Dees2014

It has always intrigued me (anyway for the last 20 years) why we do not insist on wearing our traditional kit when it does not clash with the opposition in their home games. For Christ sake, we do not even wear it often in our home games (aka Alice Springs). Not only is it the smartest kit in the AFL, but it also means an awful lot to our traditional supporters like me. If it is good enough for Collingwood and Hawthorn to wear their traditional gear at every opportunity, why not us. It is time we stood up for our proud tradition, and make it intregral to the exciting future we are building. I would have thought a no brainier for the very smart Roos-Jackson regime. Would also hugely annoy the magpie traditionalists. This cannot be a bad thing at all....

Yes we can't win in Adelaide either...

I would like Bleese to step up. Hevhascreal pace, something we lack on the outside. I know his defencive skills are notbtherevyet, butbtheyvcan be taught -look at M Jones, even Watts. Afire and running Bleesecwould add considerably to our mid field, even off half back. I think messrs. Nicholson, Strauss, Evans won't survive the cut this year.

I think we can't always have it both ways. On the one hand we criticize when our players "don't take the game on" but on the other we complain when they get caught. My only criticism of JKH was a couple of times he could have given off a hand pass to other players streaming down field when he kicked it backwards into defence, but otherwise sound I thought. He was also asked to play down back on their smalls on occasions-rather strange I would have thought but no doubt Roos had his reasons.

I think it is overwhelmingly positive. We are clearly developing self belief which is fundamental in being successful in any endeavor in life not just football. In a sense I am glad we are having some defeats along the way (how ever frustrating that might be) as Roosy continually points out the side is not yet up to the optimal level of his game plan. It is sometimes easier to drum in changed behavior after a defeat rather than victory. No, I think we are going along nicely. I still think we will win 9 or ten games overall this year which would give us huge momentum going into next year when we will have Hogan on the park, perhaps even Clark, a fit and rejuvenated Trengove (2010 style), a more mature Viney, Salem, Tyson, Toumpas, JKH, a fit ( for a change) in front of his first full pre season Max Gawn, and even an up and running Sam Bleese (yes I still have high hope Roosy can get him firing - his outside speed would be very useful in this team) . We are starting to see the basis of our next premiership side. Hugely exciting I reckon.

Defeating Collingwood is entirely in our own hands. Whether we play well, maintain our structures, everyone plays their role (to use Roosy's favourite cliches) is almost entirely up to us. Mitch's recovery is in the lap of the Gods and Medical Science. Having said that the more speculation about this there is does not help his return. He retired in order to get away from the continuous speculation about his return from the Press and supporters. I think maybe we all (including me) should shut up about this and let the future take its course.

Of course they would say that wouldn't they? To do otherwise would be totally irresponsible and entirely defeat the purpose of him retiring in the first place i.e take away continuous speculation by the Press and supporters about his return (and accompanying innuendo about his pay packet) to give him room to recover. I might point out Clark lives in Melbourne, I understand has bought a house here with his girlfriend, and is developing his own photography business in the Melbourne market. I doubt he would do those things if his intention was to hot foot it back to Perth to play for Freo. I might also point out that as far as MFC official records are concerned (I.e. the Club's website) he remains on the MFC list until the end of the year. They also have made no official announcement to my knowledge that he has been removed. If this is so they are free to reengage him at year's end without him going on the market as he has one more year left on his contract.

Just watched the post match interviews with Roos, Vince and Frawley. All were seriously [censored] off. Obviously they thought they SHOULD have won. A great sign of self belief. We will get better at finishing off games, and when we do we will be 7-3 (and well in the eight) rather than 3-7. The future is looking good.

Calamity? Nonsense. What short memories some of us have. Last yeat this would have been a 150 point thrashing. Most even last week feared an Eagles type thrashing. Give credit where credit is due. It is not to say we accept defeat -Roos clearly doesn't, but at least enjoy the ride, it is going to be a beauty. We will win many more than we lose for the next ten years. I was amazed we were so good. Can't wait for the Pies plus Dawes.

