MFC Fans Only You Are a Melbourne Board Member

[ExTasDeeMan]

If and Only IF: We have Paul Roos ready to step in.

Otherwise it's the same old s**t.

 

[Dee Won]

Voted no, not at this stage in the season and same reasons as others have given.
My main problem with Neeld is what exactly is our gameplan? is he developing our players? team selection/player positions have been??

 

[The Goon]

Can I intrude and say no.

Peter Jackson has only just stepped into the CEO role. It takes months for a CEO to at least start to get their head around an organisation. You want him to be comfortable in his knowledge of what is going right and wrong at the club across all levels before he starts to make his moves.

Getting rid of Neeld in the meantime will achieve nothing, and just take time and energy away from Jackson understanding the club. On the other hand sacking Neeld now may allow others who've contributed to the club's current situation to again meddle in the replacement process. I am of course talking about the board, who (as far as the press go) seem to mysteriously dodge all responsibility despite it ultimately being their decisions that have led to this state of affairs.

In a couple of months Jackson will be in a position to at least try to effect meaningful change, and he'll have the AFL behind him. He can then decide what the most urgent changes required are, in what order they need to be carried out, and the political implications within the club. I'd suggest as a highest priority you at least need a new process for wooing or selecting a new coach and assistants, and sacking Neeld now would not necessarily be the best way to start the process.










Plus, I don't want us to play you after you've just sacked a coach. (too soon?)

 

[Marlowe]

I vote yes, because clearly every other instinct I've had as a board member has been wrong, so the opposite must be right.

 

[Swampfox]

The supporters of our club cant see the Forrest for the trees

Who remains without scrutiny yet responsible ?

Sack the Board

 

[Klyntonius]

I've been umming and ahhing on Neelds future for the past couple of weeks and came to the conclusion before the game that I'd see him remain til seasons end no matter what. The main sticking point for me is who replaces him. For now I see no superior options available but if later in the season we've sounded out a proven coach to take on the job (assuming Neeld hasn't orchestrated a miraculous turnaround) and can give him a head start by installing him as coach before seasons end, then I'd look to sack him.

 

[melbournemartin]

No. Hold the line boys. Hold the line.

 

[melbournemartin]

Honestly though I have no idea, and I've thought about this a lot. I know Neeld has a naturally stressed looking face and has that nervous eye twitch but he looked completely shocked today and in many other games.

I remember last year when we got surprisingly close against the Saints and he was going mental. I thought that was how a coach should act. Now he just looks confused.

Our midfield is getting slaughtered? How about we put our best midfielder in the forward line. After all, it's worked so well for Trengove in the past hasn't it?

 

[Tulip]

Resounding NO from the MFC supporters voting.

 

[CM Sean]

Our midfield is getting slaughtered? How about we put our best midfielder in the forward line. After all, it's worked so well for Trengove in the past hasn't it?

Are you talking about Howe? If so, I'd prefer him in the forward line tbh. Looked promising every time he got near it up there. Has a real crack, and can take a mark. Will develop into an amazing forward alongside Clark, Dawes, and Hogan. That is of coarse unless we absolutely NEED Howe up the ground while the previous three are all playing together. Until then, leave him forward imo.

 

[melbournemartin]

Are you talking about Howe? If so, I'd prefer him in the forward line tbh. Looked promising every time he got near it up there. Has a real crack, and can take a mark. Will develop into an amazing forward alongside Clark, Dawes, and Hogan. That is of coarse unless we absolutely NEED Howe up the ground while the previous three are all playing together. Until then, leave him forward imo.

No not Howe, Jones. Jones played a lot forward in the third quarter. Granted I only have TV coverage so I can't see the whole ground, but that's what the commentators said and what it felt like.

I have generally been against Howe playing as a deep forward but he did very well from limited opportunities today. He'd have kicked 5 if more accurate.

 

[CM Sean]

Ohh. I was at the game but I didn't really notice Jones being moved to the forward line. Wasn't paying attention. Too busy bein' agro.

 

[Marns]

I said no, simply because there's nobody there to step in. Sacking the coach and putting an interim coach in won't make an ounce of difference with the blokes that we're currently putting out on the park.

 

[Sylvia Saint]

Port were never in this bad a shape but they made a gutsy call sacking Primus early in his tenure when they did and it has paid dividends for them so far (even if the bubble has burst a little).

Neeld under no circumstances can be at the club in 2014. Whether we bite the bullet now, in a month or in 2 months is probably irrelevant. But he just can't be there. If it was up to me he'd be out the door tomorrow but I suspect he'll go after an inevitable 30 goal loss, whichever good side does it do us.

 

[Tommy D]

This might seem extremely far-fetched, but why not sack MN and just not have a coach for a couple of games? Obviously have the assistant coaches give them suggestions/pointers, but ultimately the players' play their way. The boys would be able to play a more natural game style and not be caught up in all the confusion of MN's tactics.

On top of this, we'd get to see those willing to play for one another and separate/weed out those who just play for themselves, as opposed to playing for the bespectacled one.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Resounding NO from the MFC supporters voting.

I think I change my mind every few minutes...

 

[syl]

This might seem extremely far-fetched, but why not sack MN and just not have a coach for a couple of games? Obviously have the assistant coaches give them suggestions/pointers, but ultimately the players' play their way. The boys would be able to play a more natural game style and not be caught up in all the confusion of MN's tactics.

On top of this, we'd get to see those willing to play for one another and separate/weed out those who just play for themselves, as opposed to playing for the bespectacled one.

