_H_

Mm, I don't think that would be appropriate, I heard Malthouse saying at some stage that he delayed neurosurgery for Collingwoods 2010 premiership. This year he has been accused of being racist, being unable to coach, criticised for starting captains on the bench, not having a game plan and the usual media slander. His medical history is none of our business; nick names referring to any neurological condition which is no fault of his own might not be very tasteful. Don’t need a coach frustrated by impatient supporter slander of a developing playing group, to be any more upset with us than he probably already is.

Fairly flexible list when you look at where these players played throughout the year. B Rivers Frawley Garland HB Watts McDonald Nicholson C Blease Viney Grimes HF Sylvia Dawes Trengove FF Davey Clark Howe R McKenzie Jones Jamar INT Burns Bail Tapscott SUB Gysberts EMG Pederson Seller Bennell Jetta Taggart Dunn It looked pretty good at the start of 2012 too, but maybe they ran out of legs in 4th quarters and neede to adjust to a new way of playing under a new football department. Hopefuly all of them get a full pre-season and another 20+ games into them and it'll be a pretty competitive list in 2014 with Hogan added to the foward line.

It would be devastating if we lost him. People bang on about our need to draft midfielders yet we have him and Gysberts here who are about to get a pre season and hopefully a game in 2013. If I've got this right, he had stress fractures in his spine earlier in the year and returned to Casey towards the end of the year. If you have a look at his press conferences and interviews, he seems to have the kind of attitude and character that the playing list needs to work harder at getting off the bottom of the ladder. If it's true that the Bombers are looking at him, they'd prob be right to be doing so. He's got wicked skills.

Sydney has a mature list averaging over 100+ games. They’ve been playing this brand of football for at least 10 years. In Neelds first year he has been persistent that he wants to impart the defensive parts of football at MFC and play a style of footy that stands up in finals. “The toughest team in the comp to play against”, and all that. I was glad to see both Fremantle do well in the finals and see Sydney win the flag out of concern that the boring defensive style of Neelds game would ultimately lack class. But both Freo and Sydney are seriously, seriously hard to play against. This convinces me that the "no hollywood" football that Neeld promotes i.e. making certain that the basics are done well, and that they’re hard and tough at the footy does win football games in finals. Sydney’s internal indicators were through the roof on Saturday according to Longmire. It’s possible that Melbourne’s internal indicators probably have a similar focus to Longmires; 1%’s, tackles, pressure, hard contests etc. It’s taken me all year to come round and accept we can’t watch exciting ‘downhill skiing’, but I’m sold on the Mark Neeld philosophy to football, even if it’s as boring as all hell to watch it just won the 2012 GF.

As the late Bob Davis said of Ronnie Burn's time at Geelong that he was “good until they taught him how to play”. He's not the only player that has been struggling for form this year while adapting to our "development stage" and learning "the defensive aspects of the game". Wish him all the best, hopefully in a side that spreads a little more than MFC. Maybe elsewhere he'll start enjoying football rather than being an out of form inconvenience for the football club he's barracked for his whole life.

Anybody suprised by this article? According to Stynes' book, My Journey on the subject of Schwab; "I did not believe he should be offered an extension," Stynes writes. "Some of his behaviour was proving destructive and it was clear he had lost the faith of the coach and the playing group. "I felt that some aspects of his work were first-class, and perhaps that two-thirds of what he did overall was good. "But I was frustrated by the fact he was choosing to ignore the board and seemed determined to run his own agenda." The rest is here: http://www.heraldsun...FL - Melbourne)

There was some mention here: http://mfcdemonblog.blogspot.com.au/ at 'Every Day Is Like Sunday'. You will need to scroll down to 'Midweek madness' in the blog '50 Shades of Brown' written on Friday the 13th of July. Speaking of EDILS, should we be concerned that Adam may have commited suicide after the Port game?.. There is no blog this week.

1205th player to appear at MFC, 15th most games played, 22nd most goals kicked, 224 games over 10 years, 4277 disposals, 210 goals. (http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/players/C/Cameron_Bruce.html) Taken at 20 years old pick 64 in 1999, but definitely played better footy than most of MFC's higher picks... which doesn't seem like the run of the place lately. Legend!

