Autopsy Dees vs the GWS Dollarmites - The bad & the fugly

[Captain Jack]

Also we seemed to have other talls rotating through Pedo's spot in Dunn, Garland and maybe Frawley too. Every time I looked down there (not often, given how we were playing) it was a different player!

 

[Topkent]

Also we seemed to have other talls rotating through Pedo's spot in Dunn, Garland and maybe Frawley too. Every time I looked down there (not often, given how we were playing) it was a different player!

Yeah and Pedo is the only one who can take an actual contested mark under pressure

 

[wowlace]

What? Pedo didn't play? ******* hell.

 

[Supermercado]

Why are the bulldogs not dead? - Because they rattled tins in 1989 after being left on the verge of death and have had enough up periods in the last 25 years to keep them alive with life support from the league. Had a good result in only losing $150k last year.

How did Sydney survive after 70 years of failure - Went broke in two different cities

Why are there still droves of St.Kilda supporters despite constant Grand Final disappointment and more wooden spoons than a kitchen - basically bankrupt in the 80's, not much better in the 90's, lost $2.6m last year. Still taking handouts now.

Us, the Dogs, North and St Kilda are only alive because the league wants us to be for now. Brisbane and Sydney could do anything and they'd get bailed out, but if the league ever decides to push relocations/mergers again and they stop writing cheques to our clubs we'll all be in trouble.

We can't just sit back and think we're safe because of the name or the history. The proportion of elderly people at the game yesterday was ridiculous and if we're still playing tedious, horrible football in a couple of years when they start carking it then good luck finding adult members to replace them. We've probably gained the least support of any Victorian club in the last decade. Last year when we had to go begging to the AFL for even more money should have been the wake-up call that we haven't got an automatic licence to show up every year and be a drain on the competition.

It's a good thing we reunited with the MCC because otherwise they'd probably be sitting around the boardroom table thinking about how much more money they could make if they could ship games like yesterday off to another ground.

If the grim reaper ever comes we have to make sure we're in a position that it's not coming for us. Apologies to Dogs, North and St Kilda fans but if we have to throw them under the bus to survive as the Melbourne Demons at the MCG then I'm happy to do it.

 

[Topkent]

Us, the Dogs, North and St Kilda are only alive because the league wants us to be for now. Brisbane and Sydney could do anything and they'd get bailed out, but if the league ever decides to push relocations/mergers again and they stop writing cheques to our clubs we'll all be in trouble.

We can't just sit back and think we're safe because of the name or the history. The proportion of elderly people at the game yesterday was ridiculous and if we're still playing tedious, horrible football in a couple of years when they start carking it then good luck finding adult members to replace them. We've probably gained the least support of any Victorian club in the last decade. Last year when we had to go begging to the AFL for even more money should have been the wake-up call that we haven't got an automatic licence to show up every year and be a drain on the competition.

It's a good thing we reunited with the MCC because otherwise they'd probably be sitting around the boardroom table thinking about how much more money they could make if they could ship games like yesterday off to another ground.

If the grim reaper ever comes we have to make sure we're in a position that it's not coming for us. Apologies to Dogs, North and St Kilda fans but if we have to throw them under the bus to survive as the Melbourne Demons at the MCG then I'm happy to do it.

Exactly, its not beyond the realms that we have picked up almost no new support since 2007... and Why would we get any more new support now? We are hardly on TV and when we are we are getting flogged.. We are gonna die a slow death at this rate

 

[MUYB]

Exactly, its not beyond the realms that we have picked up almost no new support since 2007... and Why would we get any more new support now? We are hardly on TV and when we are we are getting flogged.. We are gonna die a slow death at this rate

If I had a kid at the moment I don't know that I could bring myself to let them barrack for Melbourne.

 

[CTHORANGE]

If you were between the ages of 5 and 10 in 2006, so now in your mid to late teens - then really all you've ever known is your footy team is shisen housen and would be embarrassing to even barrack for. So either you've switched teams, codes or just don't care anymore. At least I can remember times when we were decent, but unfortunately we've lost a stack of kids who may have been interested even if we just ok at times in the past 8 years. And for the kids who are between 5 - 10 years old right now, well we only have a couple of years to do something or in 5 years we'll have lost their interest to, if we haven't already.

