Autopsy Blues V GWS. Rant away folks....

[SE_Blue]

About the only good thing of going to this game was that during the third quarter I stood behind Tom Scully and his family and watched his enormous father eat six buckets of chips in a quarter.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

About the only good thing of going to this game was that during the third quarter I stood behind Tom Scully and his family and watched his enormous father eat six buckets of chips in a quarter.

That sounds revolting.

 

[Sin City]

I think the dust has settled and it's safe to come in

We lost because we were beaten to the ball in the middle of the ground all day. Credit to GWS, they were first to the ball and I've said it before but this is where most games are won or lost. Winning the ball, pressuring the other team when they have the ball (they managed 19 more tackles than us even though they controlled the play).

I'll go back to our best game this year and the game that looked like we might be turning the corner which was against the Bulldogs and that was when we moved Simpson on the ball alongside Murphy and Gibbs. Indeed they had some grunt next to them for support in Bell, Curnow and Carrazzo but with those three onballers getting to the ball first against a bloody good contested ball team the result had been decided before half time.

Even with Murphy out on Sunday Simpson stayed in the back line for much of the game but that's no excuse. Chris Judd doesn't exactly reinvent the wheel in his style of play, he just uses his strength and speed to get to the ball first. That has to be the aim of every player on the ground. It's funny how much better your outside players look when your midfielders are winning the ball and the pressure game and how much better your forwards look when you're winning the ball in the right places on the ground and delivering it to them.

I feel Everitt may be too good of an offensive weapon to be used in these negating roles. He needs to either partner up with Menzel as a medium forward or play as a rebounding defender to allow Walker forward as we need another player who can score.

 

[blueboy25]

About the only good thing of going to this game was that during the third quarter I stood behind Tom Scully and his family and watched his enormous father eat six buckets of chips in a quarter.

He must be on a diet

 

[SE_Blue]

That sounds revolting.

Yep. Earning his $100,000 a year or whatever it is.

He must be on a diet

Looked like it. Went to Question Time at Parliament House yesterday and saw Clive Palmer, bloke could hardly walk, tuck his shirt in or even get into his seat and he still wasn't the most unfit person I've seen in the past few days.

 

[pumped]

It goes back to before Pagan. It started with Parkin empowering the playing list & the players took it to a whole new level under Brittain, who had little control over the players. By the time Pagan came in the older players were running the club & this continued right through the Pagan & Ratten years.

Our club is very much like Collingwood through the early to mid '70s, when the players were deified by officials & supporters alike & therefore did not have to get the results on the field to earn the accolades of their loyal followers. Our players need to have the self-importance knocked out of them, just like Hafey did at Collingwood.

Interesting perspective. I actually see the Brittain situation differently. I had a fair bit to do with the players back then and Brittain had their respect and certainly was not in any way walked over by the players. The year he was sacked we had an enromous amount of injuries and the club went to a knee jerk reaction in getting Pagan. I believe if we had of stuck with Brittain that the last decade or so could have been far more successful.

 

[Windhover]

I'd consider myself a realist and I reckon I can put my flag down enough to see things clearly enough without getting worked up about a loss or carried away with a win (although let it be known I have also been known to do this).

I don't let my feelings get summarised at the final siren, I watch how the boys react after the game (win or loss), what the players have to say in their interviews, but more importantly I watch very closely to what Mick has to say after the game.

TBH I think this is where you are doing it wrong, although I think lipreading Mick has some advantages over having to listen to his crap.

I think that reveals more than anything. He's working it out step by step.

OK, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I would be grateful if you could explain what evidence you have that MM is working anything out. IMO he is clueless and our position on the ladder and losing to lions, melb, rich and GWS kind of supports that.

I've been following Carlton all my life. Mick hasn't had that luxury (for the lack of a better term). He's been given 1 full year and has had his 1st year of changing the list in the direction he wants. There is no debating that was our best off season in recent memory and he will do the same thing again next year.

Really? You reckon keeping Duigan, Scottie, Watson and Bootsma whilst telling Laidler to piss off was good list development. I call it a disgrace. I also think paying $700K for a favourite son outside mid who plays crippled compared with his pre-injury form is a long term list bomb and team morale destroyer, even if "pushing up" (daisies) is a great bloke that "will get the other players out of their shell".

You can't get it to where it needs to be in 1 year, and he will now have had 2 years to have a good look at the players and get to know who has it and who doesn't. He will be telling those around him what needs to happen and they will be making that happen. In the one instance last year where they couldn't get it done (Everitt) and he went and closed the deal himself.