This does not clear it up at all.all it does is restate the current position. It says nothing about the future. Put your self on the clubs position. We have a situation where our best player has a serious long term injury, like a two year injury, where he has been unable to play for that period of time yet he is collecting $800k per year over that period. Some players like Scully would have no problem with that, but Mitch Clark really wants to play and really wants to help the demons to the top. His inability to be able to do that, and the consequence questioning of his integrity has sent him into a depressive state. We should all feel for him in that and the most important thing in that is for him to get better ASAP irrespective of his football status. BUT, the MFC in this if they are being responsible must look after their own interests. That is, ensure Mitch has the best possible help in his recovery with no pressure about a return. If there was any chance at all though he could return they would be crazy not to make sure there was a guaranteed pathway the the MFC. That is all I am saying.I have no doubt that has been put in place. Any amount of spin in the media does not change that. It is the most sensible and professional path for the club to take, and also the best for Mitch clark

I think this is absolutely on the money. This is closest to the truth than any of the personal abuse threads prevalent on this topic. We have some very very smart people running the MFC these days, they are not going to let an A-grader like Clark go unless they are absolutely sure he can never return. If they can also reduce their expenses at the same time (as they have clearly done) and if he returned then he does so on a lower over base than before, then that is excellent management all round. Right now though,we want Clarky to get healthy, no matter what happens to his football career in the future.

I think it would have had a lot to do with the nature of his condition. You have to remember we are not dealing with broken bones here but a serious mental illness.sometimes the only treatment is a complete break. It seems as though he might be recovering and maybe, just maybe, he might be ready to declare for the red and blue before he is due for formal delisting at the end of the season. Let's hope so. I have no doubt if he was up and firing, we would be final eight material when you add in Hogan and a rejuvenated Trenners.

Think you are being very hard on Trenners. No one accused him of being slow in his first year. Indeed his football smarts usually meant he was exactly at the right place at the right time, was a tackling machine,and was an excellent mark for his size. He has lost none of those attributes,but due to his injury has had his mobility seriously restricted. When he is back to full fitness he will return to the elite endurance athlete that he was (just like his sister) and will run all day at speed. Provided the operation and recovery is successful I have no doubt Trenners will become the A grade all Australian we all knew he would be when we drafted him. Hogan, a fit Trenners, a firing Breeze (I still think Roos will get him up and running), and even (we can only dream) a renewed and fit Clark is an eye watering prospect next year. Bring it on.

I think to some extent we are paying for the residue of the Neeld regime. The slack practices, poor coaching and simply dumb behavior of that regime will take a long time to be expunged from some players. I talk specifically of Tapscott, Mckenzie, Strauss, Nicholson, Bleese. All of these players have high levels of natural ability but they were taught badly at that time, but in an environment of blame with none of the nurturing which Roos exhibits in spades. This I think is the major difference with Welsh and Roos. Welsh has many of the personal behaviors of Neeld, although technically he is trying to implement the Roos gameplan. These players I suspect are feeling very unappreciated down at Casey, and it is not only because they are not playing in the ones. The sooner we create the Casey Demons where it is fully integrated into the MFC the better, and we appoint one of the full time assistants as permanent coach there the better. Good initial job for Lingy I would have thought. Give him a job where he is fully accountable, but also within the Roos structure where he can also listen and learn. This is now an urgent issue. We will lose several more first round draft picks (Strauss, Tappscott, Bleese) if we do not correct this and soon., I think I would be inclined to sack Welsh now and replace him with maybe Allison or Miller until the end of the season in order to show the club is aware of what goes on, and is determined to see the cultural change at Casey that the Roos regime demands.

