Maldonboy38

Yep, really dumb tonight. If he gets the ball his decision making and skills are OK, but he runs around alot doing nothing. Shocker tonight.

I thought he was OK at times tonight - at least he moved around the stoppages instead of standing still. But I didn't realise he didn't lay a tackle, and that is a really poor stat.

6. Rivers. 5. Bate 4. Jones 3. Morton 2. Bail 1. Watts (some really bad among some really good)

Yep - Watts is better Darling is OK but still won't rave about him. Cameron Bruce cannot play modern press footy. He was excellent at his best but is horrible under mordern pressure I still reckon Hawks and Blues for the grand final.

There seems to be a fair bit of agreement that our bottom 6 - 8 players are below AFL standard, and many of them have had a number of years and opportunities to prove themselves. Morton ,Dunn, Bate, Joel Mac, Bennell, Petterd etc... Also, other players we thought would get a good go have shown little to the new coach - Blease, Kel Lawrence, Green and Davey etc... We all have our opinions about the ones we like and the ones we don't but inreality the whole bunch have proven to be mediocre at best. Davey and Green excepted. Two points to make: Neeld has to play the players he has, and has to shuffle the above players in and out of the team according to match-ups or injury. I sense a minor "cleaning out" at seasons end when many if not most of these players will be delisted or given the chance to seek a game at another club. For 2012 we simply have to put up with them. Remember, Gysberts, Sylvia, Jurrah and Gawn and Strauss and clearly required players who Neeld has his eye on, but cannnot get them to availability just yet. I reckon by about round 11 we will see the preferred 25 players playing in their preferred roles and then we will get a good look at what Neeld can produce. What I don't understand is why not give more of a go to Davis, Fitzy, Tynan, Sheehan and those kind of plaers.

You don't have kids, do you. No-one is giving up, and especially no-one in this thread so sit back, take a valium and calm yourself down. Go to your "happy place" and give us all a break. To build an ever-increasing supporter base, MFC need to play attracive footy with a sprinkling of super stars to make the children of supporters want to buy jumpers, badges, scarves, beanies etc... Also, they want to attract new adults and kids to support the team. The football being played at the moment is so poor, we are losing this supporter base. It is actually DEtractive, not ATtractive. And many of us grieve as we struggle to hold on to the supporters we have, let alone attract new ones.

If it wasn't for Jones we may be below even GWS on the ladder. His efforts this year in every game have been heroic. He continues to chuck himself at the ball and into packs and to date, a rare few ever go with him. He makes mistakes, but he will be a 250 game player for the Dees. And don't worry about Tiges supporters - any comments they have on recruitment must be taken as absolute rubbish. We may have made some errors, but the Tiges made an art out of it.

I am not sure what you think this thread is about. All of us long-suffering Dees supporters are not giving up or giving in or burning our membership cards. We are GRIEVING that our kids and grandkids find it hard to stick with the Dees. We are sad that at Auskick there are often no Melbourne jumpers. We are sad that we have no superstars to make kids want to put numbers on their back, or buy badges etc... And I am doing something to make me feel good about following the Demons - typing a response to you because you have totally failed to understand the basis of this thread. Perhaps I should only use single syllable words?

Some serious consideations for our club regarding a strong supporter base: Have a look at your local NAB Auskick and you will see 1 young Melbourne supporter in a crowd of 100 kids Die-hard, long suffering supporters of my generation are struggling to keep our kids supporting Melbourne We have no superstars except Liam Jurrah who is injured. Although Webjet has come on board, we have no back-of-jumper sponsor When my boys talk footy with their frinds they talk Judd, Ablett, Betts, Daisy Thomas - no Melbourne player within Cooee WE can't win and are really poor at the moment. If something doesn't change on field soon... We need something to click, somethig to work, something to celebrate, something to get excite about. And we need it soon.

He is one of the players I want to do well, but today, apart from a few outstanding kicks he was poor . His hands are made of trampolines - the ball just bounces off them. Also his turning circle is like the Titanic. And as far as handballing to stationary team mates - this is one skill he has perfected.

You misunderstand me. When I say "it is not about..." I mean that Mark Neeld is responsible for inspiring and leading us out of all these things. If we lack skill or endeavour, no player or group of players change this of their own accord - they are coached out of it and I expect Neeld to do the same. I am not blaming him for all that is transpiring but I unashamedly lay at his feet the task of change. It is an expected part of his role.

In part Striker, I agree with you. However, two glaring areas of weakness killed us time and time again today. 1. To use a tennis term "unforced errors". Our back 6 would win the ball, get it to the wing and the next disposal would be inexplicably poor. Missing targets, kicking blindly, or even centring it and having it cut off. 2. Our work around stoppages when Richmond won the ball. They would spread and end up with 3 versus 1 and run it freely through the middle of the ground. Our defensive gut running is horrible, and if we did not have Jones today, and to a lesser extend Jordie, we would not have been within 15 goals of the tigers. But as for your comments about not thinking any of our players were awful, I reckon you may need to get your eyes tested. Morton, Bate, and Bartram lacked class and effort and trailed thier opponents for much of the day. When they did get clear, with a few exceptions they were embarrasing.

