bing181

"Monday (two days post game day) we’ll do a light run around session where we test everyone’s heart rate to see how their fatigue is going. Then we do a skill-based session in preparation for our main training session that week. This might include some light touch drills, a kicking circuit, a handball game or some weeks we might play soccer or American football. The purpose of the session is to get the body moving." David Zaharakis.

Fairly in depth commentary on the Dees on First Crack, with the usual damning footage of players just banging the ball on their boot. Oliver and Viney main culprits. Not sure how we get out of this with this list, though the list can grow and evolve over the season - if we can get some of the next gen players on the park and keep them there.

I just don't get why people post things that are demonstrably untrue and not difficult to check: "Spargo recently made his long-awaited return, facing Sandringham in a VFL practice match." https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/1729810/charlie-spargo-the-road-to-recovery

I hope to god he never tells the truth about our injuries. The last thing we - or our opposition - need to hear is who's carrying what injury etc. etc.

If the Lions' list was more injured than fit every season (which apart from being a hyperbole is demonstrably untrue), then that would be the responsibility of their High Performance Manager, Damien Austin. Who has been there for 10 years, including for their premiership.

Like who? AMW out for the season, Lindsay, Lever and Hore injured, Howes not doing it … there are only so many small defenders on the list. About the only one left might be Seston, but is he up to AFL standard and fitness?

Might need McVee or at least Lindsay to come back in for that to happen. We're plugging holes at the moment.

FWIW, we have a person who's title is List Manager and who, unless I'm sadly mistaken, is there to Manage the List. We also have a List Management Committee to oversee (checks notes) List Management. List Management committee members include Lamb, Taylor and Richardson.

This is the kind of stuff that does my head in. Factually incorrect, hindsight bias, etc etc. But most of all, a complete lack of context or of looking at the whole picture. Because apart from anything else and who was playing where, Hunter was very cheap, especially in comparison to what Amon would have been asking. It doesn't even begin to be apples for apples.

No we didn't. Typical of the BS on this thread - and across much of the board at the moment.

Reasons. Because we had arguably the best midfield in the league and he'd have to go to the back of the queue. Let's not forget that we even had Gus who had come third in the Brownlow as a midfielder but who couldn't get a run on-ball. Amon knew that at Hawthorn he'd get regular first-team games as a mid.

Agree with all that, though for Hawthorn I'd say more like 7 seasons, with 2018 as the last gasp of a dying patient. Also worth noting in the context of changing coaches, that as bad as they were for the last 2 seasons under Clarkson, they went backwards for 2 seasons under Mitchell.

If you think things can be turned around in a week, then not only would I like some of what you're taking, half the teams in the AFL would like a word. Expect a call from WCE, Richmond, North, Essendon, Carlton etc. in the coming days.

You're kidding yourself. Really.

"There needs to be players who put their hands up and take responsibility and say "I haven't been the best teammate". It's all me, me me. That's the biggest issue I had when I went from Hawthorn to Melbourne, getting these players to understand it wasn't about them." Insightful analysis from someone who's been there. And no mention of the coach or coaching or game plan or whatever.

How did that work out when we sacked Neeld? Neil Craig was an experienced, competent senior coach. We were losing badly under Neeld but then went even further backwards under Craig. Which is exactly the same pattern we've seen Every Time we've sacked a coach mid-season. The incoming stand-in coach ALWAYS lost more matches than the coach he replaced. And not just at Melbourne either, happens across the league, and for that matter, happens across multiple leagues in different sports. The only way to change a team's trajectory is through list change. Delusional. Mercifully, those in charge at the club understand this, also understand what Goodwin and the coaching team are trying to do, and understand where the list is at. As for the supporters ...

Hunter was more than useful when he came across, McAdam we may never know (injury). As for the rest and what happened under Roos, Tommy Bugg, Ben Kennedy, Pat McKenna, Ben Newton say hello, even some of the people we drafted/rookied. There were more than a few doozies there. And let's not even mention Heritier Lumumba. You're rewriting history.

Petty forward. The one thing he can (still) do is take a big contested mark. Unlike JVR who is struggling to take any kind of mark at the moment. For the rest, who knows, depends on who's available. No point on just moving deck chairs to give the impression that we're "doing something". I'd be inclined to make as few changes as possible, we desperately need stability and consistency. There'll always be hesitancy and indecision when every week you look up and have a different set of players in front of you. BTW, no way Sparrow gets dropped. Was a big part in us winning centre clearances.

And there it is.

Goodwin's not going anywhere, at least not before his contract is up at the end of 2026. Get over yourselves. So many bizarre posts, unconnected to reality.

Swap Van Rooyen for a key forward who can hold his marks, and Petty for someone who can defend without giving away stupid frees, and we win that. In spite of everything, we are generating enough I50's ... only to see it come straight out again.

So who would you bring in? FFS.

Plenty of glimmers of hope and positives. Probably not enough, but at least they look like a football team. At times. Get Windsor and Kozzie back up to speed, Lindsay and Lever back in ... building, building.

A foretaste of the main game perhaps ...

"New ideas" are meaningless without real and meaningful list changes. No accident that the first thing Paul Roos did when he arrived was use our draft capital to bring in talented, experienced players who could have an immediate impact. Of course, you might argue that we could have stayed with Craig and done the same thing, and we'll never know what the result might have been in that case. But the reason we'll never know isn't so much that Craig mightn't have done as well as Roos, it's that Craig was tainted by being part of the Neeld team and the optics weren't good. If everything else off-field is in place, changing coaches is about sponsors and memberships.