pantaloons

Tanking is such a BS issue. Absolute tripe. Teams have to some degree put the cue in the rack before season's end for longer than I can remember. So what exactly is Melbourne being accused of here? Is it that we deliberately lost games in late 2009, or more specifically, the Richmond game? At that stage, we were a rabble and had hardly won a game in two years. The same people who accuse us of 'tanking' I'm sure are the same people who delighted in our ineptitude of 2008-09 and were more than happy to stick the boots into Melbourne supporters. You can't have your cake and eat it too. As for the Richmond game itself, it was quite laughable, but Bailey's moves that day were no more laughable than his moves TO BEGIN THE GAME on Saturday. How is Warnock at full-forward a stranger move than Jurrah on a wing against Bartel? At the press conference, Bailey mentioned that he'd always experimented with players in different positions. It was not an isolated strategy for one game in late 2009. I just find the public fascination with 'tanking' ridiculous. It's not all draft-related either. Pre-1986, do you think that no club that couldn't make the finals ever decided to have a player operated on before the season finished? Or that it wasn't in the best interests of clubs to give kids a go at the end of lost seasons? It is simply necessary list management, player development, and proper decision-making. You didn't need to have the carrot of a #1 draft pick dangled in front of you to tell you it was not really necessary to play your best player with a broken hand for the final four games of the season if you couldn't make the finals. It just staggers me that anyone, not least of all someone who is paid supposedly for their football knowledge and communication skills, could actually believe that what Melbourne have done under Bailey is punishable. Get over it, get a grip on reality, and have a look at the way clubs in Melbourne's position in any relevant sporting competition in the world conduct themselves.

I don't think his positional moves in the Jordan McMahon game could have been any worse than his use of Jurrah and Watts from the opening bounce yesterday.

LOL at this thread.

Just picking a bit of your post, e25, but personally, I don't think this particular area has been the biggest factor in Melbourne's underwhelming form in 2011. Evans (4 games), Howe (7), Nicholson (7), Gawn (3), Tapscott (10) and Blease (1 as sub) haven't played a whole lot. Tapscott has a ready-made AFL physique and has slotted straight into our best 22, and Gawn was the logical replacement for Jamar during his absence rather than the comedic backup ruck offerings of Newton and Dunn, and big Max acquitted himself very nicely. If I was tooting Bailey's horn, I'd be pointing squarely at the performances of the senior players minus Jamar, as Rhino has demonstrated. I'm probably having a few bob each way by criticising the team's performance this year while acknowledging the failings of the senior players, but I expect more, and I think that's reasonable. Could a proven premiership coach like Malthouse, Roos, Williams or Clarkson extract more out of the likes of Green, Davey and Sylvia, and a flailing younger player like Morton, for starters? Certainly, I think the latter two could benefit from a change of scenery. For those less disappionted with 2011, I'd be interested to know when you see Melbourne's genuine success arriving, and whether you think Melbourne should be targetting at least one quality experienced leader in impending free agency to help strengthen the side's mettle. Personally, I'm set on a change of direction for Melbourne in 2012, though I'll gladly eat my words if we end up winning a flag under Bailey.

I don't think we need to know what criteria the club thinks Bailey has to meet to kep his job, if that's what you're saying. I'd say they'd have made up their minds regarding Bailey. Some of the things you'd look for we can pretty well guess at. The overall on-field performance in 2011 has been very poor. We've had the easiest draw the MFC has had in my time following the club, and look set to win an extra two games which, given we have new, woeful side in the comp who we play twice, cancels out any improvement if you're looking at the win/loss column. More so than the wins and losses has been the manner in which we've lost. Last year we were flogged once - by 56 points to Hawthorn in Round 1. This year, all but one of our 8 losses have been by at least 41 points. I wouldn't be looking at injuries as an excuse either. Hawthorn have won games this year with their entire spine missing. We've fared pretty well on the injury front - you only need to look back to 2007 to see us really cruelled by injury. While Watts and Martin have improved significantly, others have stagnated or are a bit mired in mediocre play, or worse, have completely regressed like Cale Morton. I'd argue that we haven't beaten a genuinely decent side under Bailey in four years. For the record, I don't dislike Bailey as a human being. I do feel it's time for a change on several levels though, and am hoping that the club is well and truly into the ears of Malthouse, Roos and Clarkson, regardless of what these coaches are saying publicly.

How many lame "I reckon he's gone/staying/an alien" articles must we be subjected to before the end of the season? If he goes or stays, I can do without getting the two cents worth of every hack journalist in the city. I'd actually like some proper investigation into what Melbourne is likely to receive in return in the event he leaves. That would be news. I know Clark touched on this on Monday, but that's one piece in a season of other opinion pieces about whether he's staying.

Yep. And I heard that Rebecca Twigley is due to pop out some offspring around the date of our game, and Judd is adamant he'll be at the birth. While it's only a slim chance, we could catch a big break there. And yes, we'll definitely need 11 1/2 wins, especially after the results of the last 3 weeks. Hawthorn and Geelong look to be complete write-offs, and given our disgusting record at Docklands, the Carlton game looks the most likely chance. As others have pointed out, we really need to take a step and start beating some teams who are better than us. Or, we could just continue Bailey's record of only beating interstate sides and sash-wearing Victorian sides and sneak in with 11 1/2!

