man either, I just honestly don't know if he can win us a premiership. A couple of the things tat disappointed me the other night was starting Nicholson as a substitute. A first gamer would've come in with great enthusiasim, and yeah, may have run out of puff, but would have had a red hot crack for the the first half at least. I would've lined him straight up on Judd, and Evans of Murphy. I want to see Watts play Full Forward for the rest of the year (even though I suggested differently above). If he can aim to kick 25 goals for the rest of the year, it will give him great confidence going in to 2012. Howe needs to come in, but I'm not sure if it is at the expense of Bate or Petterd. I think our number 1 priority is to get this group of guys playing for each other, not for themselves. We aren't that much ahead of the Gold Coast in terms of development, but it's one thing they have already overtaken us on. Our team need to operate as one unit. It's hard when our better players aren't out on the park, but by the end of the year, if I can see that this group would do anything for all his mates in that starting 22, I'd be satisfied. I want to see them enjoy their footy, show a bit of flair and really celebrate each others work. As I am interstate, I want to here our supporters that went to the game say how it was great to see the backline celebrating every goal we kicked, and how good it felt to be a Melbourne supporter. The results will come, and I'm patient - you need to be if you bleed red and blue, but when we have senior players that have bad body language onfield, it does absolutely nothing to inspire the other players, and us supporters. I want the boys to give me those feelings that we all got when Aussie celebrated those goals a couple of years ago, or when Scull kicked his first goal and Trengove was one of the first to get around him, or when LJ kicked his first goals against Essendon. That sh!t gets me going, it gets you going, and most importantly, gets the team going. You could easily tell on Friday night that a number of the players weren't doing what they were supposed to do. Is this the Coach's fault? Well, you will believe what you like (ie if you don't have confidence in Bailey, of course you will believe that it's his job to get the players up), but one thing is for sure, I think the entire playing list and coaching staff need to really sort their sh!t out and fix this problem.

Petterd the sub. It will be interesting to see the match-ups, but yeah, we're in the sh!t.

I said Gysberts for 2 reasons; 1. He tagged Ablett in his very first game last year, and while he didn't defeat Ablett, he wasn't disgraced. 2. No-one beats Judd, so why not put a guy that can find plenty of his own footy. Judd will take him to the contests, and if he isn't accountable, Gys will get a number of possession (like he did last year against Gaz). The other option might be to throw Joel Mac on him. 100th game, tough, not sure about pace (that's not saying he hasn't got it, just that I don't know!). The games that Judd struggled in last year where against the likes of McPhee, where a lot of physical pressure was placed on him. Joel Mac started the game last week tagging Goddard, but had to be shifted off him swhen Tappy did his hammy. If he has the pace, it might not be a stupid idea. Depending on where Gibbs plays, I'd give Petterd that job (only if Gibbs is half back).

A word of advice RD, don't spend your money on alcohol there as you may become an addict, don't spend it in the pokies/keno/TAB as you will be going straight to hell, especially after it costs you your family/house/job/etc. Don't drive your car there unless it's a hybrid. And lastly, don't eat the deep-fried food they serve in the bistro as it will lead to an obesity crisis. Bloody hell, what did we do this for? The Club should be ashamed that they are budgeting on income from people doing the "wrong" thing.

There's 2 issues though B59; * Form (the one you are making your decision on) - Will he get it back playing in the seniors? Maybe, maybe not. Will he get it back at Casey? Maybe, maybe not. If he were to go back to Casey, it would come with strict KPI's to ensure it's not an easy gallop. As I have said to you above, a boring 40 possies will not mean anything at Casey, but a hard earned 20 possies and achieving the strict KPI's, that's what the Coach will want to see. * Leadership - the infamous incident of not going 100% at that mark is totally unacceptable. We slated Bennell when he did it and called for his omission, we should do double that with Davey. That passage of play cost us a goal, which hurt us not only on the scoreboard, but the fact that our kids need senior players to look up to, and if they see him doing somehting like that, it gives them less confidence. That error had effectively disrupted the team environment that we are trying to achieve, and he should be punished for it. Playing him in the 1's with your ideas is not an acceptable form of punishment, and even after your lengthy explaination, still makes no sense to me, and most others, as to how you think it is. It's ok to have a different opinion, but when what you are proposing has absolutely no strong message to the playing group, that's when your thoughts will be questioned, especially considering the endless posts on here have us crying out for better leadership, and to lose the white collar attitude and replace it for a blue collar ethic. You opinion/punishment is as soft as the marking attempt that the bloke himself put in. Luck for the majority, he's out for 2 weeks anyway, so we didn't have to face the potential of the Club making the same mistake as what you were proposing.

