trudders

already have em... just need the time.

hmmm 1994.. Thats younger then GWS

Nathan Fyfe...... he's gonna be stealing those brownlows fairly soon

no..... the other thing is we need to break our hoodoo over there (in a real game) having confidence that we can win over there is 10 times better then getting a pick 6 places higher.

So... a thread about how bartram should be "kicked" out. FFS there is at least 16 other melbourne players that deserve this thread before bartram. He played his role, he shut down kerr. Thats all he had to do. If everybody had done their role today we would've won. Getting goals woulda been the icing on the cake. But he couldnt polish that off unfortunately. Before the criticism mounts we should be wary that it should've been either morton or sylvia or any of those outside runners that were in his position when going for goal. That is their role.....

Considering trengove's loyalty to the club, it wouldnt be surprising

They're zoning up well this year...... that is our only reason why we cant beat them... we cannot drill through those things. Oh and the other thing, Nicoski? Dont know about you guys, but i rate him, always tends to kick the important goal, and always applies the pressure up forward... Who goes on him??

fair enough fair enough..... more a reflection of the clubs decision rather then the 'saga'. It wasnt clear (in fact far from it), but i stated that as i reckon this is a poor decision by the club. In my opinion we should've waited until seasons end... It just leaves our whole club in a mess, and as the confidence dwindles so does our performance. And inversely proportional to this is the growth in appeal of joining a new club. Scully's decision is suddenly tilted towards GWS because now our club is back into a gloomy state. Not to mention he was close to bailey, and therefore him leaving tilts the scales even more.

bye bye scully....

Our game plan of getting through the thickest of zones via the use of run and carry zipping handpasses is what causes the drastic difference between our best and worst in my opinion. When we play at our best the opposition struggle to put on pressure and we are confident in our skills. Our worst is when the opposition breathe down our necks forcing us to fumble and switch over. The other point is that there is no predictability in our worst, because the forwards are never certain the ball is going to go into the 50, thus we lose our forward structure of leading into goals very quickly. At our best we are predictable, the forwards have the confidence to know when to lead and when to not. When i consider these two points i can recognize why we smash the poor teams and why we get smashed by the good teams. We dont have the confidence in our own skills or our own strength.. Having forward structure will lead to 10-15 goals more a game.. Age will fix this up..... We just need to have the belief that we are just tittering on the edge of becoming a very dangerous team, this is the belief that will help motivate us to win contests. And motivation will only fast forward our development. Im excited

you reckon? I woulda used gysberts to replace petterd.. and ease tapscott through casey... none the less petterd is not suspended

as was I.... haha

+1

1) Defenders will run off. Because if the ball is on their half of the ground, they will try and look for a scoring opportunity. 16 or 17 on 18? Thats one man loose in their forward line, all he has to do is just isolate himself from everybody else and once they have the ball, bingo he's free. And when we do have the ball, the defender will easily be able to either a) get there himself. or B) make somebody else cover his ground ie accountable footy. 2) Fair enough, i only wrote that to make the list look big.... you could argue that the forwards will go in with more intensity as well. So erase that point 3) I quote "not letting players get away", be pretty hard to do that if a defender is in their attacking 50 and we have a forward miles away from him and the action. Basically its just the first point repeated. A loose man in their 50 when they have the ball in their half is going to be more damaging then having a forward in our attacking 50 (when the ball is in their half). 4) skills, and our effective use of the spread will make sure their are options in future. We have kicked far more goals when there are only 1 or 2 forwards running into our 50 free of congestion, then chipping it through the opposition's defensive wall. Dee's after all are one of the most effective users of the ball once their ball gets into their 50. 5) Just as much as stagnant forwards are a part of "ancient football". If we play "ancient football" tactics on other "ancient football" tactics it will work out. It probably wont be this tactic after all as any defender will be running in front of the forward or running into their attacking 50 depending on who has the footy. Basically refer to my point in reference to the adelaide game, forwards in deep will only get cheap goals 3-4 times out of a whole game, and if this is our only route to scoring goals, then he's most likely to have the teams total tally of goals. It will work sometimes, but only 2/10 times will it work You could argue that you have to be a defender with a smart footballers brain to do some of the damage outlined above. But thats the whole point of it. A man deep in forward is a gameplan with a easy to shutdown approach to it. However forwards working hard up the ground and pushing back is a gameplan that suits our era. Did anybody see geelong last night, magnificent footy they played with forwards taking marks en route to goals. It is a gameplan that will be hard to shut down. We just need our forwards to back up hard enough, with time and more precision we will see this happen. The one tweak i want to see in baileys game plan is perhaps a bit more structure on the wing for when we do get the ball, say a midfielder that is not part of the contest to push out wide to receive the get out of jail kick that will see us over the zone.

So sick of all this "put the man deep in forward" rubbish. I for one will go against the flow and back deans plan. Playing forwards in deep results in less chances of breaking down opposition zones. (the defenders will leave the forwards alone) defenders with full energy. ready to run up the ground with more intensity, burning us off to a larger degree. a weaker defensive side to our game. a more congested forward line for if the ball does gown there. an easy to tackle tactic for opposition coaches to handle. A loose defender in the hole, will suffice. I'll probably cop the flak for this. But just ask yourself, how the hell are we going to get through the zone (that we already struggle to get through these days) when we have players taken out of the contest. Having a deep forward against the zone, will be pointless. We would have to kick it 70-80 meters or so just to get it to the 50 meter line, this alongside with the fact that there will be pressure due to the zone, and you gotta question how easy it is for a defender to get back to the forwards. Sure there will be a one off, where we get the ball down in the space of 10 seconds or something. But how many times does that happen in a game, leaving the forward alone will allow the defender to play a loose role, a more likely role to get goals. We saw it in the adelaide game, where we pushed hard up the ground only to have cheap goals scored against us, because they had loose men in their forward. Who won the game? We did... and by how much? alot... because having that spare defender in play was far more damaging then having a deep forward. BEcause the deep forward only got an opportunity 3-4 times in the game. Another point to mention is the fact that when the ball is spoiled to a forward running towards goal the momentum is still carrying the ball closer to the goals, giving the forward the advantage of the contest. Bailey has a revolutionary game plan, we just need to have the skills and consistency to back it up. To me there is no greater joy then seeing wattsy running towards an open goal with the ball (done it a few times this year hasnt he?). Because for me it is one of those magical few moments when bailey's plan has worked and it is a moment where we start to get confidence and burn off the opposition. We just need patience. sure you will say bailey's been here for 3-4 years... To me this is his first year of coaching, you cant expect him to make a stellar coaching career on the kids he's selected ala potential/ not ready made but all together classy. He took them with a long term plan in mind, to get us a real genuine chance for a premiership down the track, rather then having a solid team who cant win [censored] ala St Kilda, Carlton, adelaide, bulldogs....