Demon Dynasty

Like i said Hang.... just keep believing that it's just a matter of spending dollars on the FD alone mate. I agree. No need for any passion, effort or pride etc as well mate. It's just all about how much $ we spend within the FD. I'm a believer mate.... keep on bananering! B)

Lol de cali. Maybe the club isn't selling enough bananas yet! Don't worry....Hang will show us the way to the promised land! Hec, this just might be the start of the rise of the planet of the apes. As long as he don't take over the planet. I'm sure Hang could also recruit recruits some fellow apes to the club to add some, dare i say it Hang, much needed grunt to our list. Provided the Demons win a flag as a result....i'll be more than happy. Go Hang!!! Maybe we should rename ourselves the Melbourne Bananas! Club sure is good at driving us bananas that's for sure

Goodbye Deano. Nice guy and all but..... P.S. Thanks for the memories mate

I agree with you Hang. I was wrong all along. We definitely need less passion/pride/grunt/intensity in this team. This has nothing to do with playing football at all. It's about time our club woke up to this also! Oh hang on (parden the pun lol), didn't we do so yesterday? However, may i suggest you ask the club to go and recruit robots and program them accordingly so that their level of output on the field can match the level of input spent on the FD $$ wise? It should also be compared to the spends of all other clubs so that we can measure and match the level of output in order that the outcomes on game day, match appropriately with Club's spend on FD in comparison to all other clubs so that we end up finishing on the ladder at about the spot our FD spend would indicate using your theory? By the way, the Coach, Skills Dept, List Managers, Fitness trainers, Assistant coaches etc....have no say in this. They must adhere to the comparison of dollars spent and make sure we finish in the same position on the ladder as we rank spend wise on the FD dept give or take one position maybe. In addition they will need to convey this decision to other FDs of other clubs (such as North) to make sure they also aim to finish in the appropriate relative position at year's end. No punching above or below your weight here thank you! Although the quality of choice of robot may well be impeded by the maximum spend within the FD on the other factors you mentioned such as coaching/skills dept/preping/performance factors/drafting/list management. But this isn't a factor. It's the overall FD budget/spend you're looking at yes? So the final result at the end of the year should rank with the level of spend at each of the other clubs. Nothing more....nothing less. This all makes sense to me now. Thank you Hang

Forget about floppy soft scarfs How about sending a giant truckload of bricks and dump it outside the FD. Aside from a replacement for Bails (Eade maybe) and a few others within the FD for next year, we need more players built like a brick shite house in this team who have some real mongrel in them (a la Tappy) and who can lay (and stick) a crunching tackle and are "willing" and able to do so time after time after time (eg., 2nd and 3rd efforts) as well as apply some kind of forward press! No more skinny boys like Morton/Bennell/Gysberts/Jetta/Strauss/Cook & Scully who get brushed aside and swatted like flies in the contest. No more outside star gazers and watchers/waiters like Jurrah. Along with a key forward, a classy tough mid fielder (Mitchel/Chappy/Watson type), a strong tall defender who can pack mark run off half back....Nearly a whole new team ARRGHHH!!

Ok, so no one is to blame it's just a matter of finding a few more $ to spend in the FD and the effort/intensity/grunt/output/passion/pride will miraculously improve throughout the playing group and we're on our winning way up the ladder!! Yahooooooooooo! Holy Lucifer you've done it, you have the answer there Hang!! Albeit it would no doubt be very helpful, i don't see this this as the panacea for avoiding disasters such as yesterday. So what you're also kind of saying then is that you think members should be happy and just lay down after what some would argue is the blackest day on the field (or very close to it), in our club's history? You may have been playing with your banana a little too often i think. Might be a good time to come down outta the tree and look around a little. Nice try, but a little pre-historic in its simplicity