Nice. That's a very good result. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but the 40,000 target was always going to be ambitious. It's a realistic goal for next season, especially given we'll be a likely finals contender. I'd be interested to know how much money each club generates from membership. There are plenty of 3-game memberships floating around, MCC/MFC affiliate memberships (at least in the past), as well as the odd pet membership for those keen to take their gerbil to the footy. I'm also interested in where membership goes in the future. Collingwood cracked 70,000 members this year. Practically, there comes a point where Victorian clubs will have to either cap membership or continue to be creative with the packages they offer.

Richmond? Did I miss something?

Incredibly sad stuff. My condolences to Sean's family.

Compulsory viewing. Brilliant.

Sorry, but we didn't actually win 10 in a row. After getting flogged by Carlton, we won three in a row, then lost by a point to North in crushing fashion (seem to remember Troy Makepeace at the end for some reason) in Round 17. We then won 5 in a row to finish the home and away season. I like the premise though! Hopefully we take advantage of a fairly soft draw and can win 6 or 7 of our last 10 to squeak into the 8. The Geelong, Carlton and Hawthorn games will be very tough so we can't afford many other slip-ups.

Sorry - didn't want to turn this into a list management thread - just replying to a couple of the delisting ideas. Thanks for the suggestions. According to Demonblog here: http://mfcdemonblog.blogspot.com/ of those LDC and Dawi mentioned, Newton, McNamara and Lawrence are all rookie listed (and don't count, as LDC mentioned), while Dunn, Spencer and Bate are on the books for next year. Which leaves you with Maric, Wonaeamirri and Warnock. I'm not putting these guys on the chopping block with 10 weeks to play - merely pointing out that we don't simply have complete wastrels to delist this year. The list is in very good shape for the future if developed well.

BVI, I'm assuming you're an Orlando fan. Bill Plaschke, admittedly a Lakers man and a writer for the LA Times, proposed this LA-Magic deal about a week ago: http://www.latimes.com/sports/basketball/nba/lakers/la-sp-0615-plaschke-dwight-howard-20110615,0,4361777.column Basically, it's Bynum and Odom for Howard and Redick. Salaries work. Highly, highly doubt it would happen - for it to go down, Orlando would have to be convinced they were going to lose D12 for nothing. But you could do a lot worse than Bynum and Odom in return. You're not going to get a better center in any other deal for him I'd imagine.

I fail to see how our 'facilities' were responsible for Simon Buckley being one of the worst decision-makers I have ever seen play for the Melbourne Football Club. You could pluck someone from the crowd and insert them into Collingwood's 22 at the moment and they'd look ok. Admittedly, Collingwood has a great recent track record of developing extremely average footballers into capable players in a strong side, but Buckley was rightly delisted by the MFC, and if he was still here he'd be in the gun again. It's going to be hard enough finding players to delist this off-season.

It's fairly certain that, barring an amazing turnaround from the team or complete hari kiri from the club's powers, Dean Bailey will not be coaching Melbourne in 2012. I would actually consider it an uncharacteristically proactive move from Melbourne to remove Bailey mid-season and appoint Todd Viney. I was against the mid-season sackings of Balme and Daniher, but this one gives Melbourne the opportunity to have a look at Viney over the course of half a season. We won't learn all there is to know about Viney as a coach in that time, but we'll know more than we will if we leave him in his current role. An experienced coach in Malthouse or Roos has to be the priority, but at least Viney's promotion gives us something else to work with.