 

[Bluelegs]

Pretty good argument actually but you might what to rethink that first bit...

I get it they had to relocate and have had support from the AFL but even they looked like they were on deaths door in the 80's. Assistance from the AFL, a legendary coach and a few years of patience is what it took for them to become relevant again. Sound familiar? We've got all of that except for the patience. I expect we'll play out of our skins next week similarly to how we showed up against Port and Carlton after poor efforts the previous week. We probably wont win but Sunday was a bump in the road not the deathknell of our club.

 

[Supermercado]

I get it they had to relocate and have had support from the AFL but even they looked like they were on deaths door in the 80's. Assistance from the AFL, a legendary coach and a few years of patience is what it took for them to become relevant again.

And unlimited access to a market of 4m people for over 25 years. Sydney and Brisbane could be five times worse off than us (and financially Brisbane are) and the league wouldn't let them fail. Melbourne clubs might not always have the same luxury.

Luckily I don't think the league has got the cannon out at the moment but if any of the financially bottom four sides hit a total tailspin like Brisbane there would surely be a point where the league would stop bailing them out - and we're going to battle to turn any sort of profit this year with two games in the Northern Territory, the annual Queen's Birthday free kick, pokie revenue and the usual handouts from the Foundation Heroes. We're doing reasonably well considering the circumstances but bloody hell we're vulnerable if things go on like this.

 

[The Dr]

What? Pedo didn't play? ******* hell.

It's incredible to think we've got to the stage where we're angry about Pedo not playing. Says a lot about our team - and how much he's improved as a player - that we feel his loss when he's not out there

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Good:

Roos got the loss he needed to wake him from his 2005 slumber. You simply CANNOT instil one facet of the game at a time. Football is organic, it all has to come together at the same time and gradually build in each area. Our 1 dimensional training has been ridiculous. In the modern game each aspect depends on the other.

Disagree mate, our defense was so bad that it had to be done this way - most good teams were built this way.

If you're coming from as far back as us....

 

[CTHORANGE]

Good: Salem running back with the flight at full stretch and putting his arm out, and taking the hit to earn the free kick - loved this.

Fugly: Watts going for the mark in the forward 50 - taking a half step then doing a jumping spin move to avoid contact with Mumford who was charging at him. I know Watts got the goal in the end, but he should have taken a full step, jumped, kept front on, taken the hit and earned the damn free kick. That really did piss me right off.

 

[saj_21]

I don't think i need to say much more in regards to yesterday, it has already been said.

For me the saddest part is now, i half went to the game against the Lions not expecting to win which in turn eventuated. I had a bad feeling GWS would beat us, but they thrashed us. I just don't care, i'm not angry, i have no hope, no desire for the club or the game anymore.

 

[Ando727]

Bad - I haven't seen a win this year and im not going to north (not that we have any chance)

Even when we are going ok, we can't get near North. In fact, Melbourne vs North is number one on my "matches not to attend" list.

 

[stretcharmstrong]

Why are the bulldogs not dead? How did Sydney survive after 70 years of failure. Why are there still droves of St.Kilda supporters despite constant Grand Final disappointment and more wooden spoons than a kitchen. The kids were playing kick to kick on the G' after the game, they were sitting around me with their parents and the rest were sitting right up next to the bannisters to get a close look at the players. The club has lived through worse than what we're dealing with now.

Did anyone really think that Roos would just magically fix the embarrassment we were copping every week last year? He's neutralised it but there were always going to be some poor games. In large we've improved, having plenty of winnable games that we couldn't quite take. That's fine, work on it over pre-season, cut the spuds and keep going.

I thought Roos would have us beating an injury ravaged gws at the mcg, that's for damn sure.

 

[Dory_77]

If you were between the ages of 5 and 10 in 2006, so now in your mid to late teens - then really all you've ever known is your footy team is shisen housen and would be embarrassing to even barrack for. So either you've switched teams, codes or just don't care anymore. At least I can remember times when we were decent, but unfortunately we've lost a stack of kids who may have been interested even if we just ok at times in the past 8 years. And for the kids who are between 5 - 10 years old right now, well we only have a couple of years to do something or in 5 years we'll have lost their interest to, if we haven't already.