Of course we can. As I ha e posted elsewhere on here we are potentially on a 1987 style roll. This may be the start for several reasons: 1. Port are due for an unexpected loss. That is our specialty. Look at the way we swung the three clubs we beat into media manufactured crisis just because melbourne beat them. It was the end of the world for all of them. Nothing to do with the MFC good play of course.and that is the rub. We continue to be underestimated and long may it continue, it gives us a great chance to sneak up on these f**kers. 2. We have a good record in the top end particularly against Port, 3. We play a similar brand of football, and a few of us have a lot to prove against them, viz Jack Viney who I have no doubt would absolutely love to show his great friend Ollie Wines that the future is his, not Ollie's; 4.our rucks are better, particularly with big max hitting his straps;and 5. We are due..... Many will say this is wishful thinking: maybe it is, but let's go for it anyway. Go Dees!

I wouldn't like to see a female coach JUST BECAUSE SHE IS A WOMAN. if she is the best football coach available for a particular role, irrespective of gender, the lets go for it. I would hope we would always go for the best available for any job at the MFC.

The real issue re salary cap here is what happens to the salary cap when up to a dozen EFC players get infraction notices and are rubbed out for two years. They will have to recruit to field a team. Essendon have said if any players are rubbed out they will continue to pay them. They will therefore need special salary cap dispensation in order to recruit additional player replacements. It breaks all the AFL RULES, and no doubt their own contracts when standard contracts say that if a player is rubbed out for taking performance enhancing drugs their contracts(and therefore the obligation to pay them) becomes null and void. I'm predicting massive law suits from players effected against the AFL and the EFC here. There is also the possibility of additional litigation against EFC by disaffected members of the EFC when Essendon continue to pay players after they are rubbed out, in contravention of their contracts. The whole thing is a huge mess, and will be tied up in the courts for years and has the potential to dismantle the carefully constructed AFL rules which makes the whole system work. The only winners are the lawyers who feed of this stuff.

The real issue re salary cap here is what happens to the salary cap when up to a dozen EFC players get infraction notices and are rubbed out for two years. They will have to recruit to field a team. Essendon have said if any players are rubbed out they will continue to pay them. They will therefore need special salary cap dispensation in order to recruit additional player replacements. It breaks all the AFL RULES, and no doubt their own contracts when standard contracts say that if a player is rubbed out for taking performance enhancing drugs their contracts(and therefore the obligation to pay them) becomes null and void. I'm predicting massive law suits from players effected against the AFL and the EFC here. There is also the possibility of additional litigation against EFC by disaffected members of the EFC when Essendon continue to pay players after they are rubbed out, in contravention of their contracts. The whole thing is a huge mess, and will be tied up in the courts for years and has the potential to dismantle the carefully constructed AFL rules which makes the whole system work. The only winners are the lawyers who feed of this stuff.

watch for him to attend the Harvard Winter school over the next two year. that will be the tell tale sign...A bit like Hird is doing now in France.

I was talking about Roos taking over from jackson. I have stated this here before and ridiculed right left and centre. I can tell you it is not ridiculed in the Club. it is a serious option and Roos wants to do it - if not at Melbourne then somewhere else.