"The Tom Scully to GWS Guide for Dummies" available for $9.99 at all good bookstores. This is obviously a crucial topic for the Melbourne Football Club, and it's no surprise to me that this thread is as well worn as it currently is. A few points to clarify the situation from my vantage point (some of this is just packaging much of what's been said by others into burger format) and hopefully quell some of the desires for a group hara kiri session, and apologies for providing no new info; 1. There seems to be a feeling among some the general populace that Scully is gone because he hasn't re-signed yet or made a public statement, or that he has actally already signed with GWS. As earlier noted - the statement from his management WAS the public statement. Good sporting clubs don't do their contract negotiations through the media, and that was a fairly unique statement in light of the growing unrest amongst the Melbourne faithful. Secondly, there is no way known he would have already signed with GWS. Unless he physically combusts, his value is only going to increase as the season progresses. Signing with them this early is only in the best interest of GWS, and duds Scully. It is a simple matter of giving himself the best chance at a bigger contract by improving on-field performance over the course of his current contract. It is completely reasonable that Tom is allwed to do this. I think all along it would have been his intention to conduct his contract negotiations in the second half of 2011, and that the current media hysteria would be somewhere between irritating and quite disconcerting for him. I'm not hanging out for him to make an announcement on a live news cross, but then again I don't think he'll leave. 2. That Scully will go because the money will be too much to refuse. I'm trying to recall good players who have left clubs in the last few years and their (supposed) motivations for doing so. Judd left WC because of 'player culture' and chose his club based on money. Ablett certainly had financial reasons to leave but was increasingly unhappy at Geelong and could play with his brother at GC. Bruce - not offered more than 1 year at Melbourne. Scott Thompson - went home for family reasons. Fev - nutcase. Burgoyne - Choco and Port growing on the nose. I'm sure there are many more examples, but you get the point. The reality is, that for a player to want to move, there is almost always an unhappiness with their current club. I don't know Tom personally, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. Let's say he is offered $800k by GWS and $500k by Melbourne. That's a lot different than the difference between $100k and $400k. I can't see a professional footballer purely leaving for a bigger contract when all the other intangibles are in favour of staying with the current club. If Scully is happy at Melbourne, and we're not disgracefully miserly in contract negotiations, I think he'll stay. 3. Ultimately, we like to be in control of things, and it's frustrating that it's out of our hands. Short of hitting Andrew Demetriou in the face with a frozen mutton chop in the local supermarket, we're not really going to be able to have a positive impact on the situation. Hopefully the club continues to remain as attractive a playing destination for him as possible, and avoids unthinkably soiling itself with measures like playing him at Casey or giving him ultimatums. Happy Scully = Demon Scully. Just remember the positives. All GWS have to offer is extra money. We're not offering to pay him in magic beans. At Melbourne, he's got friends, family, the chance to play at the G more than 50% of the season, greater endorsement opportunities, and the opportunity to win flags in the near future, all while earning a very healthy wage.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/morton-may-miss-10-weeks/story-e6frf9io-1225835310273 Similar stuff in the Hun article. Hope he makes a speedy recovery. I didn't think a lot of the incident when it happened.

The lockout slaughtered the NHL. The great game and league lost its spot on ESPN due to the lockout and hasn't regained it. Immediately after the lockout, the NHL changed some of the rules and nuances of the game, most of which irked traditionalists and pleased the fairweather fans. In the US though, the game has lost significant momentum and national interest that will be difficult to regain. That sums up my thoughts on soccer's popularity perfectly. I actually really enjoy watching the Socceroos, but there are other sports created (not coincidentally by wealthy nations with the nous and resources to support these new games) that have soccer covered in almost every facet in my opinion. I'd happily see the World Cup here, but there seems to be an air of colonialism about FIFA. Soccer fans that I've known have always generally been intolerant of other sports and keen to see soccer spread all over the world and squash other sports. That's arrogance. I don't see unreasonable points being put forward by footy fans on here. No one is saying that the World Cup shouldn't be played here - just that footy should be able to continue during this time. If our great league can continue during the World Wars, then I'd suggest it can do so through a four week tournament of another sport.

I've said during 2009 that I wouldn't swap our defence with any other club's. It's not the best yet, but easily the best young defence in the comp, pretty much covering all bases. It's the least of our concerns.

There is no doubt that every other club would swap their picks with Melbourne. I'm happy with journalists using some subjective analysis in their grading though. We all knew that Melbourne had the best picks before the draft. The grade is probably more of a reflection of what the journo thinks we did with those picks (obviously excluding the top two).

I spent draft night with a few mates, most of whom are Melbourne, in front of the Foxtel coverage. We were all scrambling for the phantom draft for Gysberts name when selected, as while we're all keen AFL followers, besides watching a couple of carnival matches we really don't see much of the junior stuff. We're pretty much going by regurgitated mock drafts and popular opinion. Mind you, that doesn't eliminate the ability to identify areas of current need in our team. The Gysberts selection sparked a bit of debate around the telly - a couple were of your thinking that our forward line will be fine. I'm just not 100% sold on that. I'm big on the importance of gun forwards being essential to premiership sides. We're doing nicely with Watts and Jurrah, but another one would have topped it off nicely in my opinion. Again, I'm not unhappy with Gysberts, but in a perfect world I'd love to have another gun key forward joining the club (wouldn't all 16 clubs though?!) As for Fitzpatrick, hopefully his performance against SA in the carnival was not representative of his usual work.

I'm not saying he stuffed it Jaded, I just think we're light on for key forwards and that could have been addressed at 11. Obviously BP and Melbourne think Gysberts is going to be a very good player, and they'd know infinitely better than I would. I'd like to have Jurrah as the number 3 forward option, but obviously they're happy with Watts and Jurrah as the combo leading forward.

Hmmm...the Melbourne Timberwolves. I'd really hoped for a key forward at 11. 11 was the first pick Prendergast had to actually use his brain for, and its crucial that he got this one right. Hopefully Gysberts can play 200+ games in red and blue.

The only thing regarding the US stadiums is that the World Cup doesn't conflict with the NFL season, and the World Cup doesn't need to use baseball stadiums, so the World Cup essentially fitted in perfectly with the US sporting calendar as it does for the rest of the northern hemisphere. The World Cup presents a potentially large pain in the date for AFL fans, but there are ways to make it work. The stadium quarantining period is an absolute crock and I'd be looking to negotiate that, while utilising smaller grounds and byes throughout the cup in the event we did get the event.