nutbean

this...i just dont get it....preseason or no preseason....you may tire from lack of work...but to be so slow from the opening bounce..i dont get it

maybe so...but you keep switching roads because you think that each road is a better shortcut...invariably it takes you longer to get there ...

rephrase - interesting to see if Mick would want him and we let him get to Carlton...( therein lies the problem for any player who is not a free agency wanting to go to a club of their choice other than a bottom of the ladder team)

I think we need to also look at mechanisms around "mass exodus of players who will leave at the end of the season". We have two players eligible for FA - so they are at risk of leaving. Players out of contract - ("Carlton are into Watts big time") - sooo once you are out of contract you dont have free choice to go where ever you want. If Watts wants to go to Carlton - if we want him to go - Carlton have to deal something we want for him to be guaranteed to get there. We can tell him to get stuffed and enjoy yourself at GWS as they would probably have first crack at getting him if he goes into the draft. That is the problem that players who are out of contract face. Players in contract - we have all the say whether they stay or go The only players we lost last year that we may wanted to have kept were free agency footballers and they didnt work to hard to keep Moloney as I dont think the coach wanted him. So this nonsense about a mass walk out of players is just that...a nonsense.

Maybe so - but that is setup - not implementation - you need to point the finger at the players for implementation. ( when you tell me to dive off a building, you will get blamed for the setup that i didnt do it...i unfortunately get potted for the implementation)

its a combination of both...the good teams have confidence that they can send one player to the contest and win the contested ball and you have his mates running and spreading into space to take the uncontested ball and deliver it with precision. I am not sure what the stat is this year but LY we had an unhealthy percentage of contested to uncontested footy compared with most other teams. This meant we were working hard in the contested situations but had too many doing this and none prepared to back our man to get the hard ball and spread waiting for what we once called the easy ball.

not sure it is teaching or communicating ...this run and spread is a confidence/risk taking exercise and I think you can level criticism at Neeld for not instilling the confidence in the players that sees them do these things. ("we do this on the track but it is not translating on game day") I put it some of it back on the players but Neeld must accept some responsibility as well.

ahhhh no.....A coach cant implement them...only the players can....So Neeld is responsible for the setups but the players are responsible for implementation ( unless Neeld decides to pull on a jumper and become playing coach).. Now you may be right to criticise Neeld for poor structures or structures too complicated or above the players capabilities but bashing him because of implementation is just more Neeld bashing.

I would take the authority off them because whilst a free kick may have an impact on how a player performs i would suggest being reported would certainly play on the mind and Tapscott was not as physical and hence quieter after the incident. The camera's will pick up everything so take reporting away from umpires and if the camera's cant get an incident then so be it. ( thank god we dont have a send off rule)

Until he learns to hurt opposition by foot he will be a good ordinary footballer.

I love reading the bio's of the draftees's - its like Danos direct - the advertising on TV looks so good but the reality aint so good - not just for us but for everyone - have a look back over the bio's for Scullys draft - a whole lot of underperformers there

I trhnk the question is why maybe only 2-3 of the list has stepped up.

I dont like the idea of keeping someone just because we dont have anyone better. A player either adds value or they dont. I think it is pointless saying we should have kept Beamer because look at how the rest of the midfield are playing. I have no problem with Beamer going at all. I have a problem with us having no midfielders who have really stepped up ( save possibly the two Jones boys) - the two issues are stand alone for me. I have question marks all over Neelds player management and communication style but I only have the visual facts of the players are not playing well and with not much heart for me to reach that conclusion, although I have seen an improvement in the last couple of games. When Neeld came - i liked his no nonsense approach but I havent seen enough players flourish under his reign and i would have liked to have seen a player with some attributes ( and some deficiencies) like Beamer improve last year under Neeld - instead he went backwards. There havent been enough players who have shown improvement for my liking.

I am clutching at straws, at anything with Colin....this year he has at least been involved. He has been far from the worst of them.

Poor Col Sylvia cant win.... I have been his harshest critic because i believe he has everything to be a top 10 footballer in the league ( except between the ears). So we have lambasted him for not giving a rats and whilst he absolutely butchered it and tried to do too much yesterday I see a footballer at least who is having a red hot go. With so much to complain about at the moment, Colin Sylvia is not one of my major complaints.