The Something > The fact i was at work and i don't have foxtel anyway (thank Lucifer) > Jordie for getting 25 possessions amongst the rabble and being mentioned a few times on radio as being in the mix (whilst getting smashed the other way by Selwood) > Dunny Brush for kicking our 1 and only goal to half time and getting under Chappy's skin for some reason lol > Watts for trying his guts out and getting 17 possessions > Bate for showing something in the 3rd The Bad > The Senior players most of whom went AWOL > Playing yet another team into 'super' form and playing Mooney into some sort of form after showing nothing in previous games this year. The Ugly > Whoever made the decision to select Bailey ahead of Sheedy 4 years ago and believed this was a good choice for our club overall. > Zero Zilch Nil Nicht fight shown by any player when Dunny was getting hammered on the ground by Chappy.....a reflection of how soft this team is (Moloney excluded as he wasn't on the field at the time for some reason lol) > The inability of Bailey to motivate this team whenever they're challenged (generally, not just in this game) > The lack of a 'SHUT DOWN" plan C game plan (to limit the damage) when the opposition gets on a roll and is likely (should things continue) to take the game out of our hands and its about to get ugly. > Green. A good player when things are going ok but a woeful leader of men when things aren't going quite so well > Rivers, who is not up to AFL standard, even before yesterday's result. A point i've made on a few occasions prior to today. > Chip for going missing when the going got tough > The Jurrah experiment (which has now failed) and again, isn't up to AFL standard. > The players (i would like to use the word team but they aren't a team at this point) for allowing itself to continue to play "Unaccountable" footy and believe that it's acceptable to do so > The players for allowing themselves to play ameature football at various times throughout the year (including yesterday's humiliation obviously) in a professional league > The fact that there's now no obvious 'willing' suitor to Bailey for next year > The fact that the MFC will now (yet again) become the laughing stock of the AFL > The impact this will have on aquiring a decent coach for the future and decent players during trade/draft time. Honestly, who would blame any player for shying away from this club after that result. GWS & GCS are looking pretty attractive versus us if that's the choice they have put to them after yesterday. > The impact this could have on memberships/sponsors/finances/ tv fixtures for next year etc > Given the context of where we were supposed to be, the blackest day in our clubs history (Norm Smith sacking aside).

Correct. We wont and IMO we've gone backwards this year. I would say at least 2 pre seasons away from even matching it with middle of the rung teams and that's just in a physical sense. And we are so far away from matching it with anyone in the top six on a consistent basis it's scary. Top teams also demonstrate how much talent/fitness/ability we have/haven't got. There wasn't a moment in today's game that i thought to myself, "wow, we've uncovered someone/something special here, or the game plan really seems to be finally coming together...as a club (on the field) we're finally getting somewhere, we've made some significant progress this year, the structure is really starting to take shape and form". Just nothing other than a few individual efforts from Petterd, Dunn, Martin, Mckenzie (shut down role on Mitchel) and Tapscott. Reaction times when up against the top 6 clubs are just too slow. Caught far too often too easily, even when there's a fair amount of decision time. The top 6 teams escape the stoppages way too easily against us way too often. Decision making generally poor when under decent to full on pressure. We don't work for each other nor do we play 'team' footy and take the game/opposition on often enough with run and carry style play that worries or upsets the opposition for more than a few minutes in spasmodic passages of play. We're often standing still in the back line and stationary. The opposition teams run run run and we just look too slow or unwilling to find a man to shut down quickly enough when we turn the ball over. And senior plays seem to chase the ball in general play instead of finding their man once the ball's left their general area. This creates yet another free man/option opportunity for the opposition to hit up once they find that free man again as the play continues. And turn the ball over we do. Even senior players, time and time and time again. Jones & Sylvia classic examples today as well as dumb free kicks given away at crucial times (Moloney). Match ups pre match are often questionable. Frawley to Buddy was always a height mis-match IMO and nullified one of the few advantages we have when Frawley applies some creative play and run off half back for us. Instead of having the option to be attacking he has to watch his key forward at all times and play him close. Garland surely would have been the option for Buddy. Can leap to spoil and run with him as well. Couldn't have got a worse result from it and would've freed up Chip to provide the run and creative side off half back. Another poor match up decision by the FD/Bailey. Neither appear to be learning and Bailey seems unable to motivate this team against anyone other than interstate clubs (West Coast excluded), Richmond and the Bombres at the G. At one stage we had Garland playing on Rioli in the forward half lol. What a joke. Surely Nicholson (at least he'd be able to run with him and learn something) or Bennell (albeit i don't rate him to shut down Rioli either...but hopefully he'd run and pressure him just a little) and allow Garland to match up against a taller defender (eg., Hale). Most senior players seem unwilling (or unable??) to make the 2nd and 3rd efforts when the game was up for grabs. Martin running off half back early in the last, 4 bounces, not one lead up target?? Turns the ball over through lack of options...goal to the Dorks. Sorry to say but Rivers under any sort of pressure on a half decent opponent is just not up to this level. Not many obvious replacements at this point but it's time to start blooding someone else. He cost us at least 2 - 3 goals in the first half. Movement out of goal square after a point is still way too slow. Other teams race it out of there (not all the time but far more often than we do) before the cameras even had a chance to show the umpire finishing his flag waving!! We take tooooo long. Then when we've made a little progress through the zone, say to our half back line, some of our players decide to go back deep into the goal square again, lacking the instinct/confidence/ability to look up field or take the game on with run & carry, and we have to start allover again from the goal square. At times, our style of play is comical. Not all in the same boat, but as a team, we played/looked like amateurs today. The West Coast, Carlton and 2nd half of first Dorks game aside, one of the most disappointing efforts all season. IMHO we are at least 2 pre seasons, a key forward, some class/grunt through the middle, a brutish tallish defender (maybe Garland with 2 more pre seasons but unlikely) and a new coach away from going anywhere other than 9th to lower with this present set up/list. If we're happy with that sort of result year after year, and to waste the talent we may have with some of our recent draft picks, then i'm sure 'steady as she goes' will be fine at the MFC from here.