I am not exempting Mark Neeld. But our midfield work is even worse than the Suns, and Royal is our man. Surely he has some serious questions to answer.

A coach has to take some of the heat when 16 out of 22 players are all out of form and playing without confirence at the same time. This is not about talent. This is not abut endeavour. This is not about game-plan. This is not about size of bodies or experience. Blah blah blah... It's about coaching. Why? Because its is about confidence across the playering group. And this IS the coaches job - to lift them, inspire them, encourage them, teach them. I have said it before and I will say it again. I will not "buy in" to a new coach until 11 rounds are played. But Mark Neeld has to coach these players out of their slump. That is a major part of his job and I expect him to attend to it.

I fully understand and accept modern pressing and zoning, but when a dud like Grigg is left alone ALL DAY to run free and deliver into Richmond's hlaf forward line, I think old-fashioned things like "man up" are exactly what should happen. We often hear about the fat side of the ground or the skinny side of the ground. Surely, in a game that is based around contested possession, we have a player who could stand somewhere near Grigg or Houli or Foley and try and beat them one-on-one. There is a time for man up, and we should have at least tried it at times today. Nothing else really worked.

Cale doens't seem to have any difficulty getting the ball when there is an absence of pressure. But it stops there. His body work today was embarrassing to our jumper. His disposal when free, running through wing or half back, was atrocious. If he got 50% effectiveness for uncontensted disposal I'll barrack for the Pies tomorrow! His decision making is wobbly.Today, he refused to look beyond the first option, whereas at Casey last week he looked poised and made some great decisions. No more cale Morton for me.

6. Jones. Even in the last quarter he was the only one trying to fill in gaps and gut-running to cover team mates lack of effort. 5. Howe. Class 4. Clark 3. Watts 2. Frawley 1. Our week in week out back 6 who save us from 20 goal thrashings - deserve medals.

ALthough Richmond deserve to go into the game as favourites, I am beginning to think it will be closer than people think. I am feeling more postive, but there is still some wariness. In both games for both clubs so far in 2012, neither have been able to play their own game for more than 2 or 2.5 quarters. When both Dees and Tigers stick to their game plan and play it well the games have both been tight and close. When they have relaxed or worn out or whatever, the other sides have pole-axed them and run all over them. So my question is - who is going to play more of their own game, Dees or Tigers? Yes, we have been really poor so far, but we have been able to stick to our game for longer in both games so far. Can Tigers beat us by playing 1 or 1.5 quarters better than us? Boys, I don't reckon they can. Chip will keep Reiwoldt to 2 goals and someone will tag Cotchin. At the start of the week I thought Tiges by 20 points. Now - Dees by 8 in thriller.

He made a couple of bad blunders right in front of the grandstand but these were overshadowed by mainly good disposal and decision making.His disposal was definitely NOT disgraceful in my opinion.

I feel poor about the Dees at the moment, but give up? NEVER!!! Come on guys and gals, it's not over yet.

I might keep an eye on this bloke as a posible mature age recruit. He was impressive today against some potential AFL players.

OK - the joke slipped through. Got in now though.

If I was a betting man, I reckon Richmond by about 20 points. But their 6 worst players are really poor - possibly the worst in the league outside Giants and Suns. If Chippa can blanket Reiwoldt and beat him like he usually does. If Jordie, Bartram of Bail can run with Cotchin and keep him to 20 possessions. This will go a long way to our victory. IN our favour:- Our defence is far batter than their attack. They have no match up for Mitch Clark. It could be a very interesting game, especially once we know how the Dees will ine up.

It's no guarantee he would give us this "armchair ride" but his intensity today was good. In AFL games I have seen him live, I reckon the speed of ball movement is too quick for him and he has to double think his first instinct. But he should be considered on today's game.

I watched a replay of the game on the AFl website video, and I reckon Neeld got it spot on in his press conference. We played a half of footy OK and we weren't "horrible" as so many seem to suggest. On another post I compared the Dees of yesterday to Fitzroy of the mid-90's and the lack of energy is similar. But Neeld's summing up seemed to be spot on, and like what McQueen says above about how Worsfold stuck to his game plan in 2010 and just bore the pain. It seems to me that Neeld is preferring one half of the game being played according to his model resulting in a huge loss, than a small loss using a game plan that will never stand up in a final. I agree with him. I am still being cautious and will not "buy in" to Mark Neeld but I agree with him on the game versus the Eagles.