Straight Sets Simon

Thanks for your response.

Just answer the question. Where's the irony?

I wouldn't mind getting an answer to this question.

Do you think that Melbourne should sign up Daniher for another year?

It says a bit about Woewodin's career too...

No worries.

I'm saying that he didn't play a bad game, in fact I thought that he did quite well especially since he was out of the game for over a year. I can't remember who he was playing on because I can't remember anyone kicking a bag of goals on him.

Nasher, out of interest what is it about Daniher that like about him as a coach? Or what is it that makes you think that he is / has been a good coach? I'm not trying to have a go at you with these questions. They do sound aggressive if taken out of context but I am genuinely interested to hear your point of view on Daniher.

If Melbourne were playing good football at the moment, how many more members do you think there would be?

Bizzell didn't exactly play a bad game either. Can anyone remember who he was playing on against Fremantle?

Rhino, old55 and anyone else who has previously thrown their support behind Daniher. Do you think that he should be signed on again as coach of the Melbourne Football club?

So are you saying that there was very little emphasis put on "run and carry" at training and that all the players just out of nowhere decided to predominantly use this tactic all through the pre-season and into the start of the season proper?

I've never seen them train. But I've seen them play. If Melbourne spent most of their time training for a long and direct style of play then I would expect to see that being the predominant tactic used on game day. Why train one for one tactic only to use another?

Great post. I just wrote something similar over at Demonology in regards to the pre-season and "run and carry". We all know that Daniher has acknowledged that Melbourne overdid the "run and carry" during the pre-season games and that it was intended to be used for games at AAMI and Subiaco. But surely, if the players continually overuse the tactic (even at the MCG) then that implies that it has been drilled into them in a way which suggests that too much emphasis was put on this game plan and that Melbourne's natural ability to play long and direct football took a backseat. There's an old football saying that has a lot of relevance to this situation: "The way you train is the way you play" (Or something along those lines)

Not really. Because Melbourne haven't had injury problems for all of the past six or seven years.

100% agree. Can anyone tell me who Bizzell was playing on against Fremantle?

Assuming that Melbourne do fail to make the finals this season and taking injuries into account, do you think that the MFC should offer Neale Daniher one more year as coach?

Crowds are low because Melbourne are playing crap football. Melbourne aren't playing crap football because the crowds are low.

If Neitz and Green can play: Out: Bate (inj), Jamar, Garland, Brown, C. Johnson In: Green, Neitz, Newton, Bizzell, Ferguson FB: Ferguson Carroll Bell HB: Bizzell Rivers Petterd C: Johnstone Bruce Green HF: Pickett Miller Dunn FF: Newton Neitz Davey Foll: White McDonald Moloney Int: Godfrey P. Johnson Yze Sylvia

I'm with you Jaded. Bell has easily been one of Melbourne's best this year. As has been mentioned many times before, Bell's biggest problem was his awareness. Too often he got caught out or chased down by the opposition. However, that was just an experience thing that I believe he has greatly improved on. He has always had the ability, now he has the experience and confidence to really utilise it.

From all reports Newton played well for Sandy today. I wouldn't mind seeing him come in for Garland assuming he did play as well as has been suggested. Nothing against Garland who had a tough ask playing in the forward line against Sydney. At least now he has a better understanding of what it takes to play at AFL level.

Melbourne have a coach with almost ten years experience. Sometimes I wonder just how important experience actually is.

There seems to be a close enough is good enough attitude around the MFC. For example, when looking over the coaching career at Melbourne of Neale Daniher, many people point out that he has taken Melbourne to the finals in '98, '00, '02, ,'04, '05 and '06. Now that is an improvement on past Melbourne sides but it's still not good enough. In 2000 Melbourne got as close as they could get without actually winning a the Flag but again, it's still not good enough. People don't remember the number of finals a team plays in. They remember when a team wins a Premiership. In contrast to this, there is Mick Malthouse who when after his side went down to the reigning Premiers at their home ground by two goals, said in his post-match conference that "We don't accept anything except the fact we got beaten".

How is Jarka saying that Jolly is a better ruckman with this comment? I interpreted it to be a comment about the team rather than any individual players.

Ouch...