Melbourne vs Hawthorn Round 18, 2011 - Experience Stats Total games played by Team Demons - 1,372 Hawks – 1,897 Average games played per player Demons - 62 Hawks – 86 Average Height of Teams Demons - 188cm Hawks – 186cm Average Weight of Teams Demons - 86kg Hawks – 86kg Average games played by category 0-49 Demons - 23 / 12 (average games/number of players) Hawks - 18 / 8 50-99 Demons - 72 / 4 Hawks - 80 / 4 100+ Demons – 135 / 6 Hawks - 158 / 10 Stats courtesy of footywire.com

DEMONS please

It could've gone either way depending on the time keeper's mood i reckon. Oh. A request. Any chance we can change the header to 'Demons vs Hawks' mate?? Personally i hate that term. What is a Dee anyway?

Melbourne vs Port Power Round 17, 2011 - Experience Stats Total games played by Team Demons - 1,274 Power – 1,906 Average games played per player Demons - 58 Power – 87 Average Height of Teams Demons - 187cm Power – 186cm Average Weight of Teams Demons - 85kg Power – 87kg Average games played by category 0-49 Demons - 22 / 13 (average games/number of players) Power - 18 / 8 50-99 Demons - 61 / 3 Power - 78 / 5 100+ Demons – 134 / 6 Power - 155 / 9 Stats Courtesy of footywire.com

There was another stat that i heard on SEN last week. The average interchange per game hasn't changed from last year, with players receiving less recovery time on the bench (on average). Don't hold me to this particular stat, but last year it was something like 1minute 30 sec on average on the bench versus this year approx 30 seconds. Obviously less time on the bench has allowed the FDs to maintain their interchange numbers but one wonders at what cost to the players' welfare. The extra fatigue factor and lack of rest/recovery time from this fatiguing could go some way towards explaining the increase in injuries/break downs this year compared to last. Albeit we shouldn't place too much emphasis on one year's data and one year's attempt to adjust to the new sub rule.

I really can't see Mick coming over. IF. and it's a BIG IF, he decides to leave the Pies prior to his 2 year role with the Pies expiring then to my way of thinking...... 1. His heart lays with the Tigers not the Demons. If he's going to see his days out somewhere to me it would be in a role similar to that of Bomber Thompson at the Tigers assisting Hardwick. He has stated his heart lies at the Tigers (still), where he spent the bulk of his playing days and played in a premiership. 2. I just don't think we'd have the budget to bring him and his entourage over, either as head coach or Director/Assistant role to Bailey in a Thompson/Essendon type set up. 3. He's supposedly signed a 2 year contract with the Pies already. Seems to be a strong man of principle and word. Doubt he'd go back on that. The only SLIM possible chance i see in a Mick/Melbourne partnership is a Thompson type role alongside or overseeing Bailey. However, he would have to be willing to accept something less than what he'd be getting at the Pies and probably alot less than Thompson, in order for us to accommodate him. Does anyone here think he loves the Demons enough to do that in his twilight years?

