50 MINUTES BEHIND CLOSED DOOR MEETING AT THE BAY

[bayman]

well after todays game glenelg held a behind closed doors team meeting which concluded after about 25 minutes but the meeting continued for at least another 25 minutes with the leadership group.

now i dont think we are far away, it is an occaisional lack of concentration but more so we have had no big strong marking forward to aim at so i'd think it is a certainty that duldig will come into the side, but after hearing what the players said no watching the body language of them when they were talking tells me their confidence is low because they said the right things to say but you could tell they were down & didn't have the belie,f the other thing that needs to improve is the skill level as i would think that we actually went into the forward 50m as many if not more times than the eagles did, but the eagles used the ball up forward a lot better & had at least 3 players that kicked multiple goals that presented themselves all day, where as i think we may've had one player that kicked more than one goal.

but as they say there is always next week

[cd]

According to stats i saw Bays went into their 50 2 more times than we went into ours.

[Wedgie]

but more so we have had no big strong marking forward to aim at

You guys should look at recruiting that Willets bloke from Westies, he's been very impressive in recent weeks.

[GWW]

but more so we have had no big strong marking forward to aim at

You guys should look at recruiting that Willets bloke from Westies, he's been very impressive in recent weeks.

Nah the Bays have already got a CHB

[bayman]

i knew somebody would say willits, i thought mal or punk would be first to though

[Wedgie]

Nah the Bays have already got a CHB

Geez mate, I wouldn't play him there, Ive seen first hand how well he leads, takes a grab and has a great kick at goal (his checkside from outside the boundary at Prospect was awesome). Any club would be foolish to play him in the backlines. Wouldn't happen.

Its probably time Glenelg changed their past policy of keeping the coach steady and look to offload Mickan.

[Mickyj]

Funny you should mention Willits pretty sure he destroyed the Eagles in their first clash last year .
And from last week he was pretty good for Westies as well.
Makes you think that a former assistant aFL coach is not as agood as glenelg think .

[GWW]

Nah leave him there, Boak will be able to leave soon when hes inevitably dropped, he'll fit in well at the Port Magpies

And as for Willits, my last comment was said in jest, Mickan and the Bays were trying to prove a point but his form the last few weeks since going to West has shown how stupid it was. Even if he wasn't to play CHF or FF surely he would have done fine in a FP.

[mal]

WILLETTS = Good SANFL footballer
He is an assett to the WA footy club now
He will be missed in the short term at the bay
In the long term I think the clubs decision to relinquish WILLETTS will prove right
The club is always bigger than the individual

To suggest MICKAN should be unloaded is a bit unfair lads
His 2006 with the bays was sensational
In 2005 they were a rabble + they played some good footy in 2006 with MICKAN

Im always amazed how people blame a coach when a team is down
There was hardly a mention about MICKAN 6 weeks ago or in 2006 being a below par coach

Teams like GL have to battle on without the quick fix recruiting of some other
high spending SANFL clubs and solve thier problems as best they can.

[RoosterMarty]

Calling 2006 "sensational" is a bit over the top considering they missed a golden chance to make the finals.

[Wedgie]

His 2006 with the bays was sensational
In 2005 they were a rabble + they played some good footy in 2006 with MICKAN

Disagree, the 2005 Bays beat North 50% of the time (and at Prospect too) in 2 games.
Not sure when Simmons got pushed but theres a chance he might have even had a 100% record v North.
The 2006 Bays beat North 0% of the time despite playing 2 games at the Bay in 3 games.
Neither made the finals so its a probably irrelevent discussion as they failed in both years.
I do agree that the late 2005 team under Burgess was a rabble though.

[am Bays]

His 2006 with the bays was sensational
In 2005 they were a rabble + they played some good footy in 2006 with MICKAN

Disagree, the 2005 Bays beat North 50% of the time (and at Prospect too) in 2 games.
Not sure when Simmons got pushed but theres a chance he might have even had a 100% record v North.
The 2006 Bays beat North 0% of the time despite playing 2 games at the Bay in 3 games.
Neither made the finals so its a probably irrelevent discussion as they failed in both years.
I do agree that the late 2005 team under Burgess was a rabble though.