I know that feel; only started barracking strongly for the Dees in 05/06.

 

[Dory_77]

I thought Roos would have us beating an injury ravaged gws at the mcg, that's for damn sure.

And this x10000. They were depleted coming into the game and lost 3 of their most important players in the first half; plus a bunch of other knocks and corks etc yet we were no where near them after quarter time. Yeah things will take time but if we can't beat an understrength GWS at home then * me we've got a lot of work to do. A few flukey wins early in the year shouldn't be used as cover for performances like yesterday.

 

[Bluelegs]

I thought Roos would have us beating an injury ravaged gws at the mcg, that's for damn sure.

I'm not denying that yesterday was a disaster. But this doesn't wash away the good that has come out of the year. It's one game in a new regime, have some perspective.

 

[RandB]

Disagree mate, our defense was so bad that it had to be done this way - most good teams were built this way.

If you're coming from as far back as us....

The problem is we've gone backwards since mid-year and we were always going to under this method. It was unsustainable, predictable, laborious and it was also holding back our development in other areas which in turn indirectly enhance your defence anyway. Yes we were bad but we've conditioned ourselves in the process to be completely submissive with the football.

Nobody is arguing that our defence didn't need to drastically improve btw but the evidence is clearly there that to instill a genuine defence that can stand the test of time it is multi-faceted. If you can't defend naturally in the act of trying to win a game of football you aren't really learning anything at all in the scheme of things. You don't have to go down our road in order to learn how to tackle, zone, man up etc

I don't deny the benefits on the scoreboard from earlier this year but at the end of the day anybody can flood the back line and play keepy-off. Further it could be argued that as a group we've lost confidence and momentum because the players who can attack by nature are being weighed down by those who can't. GWS were pure confidence and pure attack on Sunday, they preyed on our band-aid approach to footy and went in for the kill - a bunch of kids with 4 key injuries. A very embarrassing game for Roos. We look like a team that is too scared to have a crack.

We've been bowling underarm to a degree. We might have saved a few boundaries but we've lost our plums and our self-respect in the process.

As such, I have to disagree TPM as well in that I don't think most good teams developed from this type of football at all. Yes, the defensive side from a personal pov is always paramount and structure is important but I never saw Saints, Pies, Cats, Hawks go about it like this leading up to their windows. Saints were a little more lock down but they didn't rely on mindless backwards rubbish when there was a game to win and they could attack on the rebound when they had to. Although ironically, of the group they were the ones not to win a flag.

As for Sydney 2005 vs 2014, they both had/have solid defence but the attacking nature of the modern version is streets ahead as it has to be in the modern game.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Good: Salem running back with the flight at full stretch and putting his arm out, and taking the hit to earn the free kick - loved this.

Fugly: Watts going for the mark in the forward 50 - taking a half step then doing a jumping spin move to avoid contact with Mumford who was charging at him. I know Watts got the goal in the end, but he should have taken a full step, jumped, kept front on, taken the hit and earned the damn free kick. That really did piss me right off.

I don't know, he's taken a fair few marks this year doing exactly the same thing - riding the contact.

It's fair to say that if Watts and Mumford both go hell for leather at the one ball in the air it's Mumford 110kg's who's winning it.

And Wattsy didn't lose his feet! I was fairly happy with that play.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

The problem is we've gone backwards since mid-year and we were always going to under this method. It was unsustainable, predictable, laborious and it was also holding back our development in other areas which in turn indirectly enhance your defence anyway. Yes we were bad but we've conditioned ourselves in the process to be completely submissive with the football.

Nobody is arguing that our defence didn't need to drastically improve btw but the evidence is clearly there that to instill a genuine defence that can stand the test of time it is multi-faceted. If you can't defend naturally in the act of trying to win a game of football you aren't really learning anything at all in the scheme of things. You don't have to go down our road in order to learn how to tackle, zone, man up etc

I don't deny the benefits on the scoreboard from earlier this year but at the end of the day anybody can flood the back line and play keepy-off. Further it could be argued that as a group we've lost confidence and momentum because the players who can attack by nature are being weighed down by those who can't. GWS were pure confidence and pure attack on Sunday, they preyed on our band-aid approach to footy and went in for the kill - a bunch of kids with 4 key injuries. A very embarrassing game for Roos. We look like a team that is too scared to have a crack.