+1 here Worth a try. Personally i feel Max has more "tap" ruck potential in him than Martin. More so once he gets his AFL legs/strength over a few more pre-seasons, he might be more of a danger/threat up forward when resting than Martin. Martin's been beaten in the tap ruck area (by this i'm referring to hit outs to advantage) against mediocre opposition in recent weeks, such as Wood (Pies) and Hudson (Doggies). I think Browne (Richmond) was a reasonable win for Martin, but given his opponents relative inexperience (9 games vs Martin's 40), a likely one. I also felt Max did a slightly better job against the Pies when he was used in the ruck to rest Martin. Agree re: top heavy comment also. Risky bringing in 3 big guys. Maybe Gawn as sub to bring on for Martin in the 2nd half as a comparison and for a fresh bod in the heat. I don't think Jurrah has earned his place this week but will no doubt be named for the crowd factor i guess. Personally i'd prefer to see him play off the bench and through the middle to get his work rate up and hopefully keep him more switched on to the role being asked. One of which you would hope is chasing/pressuring on more occasions when he doesn't have the ball, which he has shown he can do pretty well when he puts his mind to it.

Anyone watch the Dawks - Pies game last week? There was no standard. Just a constant bias toward paying frees to the Pies, that in most cases weren't legitimate, or ignoring those that should have been paid to the Dawks. Many absolute clanging 'holding the ball' decisions that should have been paid against the Pies, that were ignored and went unpaid also. One in particular, where the Pies player was swung around 360 on their HFF, brought to the ground, dropped the ball momentarily, picked it up again just after the tackle, and went on to short pass to Cloke who scored a goal (that shouldn't have been). I'm not saying the Dawks would have won or got close, but how the hec is any team supposed to have a chance against the big boys when they're getting this kind of out and out bias most weeks and extra goals/scores as a result. It would seem that the AFL, through their umpiring fraternity, is pushing an agenda of paying the obvious or ignoring the obvious towards the major money spinning clubs such as the Pies, any Etihad home team (Doggies etc and those that are playing against a true Etihad non-tenant...like us) and the interstate clubs at their home games. The umpiring against the Cats tonight is so biased towards the Weagles. 3 Frees out of the middle and 1 around the ground to Cox for holding against Ottens where IMO the decision was 50/50 play on. And that's just to half time. The Cats had a 2 - 3 goal advantage half way through the first too. IMO these frees brought the Weagles back into the match when they were against the ropes early. Many obvious Eagle throws unpaid or ignored too, as well as a few holding the ball massive 360's (as well as one where the player was 360'd and threw the ball away with one hand lol) or where the player was brought to ground after having prior and made no attempt whatsoever to dispose of the ball. Not sure why we even have a 'holding the ball' rule anymore as the absolute clear ones are rarely ever paid now, let alone the standard ones from days past. Very little reward for tackling anymore apart from the odd turnovers to advantage. And mostly there's downside, given that the tackler has a strong chance of hurting his opponent's head (sling tackles/tough tackling) when bringing to ground or just in the tackle generally and being outed for weeks for rough play etc. Another example, Cats player awarded free kick on boundary inside Weagles 50, kicks ball from inside boundary. Umpire claims the ball was kicked from inside the boundary, so it's out of bounce, ball up. Weagles eventually score a goal. Compare this to a decision in last 30 sec of 2nd quarter... Weagles player takes a mark under pressure on the wing right on the boundary line. Kicks ball from inside boundary (ie., not over the line at any stage exactly the same as Cats player earlier), umpire calls play on, no ball up. This game is now almost unwatchable, and unwinnable depending on who/where you're playing, unless you have a spiflicatingly most awesome team that overcomes even this massive bias. Unfortunately we don't at this point lol. There's an automatic 4 - 5 goal advantage when playing interstate teams, like the Weagles, at their home grounds now and something similar (maybe 3 - 4) against Etihad home teams (where they're playing a non co-tenant like us). That's a huge advantage even to a mediocre team like the Dogs, let alone a team pushing into the top 4 like the Weagles. If the Cats are struggling against this advantage, no wonder we're getting pumped in these situations atm. Not just this year either. It's been around for many years now, but seems a little more accentuated this year. It's just too consistent and obvious week after week for there not to be some sort of agenda, whether it's brought about through implied pressure or direct pressure, it's definitely a factor that contributes to the turning of certain matches from week to week.

