Harrisonrules

My big question hangs over Maric. IO believe we were crying out for talls and we went for Maric when Roughhead was still available. Its been our obsession with smalls at expence of talls that has driven me crazy. I have been pacified with Gawn and Fitzpatrick but then I thingk even the club were amazed they got them.

I'm right with you. I've just started another thread on Bartram which was virtually tackling the same concern. I'd give Maric a go on the backline, but Bailey has shown very little imagininative creativity, so don't expect it.

So they say the daggers are drawn at bomber land just waiting for him to make one slip. Tomorrow could be the day. I have personal contacts that have given me an insight into the rumblings at windy hill. I don't care a stuff about Knights or windy hill. What concerns me is the utter silence at the 'G'. Two and a half of the most deplorable years at Melbourne I can remember in 55 years of watching. Don't throw at me , 'but look at our list, they are just kids'. At the beginning of the year we scoffed at the Tigers. Everyone scoffed at the tigers, all clubs, even our administration in quiet unguarded moments. This forum was as bad as any. And look at what Hardwick is doing with those kids. 5 out of 6 wins. Last year people scoffed at the Dockers but Harvey is doing something right. The Kangas claimed they had a younger team than us when they ran over us under their new coach Scott at Etihad. How would you rate these five of the newest coaches. However you do it it would be a very hard task to put Bailey ahead of any of the others. The silence at the 'G' is deafening.

Bailey to forget he is coaching the demons and make no moves in the last quarter when we desperately need to do something different in the last quarter.

Really good thread. It's bringing some reality into our inflated dreams about our future. Forget talk of premierships. I'm confident of developing a final eight team. The question is can we build a top four team. The final steps are massive leaps and you can not tell until you are up there. We need another tall back of the Frawley quality and I don't see one there yet. I find it hard to let go of my dream that Fitzpatrick will be the missing quality forward. He Watts and Liam J would then be a powerful ariel forward line. Of the forwards Petterd is looking good and could reach unexpected heights I agree that the forward line has greater potential in its ranks than the backs even if at this point it is lagging a bit behind. Can I break back into dream mode? Jack Viney may be the extr mid we are hoping for. And it looks like we will get another top 10 pick this year.

Yes I have big questions over Clint. The club has stood by him every year he has been at the club. Don't recall him ever being dropped even though I would say he fits into the bottom few on the pecking order of player ranking in the team. Ultimately he has been designated as the mobile small back to tag the dangerous small goal sneaks of the opposition. Why was he not given the duty on Milne last week. Is he good enough or not? Word is going around that he has been playing a tagging role on such opposition livewires and starving them of opportunity. Regarding skill I could only give him a 50% break even score. Most significantly we get no run from him. When he gets the ball which is little more than 10 possessions a game he tends to look for the backward option because it provides no pressure on thinkiing or kicking. Backward movement is valuable if you move it quickly across ground for a forward thrust down the other wing but if slow it just gives the opposition time to zone up. Frawly was magnificent on Milne but that left other holes with the saints talls down forward. Either Bartram is good enough for this role or he is not. I don't criticse him. He is what he is. For me it leaves another big question over the competence of the coaching staff. I've heard good things about Wellman, but this leaves the door open on my opinion.

The idea of Garland, Rivers, even Frawley at times up forward has been one of my favourite topics. But the unimaginative coaching staff has shown complete resistance to any such thought. I've lost confidence in them. I'd forget it and be patient waiting for the next coaching team to take us deep into the final eight.

What are Jacks/Todds options. Go in the draft and take his chance with whoever bottoms out, or hope nobody wants him before the Crows or Port are able to pick him up? Do we think that they are idiots. This is a no brainer. There is only one certain thing in the football world and it is that Jack Viney will choose the Demons. His other options are all ridiculous.

So very few rate Morton. Thank goodness you guys aren't picking the team

Your opinion might be right but what can you say to substantiate it. Players are scrutinised mercilessly by 'us' what is so sacred about the coaching panel being scrutinised. Looking for concrete signs of performance is hardly jumping down someones throat. This is our opportunity to keep the discussion going to ensure excellence, otherwise why have a forum.