Having little or no confidence in the club to find there neaerst Auskick clinic, I went to the trouble of providing the details below: MELBOURNE UNICORNS Coordinator Kylie da Fonte Phone: 0403 069 622 Centre Location Venue: Melbourne High School Oval Street: Forest Hill Suburb: South Yarra Postcode: 3141 Centre Details Days of operation: Saturday Time: 9:00am Duration: 90 mins Start Date: 21/04/12 Finish Date: 25/08/12 That's as much trouble as I'm going to for the rest of the year... we should be relegated to the Yarra Valley Mountain District Football League.

People should have the option. If there can be a dedicated area for those paying members who chose to be amongst Melbourne Supporters, then the club should provide that option. Enough with slagging off people who do want to be in a Melbourne supporters only section of the ground. As if it hasn't been hard enough in past years being at the G every home game and watching uncompetitive efforts from our players; being constantly reminded we suck by opposition supporters every week just makes the game that much harder to watch.

What did Scott say?

After McLardy's interview on 3AW yesterday, I was curious to where the 'Red & Blue Print' could be found. (Interview here: http://www.3aw.com.au/displayPopUpPlayerAction.action?&url=http://media.mytalk.com.au/3AW/AUDIO/300512_donmclardy.mp3 ) This thread was the only hit that was returned by Google when I searched for it. Anyone know if this document is available to members? Sorry if returning a 20 month old thread to the top of the most recent list aggravates anybody.

What's the story with Stef Martin?

Good ol' big Russian. At least someone's havin' a crack.

I'm not sure which press conference or which player it was, but I'm certain there was some mention last week that the "running" part of the game is coming. I really know SFA about modern football, but the players focus on structure and the defensive elements of the game seems like their only focus at the moment, and they seem so concentrated on it that they are not applying themselves to the attacking styles of the game. Hopefully, their preventative, uncertain, slow movement of the ball will be less frequent as they have adjusted to the new style of playing before the year ends. Malthouse mentioned in his commentary on Saturday that he like's Neeld's theory of coaching this team. Malthouse is most likely biased towards approving of Neeld, but he seems to think that the 'one on one' style of shutting down opposition is a good one if the players can make certain that they do it effectively. (Take it with a grain of salt what I’ve written here; I don’t exactly remember what he said, but it was something like that.) I'm also interested in how the players are getting along, but it seems all a bit tight lipped. No one rushed to help Jack Grimes up when Waters knocked him down during the WCE game. Maybe there is some bitterness since the demotion of the leadership group. Who would know and if so, how would tell anyone outside the club anyway? It may not be any of our business but as a supporter, I hate to think that the performance of the club is hindered by the fact that players aren’t getting along. Carolyn Wilson is still banging on with her unsubstantiated claims but maybe she's in the ball park on the politics. The link is here if you havn't read it already; http://www.theage.co...0504-1y4ky.html

There were no tiks left at Ticketek today. Goodluck.

2012 Team Analysis: HEIGHT « on: March 29, 2012, 07:04:22 AM » Retrieved from http://www.fanfooty.com.au/

Any thoughts on Ling's commentary? He mentioned something about how much he’d like to see Melbourne take some risks in the last quarter and take the game on. If you're going to lose playing conservatively and keeping to the structures, you may as well risk loosing by a few more goals attempting to get a run on. Neeld does want them to keep to their structures for a greater part of the game than the estimated 85% that they did agaginst the Saints. It's unlikely that they would have deviated from the game plan, but Ling no doubt knows a bit about playing in a good side that can be down in the last quarter and still get up and win. Maybe we’ll see some of this in a few years or so... hopefuly. BT’s hilarious, there are far worse comentators, and they also aint worth creating a thread for.

He's a Melbourne supporter who trains with the senior Melbourne list almost weekly. Why would he go to GWS? He's already spoken to Neeld about where he'll fit into the side and he's given the club the heads up on the personality and performance of every kid going into the draft next year. He's old man ain't shipping him off to NSW.

What information do you have? Paul Roos also said last night that Sydney coaches could do nothing in 2010 to shut Melbourne down when he was handed his biggest loss in his coaching career. No one in the public, or the fans putting up with this VFL standard of football really know why we have got worse since then. And the lack of player size, contested ball and defensive part of the game aside, they shouldn’t be this bad.

If any other club will take him, give him away, he's usless.