Could be something in this. He was definitely out to get Trengove. The Monday morning before the MRP panel was due to sit, he made a statement that Trenners wasn't just likely to be sighted and had a case to answer for, but "that he will be sighted and he will be suspended for that....no question!". The next morning, before listening to his "opening rant" i was thinking to myself that KB was on a mission here and that he would most likely launch into Trengove claiming how crazy the MRP's decision was to let him off. Sure enough, on cue, that's exactly what he ranted on about in the opening. I sent a txt having a go at him and asking where he was after Corey had laid a more dangerous 'spear' tackle the week before. Of course the txt went unheralded even though i sent it within a minute of him finishing his rant. Although i also suggested he was probably still in a foul mood as the Tiges got smashed and we beat them the the week before, hence he was grumpy with anyone/anything Blues/Demons. I also suggested that he go back to bed and try getting out the other side! A stubborn old bugger when it comes to his view. According to him every rule the Rules Committee has come up with is perfect both in its design off the field and black and white when being ruled on by the umpires on the field (or should that be yellow & black?).

First point is quite valid. Was left a heavily recycled/ageing team that had in many cases seen their best years. Although i think we could have used the services of Jmac and Robbo for at least one more year or 2 while we were bringing through/blooding the new boys, winning a few more contests and hopefully instilling a more winning culture as the young guys grew physically and gained experience around them. It's a fine line between being bold and being too bold to the point of self harm. Which current players from the Daniher era are you referring to?? I've yet to see it on any consistent basis. 1 out of 4 against interstate clubs last year on their home turf and 3 of those clubs finished within 2 places of us. Not that i was expecting too much last year away from home. One win against a low ebbing Brisbane (Fev unraveling on and off field and quite an inexperienced team as well) towards the end of last year is hardly an indicator that we are playing better footy away from home. This year's fixture IMO couldn't have been much easier for us both generally and from an interstate away view. Only 3 games against interstate clubs on their home turf, and one of those against GCS. We failed dismally in the 2nd of these against the Weagles and we have one left against Port in the last game on a ground they've never played on either, albeit in their home town. I would say we'd have to win both of the remaining interstate games against Port, Darwin (neutral territory) and Adelaide Oval, just to break even in the interstate away stakes, given the easy interstate away draw we were gifted. And even then it wouldn't really be a true indicator of how we're travelling away, given the form of Port Power atm. Unfortunately we wont really get an idea of whether we're improving here until 2012 now.

Good point on the Bumbers. One thing i'd like to add though. They also brought a massive 'attack on the ball, win the clearance and play on at all costs' attitude which appeared to catch the Cats napping a little in the 2nd half of the first quarter and the 2nd. They played the game as if it was their grand final. And it worked in their favour. I only wish we could bring that attitude more often. Extra physical maturity/experience will see this happen i hope. Not sure about the whatsoever comment. I'd find it hard to believe that no one has talent within the FD. Do we feel this way when we smash our opponents? The FD must be doing something right in these games surely. However, there are positional moves/match ups that worry me. I guess that can be said about any coach post match. The old hindsight is a wonderful thing theory. But a few from Friday night.... Our best/most dangerous goal kicking forward in Green, played through the middle and even down back for much of the game and IMO wasted. Surely Sylvia should have played or been switched into this role when things started going awry for us from about half way through the first quarter. Instead Sylvia played approx 70/30 forward/guts. Surely leave Green (our most potent/experienced forward) up forward for most of the match to provide a lead/hit up/bail out target and also put a bit more pressure on his opponent i50. Playing AJ in the forward line. In fact i wouldn't have played him at all on this ground unless i was trialing him off the bench through the middle in short spurts and occasionaly pushing forward. As much as i'm not a big Dunny brush fan atm, i think he has an AFL size bod and could at least provide a target and a little more pressure i50 that AJ seems to only bring on the downhill slide or when the moment takes him. And no, he wasn't alone on Friday eve i realise. On the bigger grounds such as the G, AJ mostly up forward but a good percentage in the middle as well. Sometimes the best way of learning 'how to' is to watch. A mentor to sit alongside him while watching/learning would be handy i think. Our i50 pressure/tackling on Friday evening was woeful and a big reason why we lost so badly. Need to find more players who are committed/capable of bringing this week in week out or at least make it a non negotiable for anyone who wishes to maintain there place for more than a few weeks. Morton selected? Not suited to this ground and it's tight confines. Not ready or up to AFL standard yet, period. Evans/Bartram in for Morton at least on this ground. And no i don't think Bartram is a long term answer either. But he loves a contest and can get to one. Morton too slow. Bennell selected? Don't need outside runners like Morton and Bennell at Shi!yhad. Out for Maric or someone else, someone who loves an inside stoush and hard ball clearance! Unfortunately Tappy wasn't ready this time around so i'm not sure who we could have brought in at this point. Others may have a better idea for last Friday's match. Finally, we watched a mediocre but more experienced/physically mature opposition get on top (again), yet the FD continued the match with a predominantly "steady as she goes" strategy while the Scraggers proceeded to take over through the middle, attack the ball with more gusto and take the initiative (with the assistance of their wise coach at the helm and the inclusion of a few experienced campaigners). It appears that we STILL lack 'option B' and 'C' when things aren't going well. One of these options surely has to be .... the ability to close down our opposition when the tide starts turning against us. Where we attempt to slow things down, maintain possession and minimise the damage, until we're able to reset at the end of a quarter.