I am open minded, All I ask is give me facts, not vague opinions. We're not after a good finals team, it is only the best that will get there. Bailey will have some strengths, and weaknesses. If the club doesn't moniter them then we will only end up being a good finals team. This forum is surely our opportunity to keep asking the hard questions.

The disastrous merry go round hand ball fiasco dominated Baileys first two years plus game one. That was the game plan. It stopped then and at least Bailey now talks of his model being to kick it and through the corridor. Either our players were so dumb they got it so wrong for so long after each playing 10 years of natural instinctive football. Good footballers were turned into a rabble and we were told week in week out it was their skill and the lack of intensity. There was something more fundamentally wrong that no one was able to pin point. Your can not rule out poor coaching communication, poor game plan or lack of strategic planning and implementation unless other evidence becomes apparent. Again I say our players may have been dumb and without skill. IMO it was the most bizzare start to a coaching career I can remember. I remain open minded but continue with serious questions

D-L I just don't see how this is different from what anyone else is doing. IMO Developmental coach is just code for I'm new at this caper. I know I can analyse skills and work on guys with this in mind. Clarkson does the same but he's not going to undersell himself, he's happy to embrace the title of plain and simple coach, with all its portfolios including development. The great coaches are more likely to employ someone as development coach if they are not able to spend enough time on it themselves. It's an issue of self confidence, self belief, personal identity and Bailey is not yet embracing the whole role.

These are my preferred options in order 1. Leave as is ( I got a heap of pleasure denying the maggies a win) 2. Highest number of goals wins (similar to count back in high jump ) no extra time 3. 5 minutes extra each way, with 30 sec break to change ends and TV adtime( and repeat with 4 minutes 3 minutes 2 minutes until a result ) 4. Shoot out from two spots, one at 50 mtre CHF and the other from the boundary line (six kicks 3 from each spot ) Total score of goals and points wins. If it is still a tie then the next six best kicks. If still a draw then last six. If still a draw have a computer raffle of membership number. If they are not there the team forfeits

Our overhead marking on the forward line is our weakness. I'm happy to leave Watts in as long as he plays a half decent game. Green (untouchable) and Sylvia (Petterd next year) are the only two who could be considered reliable overhead contested marks. IMO this is our weakness and Hughes should be given a reasonable chance to show his ability. Ever since I noticed him a few years ago he has been taking 10 marks a game. Very few do it. High marking whether a tall or small intimidates backs and we don't. This is Danny's time and he should not be neglected due to other name players.

I'd like to agree but I don't see any evidence either for or against. Very few would agree that the forward line functions well. There are many options that for some reason they will not try. There have been a lot of cool persona coaches who have been no good. What makes us think that Dean develops players better than any other coach? Ratten is going well at Carlton. Clarkson brought his team on very quickly. Hardwick isn't doing well enough at Richmond. Their progress has been far better than ours was in Deans first two years. I've watched for over fifty years. I think Dean reduced our team to a rabble as soon as he came and we are just seeing some semblance of improvement and we are 13th. They were the closest to the worst I had ever seen of a Melbourne team. There may be something I can't see. But I want evidence that there is more to Dean before I will be convinced. The ledger is still very much in the balance as far as I can see.

Statistics lie. Keeping your own back quiet is one part of the job, but players work as a team and one players mistakes can lead to others scoring, eg the doggies game. Bartrams fumble cause Lake to goal. We have 2 athletic players Bartram and Miller who have good speed but both have pedestrian minds, and modest skills in Bartrams case and poor in Millers case.