Would be thinking that Gysberts will get the gig, but wouldn't be surprised if Nicholson is thrown to the wolves. My other smokie would be Morton to come in and tag him, but I honestly think it will be Gys.

Finally! Thank you for pointing this out. People want us to "play like Collingwood", by the time it takes us 2 seasons to master that, the next leader of the comp is playing a totally different style. For those that can't work that out - we would be continually playing catch up footy. I have to ask, what stage are we at in our premiership model? I know we have moved from Base Camp, are we still at the In The Game phase? The idea of that phase is that we go in at half time and we are still In The Game. If you look at our games so far, every game except West Coast has seen us In The Game at half time. While we all want results, we should also listen to what our Club is telling us. We have only had our President come out once to say that the way we played in a certain match is totally unacceptable. They didn't do that after the Hawks match, or the North game, why not? Because according to this premiership model, we are at the exact stage we wanted to be at. In regards to the OP, I don't think anyone in here can give an accurate reply at this stage in the season, hence why we wont sack our Coach mid-year. The smart supporters, like the President, will sit back at the end of the year and make their decision then. Any decisions made earlier than that are knee-jerk reactions, and are unhealthy.

It was indeed Forest Hill, thanks for that! Was it Sports Co or Sports Power? I watched Open Mike the other night, and the big comment that stood out for me was the fact that every time he walked in to the ground, he thought the Dee's were going to win. He didn't care what oppoisition they were playing - in his mind they were going to win. For a guy that played many, many years with limited success, it is an amazing attitude to have, and one that should be a non-negotiable for every player that wears the red & blue. People get on here and talk about the losing culture that Bailey/The Club has created in recent years, that crap is all in the head. Melbourne had a losing culture in the early 80's, but the leaders never believed it.

Never forget my parents taking me to the Sports Co (or Sports Power) store that Robbie used to work at, think it was in Box Hill (a long drive from Ballarat at the time). I would've been all of 7 or 8 years old, and proudly wore the number 2 on my back. Poor Robbie didn't have a Melbourne jumper in stock, and as a result, I had to try a Collingwood jumper on to get the size right. Robbie's words of advice prior to me putting it on; "close your eyes and block your nose". As I idolised him greatly, I did just that, he got my right size worked out and sent the (right) jumper up to me. A true gentleman on field, an even truer(?) one off field.

It'd want to be a ready-made one that is around 23 years old, and I also wouldn't want to hear one complaint about our midfield being soft and easily bullied. Who do you suggest? If you can assure me of those things, and thow up a suitable player/deal, I'll look at it, and most likely, along with a majority on here, wee myself from laughter.

Happy to disagree. Just disappointed that you of all people would accept a performance like that. I expect better from a senior player who is a role model for a number of our players, and think that he should be dealt with the same as it were anyone else.

I can clearly see what you're saying, but when the entire football community and us, the members, are asking this Club to stand for something, and the players are saying that we need to make a stand, you're just allowing the same old stuff that has been happening for the past decade or so. What stand are you making by accepting a mediocre performance? What example are we setting to the rest of the team? Don't come this crap about extra responsibilities, blah, blah, blah, he has been Vice Captain all season, the extra responsibilities are always there, no excuse. I think you'll find that Davey has already been asked once this season, most probably the days after the West Coast game. He responded the next week, but does that mean we should expect to have to keep asking him after a poor performance? We shouldn't have to ask, he should already know. He will be given an opportunity to "pay back" his teammates when he comes on. I don't want him given the opportunity to do that until later in the 3rd quarter. Others will not be doing "his" work, they will be doing their own work, which is hopefully the work of the entire team. Aaron should be given (ideally) the last 40 minutes of the game to do his work. Do you think if he were sitting there watching us get smashed for the first 2 quarters, knowing he can't get on until a sub has been made, that wouldn't pi$$ him right off? It should make him even more determined and hungry when he is given the opportunity.