Agree on the more mature bigger bodied aspect re last night. Not a top side though. To me one part of this plan should be not to play too many outside players the likes of Bennell/Morton on tight smaller grounds like this. And if we're going to keep playing this style of running the ball off our half back line, then you're going to need some damn quick players coming off that half back line and they'll also need sublime kicking skills. Bennell may be handy on the bigger grounds where he can find space and others can find him free and he can burn off his opponent, but on the confines of Etihad, i don't believe he's capable. Neither is Morton. Too slow and loping, easily caught and pressured. Also doesn't like the hard one on one contact like Bennell. And you are going to need this in your game to play smaller grounds (and even the bigger ones too a lessor degree). There's no avoiding it. Eventually you're going to have to go when it's your turn and crack in. This is where Davey is a huge loss for us i feel. I didn't like what happened against the Saints either, but a player who does what he does through the zones and press, is very hard to cover/replace. And he could/can lay a decent tackle and pressure the ball carrier when he's on, unlike Morton and Bennell. IMO we need 2 - 3 Davey types (with an extra injection of courage) running off the half back line, breaking the lines and finding their way through the press zone with speed and sublime passing skills, mostly by foot, if the FD insist on continuing with this half back running game plan. If we can't, IMHO we're going to need a fairly massive change in game/plan strategy going forward if we're to make any substantial progress with this team in the coming years.

I personally believe our ruck division has been somewhat ordinary versus medium to quality opponents on game day (yes even when we have 2 against 1). We may get more hit outs overall on the day (i think we may have even had more vs the Pies but don't hold me to this, a great effort by Martin given where he came from mind you) however, it's the effective hit outs to advantage to me that count rather than just a total number of hit outs overall. I'm not judging Rush too harshly over last night though, as he's been out a fair while. Takes any player a good 3 - 4 matches to find their fitness and the pace of the game at this level after being out for 6 weeks or so. I think he'll get better as the year progresses. But as an example, If you watch the Pies game, Wood beat Martin early in effective taps to advantage which got them going and gave their play makers plenty of first usage, bringing many of them into the game early. I know the Pies are an unfair comparison given their massive advantage in physical maturity/experience/talent, but they are the benchmark atm (along with the Cats) and we could do worse than looking at what they do well. We also lack 2nd 3rd efforts from too many players far too often, including some of our veterans at times, in most games when the opposition is half decent or better. Our first efforts are generally commendable. But its what happens after this IMO that is letting us down too often. The opposition probably sense/see/feel this during the game (and may well be told to apply themselves accordingly pre match and they'll eventually break us down). Probably thrive and feed off it and grow an extra leg when they see/sense that it's working. Not hard last night given we had the most rookies in for the whole year i realise. What worries me going forward with the present FD is the apparent lack of an alternative strategy/game plan to slow the game down and try for a momentum change when other teams get a run on, in order to limit their scoring rate/opportunities while they're hot. In addition i would also say that playing at Etihad is extremely difficult given the leg up that any home team gets there from the Ump. I'm not saying this is an excuse for our poor overall effort and the final result last night but it doesn't help. Personally i think it's a 3 - 4 goal advantage. And one last thing, we don't act in unison as ONE team in a professional manner, for long enough and often enough. As one example of this - When the Cats tackle and their opponent is over the ball, other Cat players close to that contest as well as the player tackling, will often appeal to the Ump for a free kick and place pressure on the Umpire to make a decision. And they often get it! When our players tackle an opponent and he's over the ball, no other players of ours around the contest appeal for the free kick, including the tackler, in most cases. There are rare cases, but usually it's just the tackler. A minor point, but to me all these little 1 percenters add up and can make a small but meaningful difference to outcomes over the long haul.