Just a quick 700 + words on this. From: The Coach (title), The Official AFL Level 1 Coaching Manual You can read it here: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/9765/default.aspx ‘Game-plan’ refers to a recognisable/predictable standard of play adopted by the coach that suits his/her football philosophy. A game-plan is simply a plan for a match consisting of a few major parts. A good generic game-plan is based on a direct flowing game, focused on player movement and control of the ball in both offence and defence. Generally, a coach will start with a game-plan that best suits the players at the coach’s disposal and maximises the team’s strengths. Game-plans can include one or more of the following examples: 1. Long kicking to key forwards A team with high marking, mobile forwards will maximise scoring opportunities by moving the ball quickly out of the centre, kicking long into the forward line. Let’s not slash our wrists yet. Quick ball movement forward from a turnover by contested ball winners put’s defenders under pressure. The fact that 5 goals can come from a 200cm guy left alone in the forward line without midfielders getting forward to crumb isn’t common to every football team. David Misson of all people can get them fit enough to get forward of the contest line at turnovers. (They all look so spent they can barely find the motivation to climb the barriers at the West Gate to kill themselves let alone use their ability to play transition footy. Who could blame them, not much is going right at this club at the moment, and if the media aren’t driving them to complete and utter inconsolable despair, we as fans are lining up to get the knife in.) 2. Running, possession game The coach of a small to medium-sized team will adopt a running game, with short passing and handball to maintain possession. After round 1, I was the first to get the boot into Neeld, but I’d had too many froffies and it was him, or a stubbie through my TV. I wan’t to watch a running, possession game, but as mentioned earlier in this thread, Baileys plan for under 12’s gets knocked over if it’s the only trick the pony’s got. I take it back questioning Neeld so early, and I think he may know a little more than we do about why we’re getting flogged. He bangs on about structures! I have a feeling that if Neeld came from a club that paid coaches the world over to teach them what they understood about team field structure, from international soccer with leagues each worth in excess of US$1.185 billion, to water polo teams that win Olympic medals, he may have learnt something about structures. If after round 2, he keeps saying he’s happy that they’re keeping to structures every quarter or so, and not disappointed that the midfield isn’t getting 20 touches each, I’m thinking it doesn’t mean the game plan is not to ever run and carry or ever have a high possession count. Maybe what were seeing isn't the game plan, it's 24 players f$%#ing it up. 3. Defensive game A team with a strongly disciplined backline working together can move the ball forward into attack. Despite the hysteria that we’re doomed, I am convinced Garland, Frawley, Rivers and Grimes can calve up an opposition forward line when they are having their day. (And I think I may be the only fan of football besides his Mum who thinks Sam Blease is going to be Heritier O’Brien on steroids, but hey, she could be as right as I am.) I don’t think discipline will be a problem for these guys, and don’t think we’ll be watching them fail because of a game plan. When Collingwood fans asked Buckley why he changed the game plan against Hawthorn last week, the way i interpreted it, which may be completely unlike how it happened, he had to explain via the media that he hadn’t. The profile was essentially unchanged from previous years. The reason Hawthorn had 37 scoring shots was probably due to a lack of defensive discipline on the part of the players. As a fan of the game who regularly drops footy words he knows little about, the Collingwood fans where a classic example of how we can make claim to understand why our players loose football matches. I don’t have a clue really, but from the definition of a game plan above, I think ‘game-plan’ might have [censored] all to do with it.

Yeah, I didn't watch the entire interview. And yes, I went ahead and used the beginning snippet of the interview to start a thread on Neeld. I haven’t given reasonable thought to the fundamental point Neeld has made in his interview either. My opening comment doesn’t really have any substance, but I did want to start a thread on Neeld because I’m hoping to learn from fans what they understand about his game plan. I don't think that defensive football suits the players MFC have drafted. I think MFC in 2009 drafted for 'run'. What’s with Neeld's defensive structures? What is it doing to get the best football out of the players we are so privileged to have?.

Neeld has spoken about time taken for players to adapt to new game plans. It is a researched phenomena, and Neeld has stated that adjustment to new mangement is a realty that faces Melbourne. In 2010, when they ran and carried and took the game on it was great football to watch. It's absolutely shattering to watch what happened today. If Neeld's plan will work in months/years to come, I hope it includes taking full advantage of the ability of these players. If his defensive structures aren’t suitable for this list, and it affects their progress, this list is wasted, and that would be tragic.

No. I didn't watch the rest of the interview, so I do deserve some pay out here. And I also deserve a pay out for exagerating Neelds input and isolating that part of the interview to start the thread. But I want a thread started on Neeld, preferably to put into context what his style of coaching does to benefit our list.