Gotzy, the thing is that the Club is fully aware that we need approx 12-14 players in our 22 each week that can be rotated through the midfield. While we live in hope that Evans, Nicholson, Blease and even Viney come on, the reality is we know what we have got with Nathan, and he has improved this year andis becomming a more than handy footballer. Nathan just played his 100th game, we are lacking in the leadership department. If we were offered something for him at the end of the year, or even next year, he'll be closing in on being a 125-150 game player at what, 24 or 25 years old? Why would we throw that away, providing he doesn't go backward in his development, to risk it on a newbie that might not make it?

So you'd have him in your "Greats of Melbourne" team? Good for you, I wouldn't, regardless of where he stood on the goal kicking table. I believe he was a very good player for the MFC, but obviously not as high as you rate him. Sorry if my comment wasn't up to your "great" standard...mate.

So, based on your opinion, we play Davey, but give him extra responsibilities by playing him in a position that is somewhat unfamiliar to what he has done. Does this then send out a message to all the playing group that we accept poor performances, and taking that further, we accept our players pulling out of marking contests at the fear of hurting ones self, but it's ok if you do these things because we'll "punish" you by playing you again next week but just changing your role. We had this attitude when we tanked, I'd like to think we have come a long way since those days. How can it not send that message? I think Aaron is very lucky that he can read more than 2 lines in our injury list. Make him sub, (hopefully) bring him on late in the 3rd, and by that stage we will know if we are in the game or not. If we're not, start him in the guts, if we are in the game, play him on a half forward flank.

I'm glad you spelt that with "fl" and not "w", which at times however, would have been appropriate. The problem for Robbo was that the delivery was dismal. He could've been something if the ball were to be kicked out in front of him rather than 2 foot above his head. Between that and his work ethic, seriously cost him a spot in the "greats of Melbourne" list. I think if the former had've been better, the latter would have naturally increased. I'm still a strong believer that Blease will make his debut this week. If we are to keep Bate in, I'd send him to Full Forward and tell him not to come out of the 50m area. This would require us to drop Newton, who would then require Gawn to come in, and I'm just not sure if we will have 2 debutantes in the one night.

I am amazed that some think that going back to Casey, getting BOG and racking up 30-odd possies is what is expected to return to the seniors. If he were to go back, I'm sure Bailey and co would have certain areas that he needs to work on, and if he doesn't meet those KPI's, they wont give a crap how many possessions he gets, he'll stay at Casey until he works on these areas. Maybe B59, you are the one that isn't understanding a simple theory. I will put it this way for you, if Davey plays at Casey and gets 22 touches, but has 10 tackles - 6 of which are inside forward 50, 4 shepards, 2 smothers, creates half a dozen turnovers and kicks 2 goals, that would look more favourably with the coach rather than a cruisy 35 touches. This is what we can use Casey for for our senior players that are out of form. If Flash can't do the former at that level, he will stay there until he can. They have ben his issues at senior level. To think that he would be "hiding" down at Casey is really starting to unearth a sheer lack of football knowledge. No-one said Newton was safe.

The only way we can punish Davey by playing him in the seniors this weekend would be to make him sub. Playing him out of position is one of the most bizarre comments I've heard, but each to their own. B59, it does look like you're on your own with this one. I don't really understand your opinion of Casey being some sort of holiday, that is unless you have played there lately. I imagine Davey would get BOG at Casey, probably pick up 30+ possessions, but I'm sure if he were to play there, he would know that he has certain areas of his game to work on, and if he doesn't do that, he'll continue to play there. To say that dropping Davey to Casey is not punishment is laughable.

Would love to be there to hear the roar of the members when he runs on to the MCG for the first time this year. Be it against Carlton, Essendon or Collingwood (did mention a few weeks ago that I didn't expect his return to be this match, it may well be), that roar will be our way of saying "You are a true Demon, and will be forever". Sadly I wont be there, but would like to think the other 35,000+ members will make up for me. You wont get that sh!t out at Rooty Hill.

Very valid point.

As opposed to our current indigenous leader who leads with such pride? It was a sarcastic comment though. Jurrah seemed more than happy to throw his weight around when Ash McGrath and Aussie were at each other all game against the Lions. And come to think of it, he was very chatty to a St Kilda player on Saturday. We don't need him to be a thug, we don't need him to be a tough player, but what we do need is for him, and he's not on his own, to obey team rules (ie chase/forward pressure, tackle hard, etc). If he's not willing to do that, he can spend a week at Casey to have a good think about it. I don't think it will need to come to this though.