Hate to disappoint you Wedgie but North aren't the benchmark of the SANFL, to Win 6 games and come 8th in 2005 (despite beating North) doesn't quite rank alongside 10 wins and 6th in 2006.....where we didn't suffer the ignomy of losing to the Wooden Spooner....

[Wedgie]

Hate to disappoint you Wedgie but North aren't the benchmark of the SANFL,

You're not disappointing me Tassie as I know you're jesting, of course we are!

[BPBRB]

His 2006 with the bays was sensational
In 2005 they were a rabble + they played some good footy in 2006 with MICKAN

Disagree, the 2005 Bays beat North 50% of the time (and at Prospect too) in 2 games.
Not sure when Simmons got pushed but theres a chance he might have even had a 100% record v North.
The 2006 Bays beat North 0% of the time despite playing 2 games at the Bay in 3 games.
Neither made the finals so its a probably irrelevent discussion as they failed in both years.
I do agree that the late 2005 team under Burgess was a rabble though.

Hate to disappoint you Wedgie but North aren't the benchmark of the SANFL, to Win 6 games and come 8th in 2005 (despite beating North) doesn't quite rank alongside 10 wins and 6th in 2006.....where we didn't suffer the ignomy of losing to the Wooden Spooner....

Not sure what your point is Tassie??? Which team are you refering to re losing to the wooden spooners???

[Wedgie]

Not sure what your point is Tassie??? Which team are you refering to re losing to the wooden spooners???

Sturt and West.

[am Bays]

In 2005 we lost to West the team then in last place and eventual wooden spooners (the back turning incident game) in 2006 we didn't lose to West who were teh Wooden Spooners....

That is not a crack at West just stating a fact from the Glenelg perspective we didn't lose to the team that came last as we had done in 2004 - 2005 (some of you will jest that in 2000-02 we used to "beat ourselves")

Not sure if we lost to you in 03 you can correct me on that.

FWIW the I don't rate our 2006 performance as anything to be satisfied with, just stating it is better than what I had to put up with since 1999.

[Wedgie]

Not sure if we lost to you in 03 you can correct me on that.

Nah, definately didn't mate, ruined our rally day to at Prospect.
We only beat Port in 2003, had 2 draws and a hell of a lot of bad losses, hard to imagine its the same club these days.
Im only teasing mate, of course 06 was better than 05, I think one of the major issues this year is missing Bryce Gibbs.
Glenelg went missing mid season last year he was playing for the state underage side too.
The kid oozed class and meant more to Glenelg than a lot of Bays supporters realised I think.

[am Bays]

[
Im only teasing mate, of course 06 was better than 05, I think one of the major issues this year is missing Bryce Gibbs.

Do you want your hook back???

[Wedgie]

[
Im only teasing mate, of course 06 was better than 05, I think one of the major issues this year is missing Bryce Gibbs.

Do you want your hook back???

Nah, already reeled it up, no bloody bites tonight.

[BPBRB]

I thought that is what he meant.

I went to the game today and as a neutral fan - the umpires make some baffling decisions with no consistency and it went both ways today. The Bays are not too far away - they had their chances and just need to find a few scoring options up forward although they missed a couple of giveme's today which didn't help their cause. I ws impressed by Smith at CHF - I thought he had the better of McGregor. He is a big target and on a small ground I couldn't work out why they didn't move him to FF and kick over CHF. Often Glenelg got the run on from the half back line but lacked confidence kicking it in long and direct - either because they had no strong marking option and more often just didn't have their little blokes at the fall of the ball when it hit the ground.

The Eagles utilised Passador and Grocke very well and both played good games overall. If one of those two fell out of the game for a period, the other stepped up and in the end, as far as focal points go, that was the difference. The Eagles will be right around the mark again especially when they get some of their missing stars back from injury.

Went back and listened to the Glenelg after match presentations and I have to say Mark Mikan bumbled through his bit, inspired no confidence and for it being just Round 7 he appeared defeated already. Whilst he is no Jarman as far as commanding an audience and media savvy, he was hardly positive or inspriational for the small corwd that hung around to hear him.