Only you & Bennell that are feeling down today huh Old Dee!?? Not so bad then haha Me today >>> And last night (as i was tossing and turning in and out of nightmarish replays of the game with the after effects of a few frothies thrown in the mix) >>> Don't worry mate.... we're on track to do a Geelong by 2015!! At least that's what i've been led to believe!

Couldn't agree more. Some of the match ups strategically and structurally were abysmal last night. Our best forward from the previous 2 weeks playing up the ground and down back where he often monsters the ball with a few forward pushes. And Sylvia, who should have been doing the opposite (ie., 70% or so in the guts/30% pushing forward or therabouts) was left up forward adding little value. AJ was getting a towel up from Murphy but lets leave him there for most of the game and move him into the middle once the result is beyond doubt? I don't rate the Scraggers either, although they did have approx 400 games experience on us, albeit up to our game, horribly out of form. And no i don't count the GCS win. 20 odd points isn't really a win against that mob at this point. Our coaching dept has yet to inspire and structure up our boys to Find a Way To Win (FAWTW) when the going gets tough. And by that i mean once a team like the scraggers gets a run on, we seem unable to shut them down and change the momentum of a game. We just go along with the same game style/set up hoping that we'll out score the opposition at some point and/or turn things around. Great teams FAWTW when the chips are down and things aren't going their way. It's mental and it's process driven, along with experience. Eventually we'll gain the experience. I'm more worried about the mental/process side with this team given the damage that might occur between now and then.

6 - Frawley (General down back and 2 goals against him [3 but 1 was complete BS] on a monster who was getting massive feed all night. 5 - Trengove (Stood up when the going got tough and never took a backward step. Overpowered eventually with weight of numbers, as was the rest of the team). 4 - Petterd (Presented time after time and worked hard all night. Needs to learn to hold on to his overhead marking attempts, seems to get under the ball a little too often, with his one screamer the outstanding exception). 3 - Howe (Not the greatest game, however he continues to work his butt off and not just offering leads, he works to assist and spread too. Only 4 games under his belt before last night yet his work ethic and finish put others like AJ & Sylvia to shame. They should hang their heads. Shows maturity way beyond a new rookie. Keep it going mate) 2 - Jones (wouldn't normally give votes on this performance but there was so little else to choose from). 1 - Watts (for trying to play as a stop gap utility in virtually every position on the ground. His head must be spinning after this role. Whatever role was asked of him that is. This is a vote to encourage him to keep going and not lose hope after such a pitiful coaching performance!)

I agree. There's absolutely nothing to be gained by revealing strategies pre match or during the game, no matter how basic/disguised we might try to dress them as. Bailes was interviewed on SEN just before the game. Dermie asked "Now you see tackling tonight as a big part of how to break down the Doggies quick ball use/run & carry yeh?" (or something to that effect). Bailes' response.... "not tackling as such, more the inferred pressure on the ball carrier, followed up with tackling where we can get to them" (or something to that effect). And to me that's how they played. Second to the ball, chasing all night, apparently trying to place some "inferred pressure" on the ball carrier. Wouldve been joy to Rodney's ears that comment (if he or someone was listening at that late stage which i doubt). But still. Why give it? And these nonsense interviews of players during the actual game on the boundary. What a load of crap. Can only play into the oppositions hands and take our boys' focus off what they should be doing surely. Neil Balme when asked why the Cats don't do this during the week on KB's show, said he sees no good reason in doing this. Nothing to be gained and just laughed whenever anyone kept pressing him on the potential benefits. Now, when the most successful club in recent times isn't doing it, why the hell are we? We know better? Jimma/MFC/FD (someone!!!) needs to put a stop to this rubbish immediately.