Sounds great if this were a feel good 90's movie. But we'd get crucified in real life. Just can't happen in modern professional football. Too much corporate involvement.

I love the idea though, very romantic!

 

[Klyntonius]

Sounds great if this were a feel good 90's movie. But we'd get crucified in real life. Just can't happen in modern professional football. Too much corporate involvement.

I love the idea though, very romantic!

Starring Kevin Costner as the returning James McDonald and Adam Sandler as the outgoing coach that no one likes.

 

[ramastar]

I think the NO arguments make sense. ‘It’s destabilise the club further’ , ‘what will it cost to pay him out’ , ‘whats the point if we can’t get anyone in to replace him’ etc. All make me vote no.

But then I think, in the time he has been coach we’ve won 5 games, 3 of those have been against GWS. Yes other teams like GC and PA have gotten better, but...

The fact is, we as a team are WORSE than this point last year. All under his watch. Yes it's not 100% him, the Football Department has to shoulder some blame, but he is the coach, and all he has done is develop a team that can beat witches hats.

YES

 

[Sir Hugh Percy]

I've left off getting involved in this thread until this morning because I was hoping that a new day would bring a different perspective.

Bailey was a terrible coach - didn't engender any sort of defensive mindset or equip the players with any plans to beat a team that had one and started the players down this path of not really caring about playing with any honour - but it's Neeld who has brought this club to our knees.

I started this season with more hope than I've had in years based on what this man has said about playing with toughness, yet we've been absolutely diabolical in our effort for 22 quarters out of 28. I don't really care about losing to Gold Coast - better teams than us have already done that - but to do so by 10 goals, at home and with barely a whimper, is beyond disgraceful.

Up until yesterday afternoon I was in the same boat as many of you and thought that we had to give Neeld until the end of the year because there was the problem of who you'd replace him with as caretaker. It seemed pointless and I still had a glimmer of hope that he could turn it around and get us on a bit of roll towards the end of the season. But, our players' confidence and will to fight out games is in an enormous pit that will only get deeper and harder to dig them out of if we let this continue.

Neeld is far from being the only problem we have, but he certainly isn't the answer to those problems. We need someone NOW who demands respect - literally DEMANDS it - or he'll smash the players on the track the next week (I wish he could smash their heads in with changeroom locker doors, but those days are sadly gone) or drop them to Casey. The players lack confidence in themselves and obviously lack faith in Neeld as a coach or they'd be giving him more. Now that Neeld has lost this faith, I don't see any way he can get it back. And continuing with him is not going to change anything. We'll see records tumble by the end of the season if we allow this to happen. You need to take the players' ability to think about confidence and what-ifs and replace it with "I give 100% today, or else". Gameplans and tactics are far less important at this time than galvanising the playing group to crack in, so get someone who can at least get them to do that right.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Look, I think we're missing something here as well.

We were ALWAYS going to be smashed by the Gold Coast.

We had less experience as a whole - AND they had a monstrous class advantage in the middle.

The result didn't surprise me.

However Neeld has destroyed this club on field, he's gone into a full blown rebuild in an attempt to justify his job and decisions.

As far as I can tell, a full blown rebuild of a team with 8 1/2 wins with the 2nd youngest list in the comp in 2011 was definitely NOT needed.

By all means, add defensive elements and build a culture - maybe Neelds way is the 'right way'.. it certainly is the hard way.

People were saying that it would take 10 years to fix what Bailey did to the club, I never bought into that - Bailey developed our players at the very least, even if he allowed our senior guys to run s**t.

What Neeld has transformed our midfield into will be very hard to fix in the short term - my only solace is that when that happens it will turn for us very quickly, because our front and back ends are good.

 

[Tulip]

Look, I think we're missing something here as well.

We were ALWAYS going to be smashed by the Gold Coast.

We had less experience as a whole - AND they had a monstrous class advantage in the middle.

Completely disagree.

The Gold Coast had never had their way with any team before us. They barely knew how to win, kept trying to lose it for themselves by giving it up.

The only person at fault for the fact that GC had any chance of belting the stuffing out of us in 2013 is Mark Neeld.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Completely disagree.

The Gold Coast had never had their way with any team before us. They barely knew how to win, kept trying to lose it for themselves by giving it up.

The only person at fault for the fact that GC had any chance of belting the stuffing out of us in 2013 is Mark Neeld.

I know... that's what I said in the rest of my post?

We were never going to win, and it was because of the decisions Neeld made on the selection and list management tables.

He selected a side with 50 games of experience on average - with 4 of our starting midfield 6 having less then 10 games played.

 

[ramastar]

If we were playing GC at Metricon, then yeah they'd be expected to win. But GC at the MCG! No way were we going to lose, let alone get smashed!
Sure, I could see GC winning by under 14 points, but this, I'm sorry, but anyone who said before the game 'I saw Melbourne getting smashed by GC at the G' is either a clairvoyant or lying

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

If we were playing GC at Metricon, then yeah they'd be expected to win. But GC at the MCG! No way were we going to lose, let alone get smashed!
Sure, I could see GC winning by under 14 points, but this, I'm sorry, but anyone who said before the game 'I saw Melbourne getting smashed by GC at the G' is either a clairvoyant or lying

Well, I guess I overstated us being smashed - but I had us losing by 4 goals (pretty sure I posted it in the match day thread).

But that was more due to me underestimating the skill of the Suns midfield.