We've been bowling underarm to a degree. We might have saved a few boundaries but we've lost our plums and our self-respect in the process.

As such, I have to disagree TPM as well in that I don't think most good teams developed from this type of football at all. Yes, the defensive side from a personal pov is always paramount and structure is important but I never saw Saints, Pies, Cats, Hawks go about it like this leading up to their windows. Saints were a little more lock down but they didn't rely on mindless backwards rubbish when there was a game to win and they could attack on the rebound when they had to. Although ironically, of the group they were the ones not to win a flag.

As for Sydney 2005 vs 2014, they both had/have solid defence but the attacking nature of the modern version is streets ahead as it has to be in the modern game.

I definitely agree with some of what you're saying mate - in fact I reckon Roos has really damaged the players mentally by continuously claiming they mentally have problems closing out the games 'which may not be able to be fixed'.

You can see the difference in our attitude in games we're expected to win vs games we're not.

I think Roosy has dropped the ball on that front.

 

[CTHORANGE]

I don't know, he's taken a fair few marks this year doing exactly the same thing - riding the contact.

It's fair to say that if Watts and Mumford both go hell for leather at the one ball in the air it's Mumford 110kg's who's winning it.

And Wattsy didn't lose his feet! I was fairly happy with that play.

I'm a supporter of Watts, and I'm usually with you on him, but on this occassion I reckon he had to take one for the team, I get that he is skilled enough to do a mid air twist and keep his eye on the ball, but I still reckon he needed to cop that one. Obviously he would come off second best, but would've earned some respect from his mates on the ground, and guaranteed him a free kick, rather than having to chance it on the ground.

 

[Cannon82]

I think Roosy has dropped the ball on that front.

I'd say he's looking for a reaction from the playing group by calling them mentally soft. Not many tried hard to prove him wrong.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

I'm a supporter of Watts, and I'm usually with you on him, but on this occassion I reckon he had to take one for the team, I get that he is skilled enough to do a mid air twist and keep his eye on the ball, but I still reckon he needed to cop that one. Obviously he would come off second best, but would've earned some respect from his mates on the ground, and guaranteed him a free kick, rather than having to chance it on the ground.

Yeah, I guess that's a fair point - at least we got the goal.

I'd say he's looking for a reaction from the playing group by calling them mentally soft. Not many tried hard to prove him wrong.

Possibly, but that might not be the best way to go about it with a group that has almost no confidence.

 

[Captain Jack]

You make some good points RandB. I agree with ThePuppetMaster that defence had to come first given how terrible we were in that regard previously. Further, there were comments around the middle of the year to the effect that there was a much more attacking focus in training than at the start of the year. That was good to hear at the time, but it really hasn't borne any fruit and in fact our scoring has probably gone backwards from early in the year.

I think the defensive focus was probably too strong at the start of the year, and it has quashed any flair or attacking spirit in the players, who are often just playing to minimise their losses.

A bigger problem though, IMO, is that those attacking and naturally talented players who looked good every other week under Bailey are not in the team any more (for the most part):

B: Bennell Frawley (shadow of his attacking 2010 self) Tapscott
HB: Morton Rivers Strauss (may not be talented)
C: Sylvia Moloney Trengove
HF: Jurrah Watts Gysberts
FF: Wonna Clark Blease

Six of those players are still on the list, with probably only Trengove and maybe Watts likely to be there next year. That's a whole lot of attacking talent which has been replaced by VFL plodders and limited triers such as McDonald, Grimes, Jones, Bail, Terlich, Nicholson, Evans, Byrnes and possibly Riley and Michie too. We have an enormous talent deficit. Fremantle can lock it down 10 times better than us (of course, they've had longer under Ross) but they have the flair and talent to open it up too - Hill, Pavlich, Fyfe, Ballantyne, Walters etc etc. We just don't have those players because we ruined most of them and lost the others to FA.

So yeah, we can complain all we like about the team being too defensive or not attacking enough, but at the end of the day most of these blokes just aren't up to scratch.

Bring on the trading bonanza. Shop them all around for whatever we can get, delist a few more and hopefully we can trade in enough senior bodies to cover all the talented kids we will need to draft.