Because we have an abundance of backs who cann't all get games. eg. MacDonald

Lets assume there are roughly 200 infringements per game. If you want to argue 100, go for it. It's a complex game and I've got better things to do in life than count free kicks. To cope they simplify the rules, eg hand in the back but let you push with the forearm in the back. Hence many are incidental to what is happening. They end up picking 30 to 40 for the game because their might be this number of simple infringements. They let the rest go because it ventures into the far to complex to pick 50/50 frees or even 30/70 frees. The crowd helps turn the complex into supposedly simple rules. The crowd simply wants this one so they give it ( and they do have to get out of the ground.)(alive). Consistency is impossible with three umpires and a philosophy of 'keep it simple stupid' My best example was the dismissed goal of Brad Greens against the doggies. Goal umpire gets ready to signal goal. Central umpire thinks doggie hand touches ball. Conference takes place. Central umpire simplifies decision. I saw it touch his hand,"touched one point" The real happening was actually complex. The ball touches the doggie hand then onto the boot of Brad Green which is behind the doggie hand. The goal umpire saw this as the foot was behind the hand and clearly visible to him. He makes his point but in the complex situation is overrules by the central umpire who can't revert to a complex situation and insists on a point. A second example. Before the bounce of the Carlton game. Blues come out to intimidate young demons ( as Carlton player says after game on the radio) The demons probably considering it. Push and shove punch and pinch fights start around the game. A very complex situation develops. One umpire pulls the trigger before the other two have lost their nerve and the blues get thesimple free. We all go home dumbfounded. Giesh and his self righteous boys review the footage and happily nod their heads then go home smiling at how well they are doing. All is forgotten as the week passes and we repeat the fiasco next weekend. Thank goodness we've got a bye this weekend. Relief from those simpletons.

We were hopeless deven in the practice games eg against West Coast. They had us totally locked in. They repeated the performance in the real game. This is what makes me question the coaching staff. They haven't addressed an obvious problem. Its not ability. Its the system. And that is a coaching issue.

We were hopeless deven in the practice games eg against West Coast. They had us totally locked in. They repeated the performance in the real game. This is what makes me question the coaching staff. They haven't addressed an obvious problem. Its not ability. Its the system. And that is a coaching issue.

Jack has all the skills already, marking (great hands will only get better - rarely drops an opportunity at even this stage). kicking (95% shot on goal - frustrates me he is passing off around the 50 mtr mark, he can kick these most times.) handballing (is as good as any one with 10 games)with excellent peripheral vision ( basketball background ). Yes he has little physical confidence with his thin growing body (but only time will address this eg. 2 years at a minimum.) His primary challenge at the moment is getting used to the speed of the game - AND HE WON'T LEARN THAT IN THE VFL. THEREFORE I SAY KEEP PLAYING HIM. Wins are nice, but the development of young kids is paramount.

Who wasn't going flat out at the end. Miller can usually take a chest mark and kicks 50/50 for goal. But notice how he almost fumbled that ball he got to Jones for a goal. He's so awkward with whatever he does and has a slow mind making decisions. Johnson would do no worse (and that's saying something) but would be so much better in the ruck. Morton continues to develop beautifully. Now there is a guy who can run and as others have said finds space. Yes an occasional bad decision but then who doesn't. I do believe he needs to improve his short passing. Better kicking long. But I'm a real fan and agree he had a great game. Basically all he lacks is a good nickname. Either Sticks or stilts might get the ball rolling.

He's my smokey. In the pre draft season I googled as much as I could on the tall forwards. Of the half dozen or so that looked well worth it I came to believe that Fitzpatrick was potentially as good as any. From the video clips he played back and forward, could mark well, run and bounce the ball, very mobile and agile. I entertained the thought he was as good a pick as any. I was half hoping we would take him at 11 or it not at 18. I was angry and depressed when we had used our first four picks. Half pleased when Gawm was picked knowing a little about him, but really delighted to find Fitzy picked in the 50's. I personally think he is the most important player on our list. That doesn't mean the best, but the one player who can fill the one place we really need, a stronger, tall marking forward and sometimes back. If he comes on, then Watts and Jurrah will be the team we need.

You omitted Bartram. His selection baffles me as if untouchable. I'd like to see Cheney in his spot. I believe he is a better runner - speed and endurance - than Cheney, but Cheney is clearly a better footballer. Somebody on the radio/TV stated that no forward has kicked a goal on him this year, but if the football department believes that statistic then pity help us. He turned the ball over to enable the doggies kick the winning goal against us. Last week he turned it over twice for goals to the blues. Statistics tell many stories. I think the FD believes that if they put enough games into him he'll become a good fottballer.