Not sure I agree with this. Here are the teams for that famous match and the relative performances Hawthorn Match Statistics (Sorted by Disposals) Coach: Allan Jeans Player K HB D M G B T HO FF FA Peter Schwab 18 9 27 4 0 0 3 0 4 1 Peter Russo 19 8 27 6 0 0 1 0 1 1 John Platten 15 6 21 2 0 1 0 0 2 1 Gary Buckenara 18 3 21 4 5 2 0 0 5 1 Michael Tuck 15 5 20 2 0 1 3 0 4 3 Russell Greene 8 12 20 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 Darrin Pritchard 11 7 18 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 Chris Langford 13 5 18 4 0 0 1 0 2 2 Russell Morris 11 6 17 6 1 2 3 0 1 2 Gary Ayres 10 7 17 3 0 1 4 0 2 2 Ray Jencke 7 8 15 5 1 0 0 0 0 2 Peter Curran 11 4 15 8 1 2 0 0 0 1 Dermott Brereton 9 5 14 5 1 1 3 0 3 2 John Kennedy 7 7 14 5 1 0 2 0 1 4 Chris Mew 12 1 13 4 0 0 0 0 3 1 Richard Loveridge 9 4 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Robert DiPierdomen 9 2 1 1 3 0 3 0 0 1 Greg Dear 3 7 10 0 0 0 1 11 0 2 Paul Dear 3 7 10 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 Paul Abbott 5 5 10 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 Melbourne Match Statistics (Sorted by Disposals) Coach: John Northey Player K HB D M G B T HO FF FA Bret Bailey 10 10 20 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 Greg Healy 12 7 19 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 Ricky Jackson 16 3 19 2 3 3 2 0 1 2 Todd Viney 11 7 18 5 1 0 4 0 3 1 Brian Wilson 11 7 18 1 2 1 0 0 1 5 Brett Lovett 12 5 17 7 0 0 1 0 0 1 Rodney Grinter 12 4 16 5 2 1 1 0 3 2 Stephen Newport 13 3 16 3 0 0 1 0 2 0 Graeme Yeats 8 7 15 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 Steven Stretch 10 5 15 3 0 0 0 1 1 2 Danny Hughes 14 1 15 4 0 0 1 0 3 4 Earl Spalding 7 7 14 3 0 0 4 0 3 0 Warren Dean 13 1 14 2 1 1 2 0 3 2 Jim Stynes 10 3 13 3 1 0 1 16 1 0 Sean Wight 9 2 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 Dean Chiron 6 3 9 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 Tony Campbell 6 1 7 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 Simon Eishold 5 2 7 1 0 2 0 0 1 2 Robert Flower 3 2 5 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 Steven O'Dwyer 3 1 4 1 0 0 1 7 1 1 When you look through both teams, on paper we should not have been within a bull's roar of the Hawks. I think it is a testimony to Northey's coaching skill that we did. He has much of the same driven nature of Roos although i think Roos is a much better people manager and considerably more personally charming. I think we underestimate what advantage Roos as a coach gives us together with his senior assistants. I would also venture to say that today's side is potentially much more talented than 1987, and so if anything can improve quicker. I agree the AFL is very different now than then, but there were 22 rounds then, 14 teams, but there was a top 5 - far more difficult to break into than the current top 8. I still think we will surprise a number of people over the next 4 months and exceed everyone's expectations!

I think it will be Brett Kirk, in fact I suggest the deal is already done. He is a very close friend of Roos and by all accounts very astute and driven. Roos will slot in as Head of football and then take Jackson ' s job. You heard it here first!

For those of you who remember 1987 AFL season, Melbourne had not been in the finals for 23 years. Out of the first 9 games we won 4. We ended up 12 wins and 10 losses and squeezed into the top five as it was then, winning six out of the last seven games. We had a very young and inexperienced side (including 19 year old jim Stynes in his first year in the senior) under new coach John Northey who tried to drum in unprecedented disciplines into the side's play including at relentless running game, We eventually won two finals against the Swans and North only to be knocked out of the preliminary final in the last kick of the day by Hawthorn after the inexperienced Stynes ran through the mark after the siren resulting in a 15 metre penalty and Buckanara slotted the goal from 50 metres out. It is not impossible for us to do this again. I see a growing self belief, with improvement every week as we go through the season with increasing confidence in the coach and his game-plan, just like Northey then. I don't buy that just because we have only won 3 out of 9, that it is impossible to improve greatly on that post bye. Let's hope history will repeat itself. Go Dees!

I'm sure the AFL are pulling the strings in the background, but it would be hard tty of believe that they would not be extremely happy with their work so far. Both Roos and Jackson are crucial to that.jackson ultimately is a corporate man (ie AFL). He will remain loyal to the cause and see it through until we become a strong club again. I have said here before, don't be surprised if Roos ends up as CEO of the MFC from this. I know many on DL think this is nonsense, but having worked at senior levels in the corporate world for much of my life, if someone catches the CEO bug there is nothing stopping him. Roos is capable enough, and ambitious enough to have caught it big time.we could do worse.