I fail to see how anyone here has the slightest clue how good or bad an assistant coach is except for Neeld. People can pass judgement on Neeld but seriously only the head coach is in a position to know if the assistant is doing what is asked of him. If our midfield is crap besides the obvious that our midfield is just crap, the head coach is responsible. Also at this stage following the sack the assistant coach logic, you would slice and dice the lot of them. To be even more illogical, we have more talent up back with Frawley and garland and we are giving up big scores so maybe Rawlings goes first ? Nope - judge the head coach and let him judge his assistants.

I am intrigued with the statements "the players are not playing for the coach". I understand motivation but as an ex surburban footballer ( and mostly a dud one at that) I played to win, I played hard not to let down my team-mates ( not the coach - i had to go at the ball as hard as my mate and show as much effort as he put in), I played with some fear of being dropped ( again - i was a spud) but mostly I played for pride in my own performance. You will only go so far if you are playing for any other reason other than the slefish reason of being the best you can and the non selfish reason of contributing to the team.

You are talking about taking a set shot which is easier again. (except for some exceptions who overthing them and are more comfortable on the run)

is it that easy ? Swan hasnt, Priddis hasnt, Carrazo hasnt ( although in fairness he is better than he was). Hawthorn made it known that they wanted elite kicks of the footballs - there arent too many wasters of the ball at the Hawks

I hear you ...I am not referring to the kicks under pressure in hotly contested situations - compare Swan to Pendlebury. Pendlebury sometimes snaps out of a pack - or rushes the ball to boot from a clearance situation and sometimes it comes off sometimes not. When he has half a second he rarely wastes it - the same cannot be said for Swan.

We should know...it amazes that in the world of professional athletes one of the most fundamental skills is performed poorly and in so many cases never improves through out the career.

So I will use Scully as an example then. As much as we dislike him everything we have heard about him is the lengths he goes ( and has gone) to prepare himself to be the best footballer he can be. Yet his foot skills are below par. I have no reason to believe that he wouldnt work his arse off to be the best he can be so... 1/ Either he cannot master a correct kicking action AND/Or 2/ Clubs dont try and rectify imperfect actions I am not sure which one it is.

thats got nothing to do with skills at all....Simon Godfrey may have had confidence and trust but butchered the ball unmercifully - Terry Wallace played in premiership and was a mastercut butcher of the highest order. Swan played in a premiership side and is average. I do agree that the better sides usually afford their players a split second more to dispose of the ball than the likes of our team who always seem to be under pressure. I also agree it can be taught and improved with lots of work and the right attitude - but I actually think more often than not that if you have 2 or 3 years at the start of your career with poor skills - I dont think they improve.

I was thinking last night about our skill level and how much improvement can be made when 18 year olds come onto an AFL list. ( I include decision making in this discussion) There are Nathan Jones' who has worked very hard on his skills and we have seen an improvement with his hand and foot skills but for every Nathan Jones there are many more players from all clubs ( especially ours) who come to clubs as "butchers" of the ball and never progress past Tasman meats. You need to take injuries out of the equation because I believe the likes of Trengove who's footskills are quite good were hampered last season through injury. Watch the likes of Swan and Priddis - both getting huge amounts of football but both are still very wasteful and their skills ( especially by foot) are average at best. From our club who have now left - Rivers, Morton and Petterd who all were in the system for a long while still turn the ball over with regularity. Even watching our friend Tom Scully - by all reports still a maniac in his dedication to training - cant kick a football ( although he is good by hand) I just believe that most players who come into the system as turnover kings - stay turnover kings.

Had an interesting talk with a Collingwood friend ( there is an oxymoron if ever there was) - i mentioned to him that Clark is probably the most influential player we have whether he is getting a touch or not. ( I meant that in complimentary way) - he said Dawes is the same - runs to good position. made space for Cloke, hit contests hard, blocking, shepherding, busting packs.. even a no possession game didnt mean he didnt have influence. Now i hope he kicks goals which is what he is paid to do but I like his approach to his footy - even if you are not clunking marks you can still contribute.