How long do you give him MileHigh? 3 years? 5 years? Meanwhile Hinkley seems to have a clue over at Port Adelaide. Go figure.

He has finally gotten down to the fact it is not necessarily the talent of the list, its the mentality of the list. MM won't suffer fools easily, and now that he has made this link he will make it his focus, and anyone he sees not cutting the mustard is going to find themselves on the out pretty quickly

Tell me MileHigh, who is responsible for "the mentality of the list". I would argue the coach is responsible for that. You seem to think it has taken MM nearly 2 years to work it out and yet he is still praised from on (mile)high. You reckon he won't suffer fools easily but . . . didn't Bootsma get a 2 year contract at the end of last year? Oh, yes, he did.

IMO my beloved Blues have no hope of going anywhere with MM as coach (for many more reasons than the tip of the iceberg I have given in response to your unsupported assertions). It is for this reason I have (since the Richmond game this year) been very happy with every disastrous loss. (This way I can't lose. I am happy when we win and happy when we lose). I want MM to be so humiliated he resigns and then I am prepared to enter a conversation about what the list needs.

 

[MileHigh]

Its taken a MM for us to not be knee jerk reactionists. If it was any other coach we'd be callimg for his head. Fortunately we took the most experienced coach around which doesnt afford us the opportunity to do so.

 

[pumped]

Its taken a MM for us to not be knee jerk reactionists. If it was any other coach we'd be callimg for his head. Fortunately we took the most experienced coach around which doesnt afford us the opportunity to do so.

Think the board went for an experienced and high profile coach as they were looking for a saviour rather than dealing with their own issues. Also gave them a perfect out clause if it didn't work.

 

[Windhover]

Its taken a MM for us to not be knee jerk reactionists. If it was any other coach we'd be callimg for his head. Fortunately we took the most experienced coach around which doesnt afford us the opportunity to do so.

I agree with you that we should not sack MM. That is why I want him to be humiliated into resigning. I challenge you to state objective measures of progress by which you would be prepared to judge MM. My prediction is either your objective measures will be ridiculous (i.e. we will make the finals in 5 years) or MM will not meet them. Over to you.

 

[Windhover]

Think the board went for an experienced and high profile coach as they were looking for a saviour rather than dealing with their own issues. Also gave them a perfect out clause if it didn't work.

I think they went for a coach who was over the hill. I guess he was a better choice than Hafey or Barrassi, but only just.

 

[Aphrodite]

I agree with you that we should not sack MM. That is why I want him to be humiliated into resigning. I challenge you to state objective measures of progress by which you would be prepared to judge MM. My prediction is either your objective measures will be ridiculous (i.e. we will make the finals in 5 years) or MM will not meet them. Over to you.

I think they went for a coach who was over the hill. I guess he was a better choice than Hafey or Barrassi, but only just.

WOW!

 

[Windhover]

WOW!

I know, I know, fancy asking for "objective measures" of progress.

 

[Silvagnis]

I agree with you that we should not sack MM. That is why I want him to be humiliated into resigning. I challenge you to state objective measures of progress by which you would be prepared to judge MM. My prediction is either your objective measures will be ridiculous (i.e. we will make the finals in 5 years) or MM will not meet them. Over to you.

You can't objectively say that another coach such as Roos, Hinkley, Richardson or Mick's heir would be doing a better job.

Perhaps you can be humiliated into changing your views and getting a clue.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

You can't objectively say that another coach such as Roos, Hinkley, Richardson or Mick's heir would be doing a better job.

Perhaps you can be humiliated into changing your views and getting a clue.

First part is fine, second is having a shot at the poster. Works both ways.

 

[Windhover]

You can't objectively say that another coach such as Roos, Hinkley, Richardson or Mick's heir would be doing a better job.

I do not know about "can't" but I do not say it and query its relevance. What I do say is that MM is finished as a senior coach and the sooner he realises it the better. We cannot progress with him. It follows anyone who is not MM at least gives us a chance at progress. Any drover's dogs around?

Perhaps you can be humiliated into changing your views and getting a clue.

Maybe, but sound reasoning opposing my opinion might have a better chance. Is that possible?

 

[JustaBattler]

Malthouse was desperate to coach again so he fibbed about the state of Carlton's list promising great things in short time - because (to quote his own words) "there is no problem with the playing list"...

His game plan nonsense along the boundary "defense first" was an even bigger nonsense - because defense starts with tackling properly and no one Carlton has a clue about tackling. This list was put together by people who favoured running one way and outscoring opponents - rather than stopping them and winning the moving maul game that has become all the vogue. Carlton was the game's 'entertainers' but would falter against harder sides in finals.

Early this year, Malthouse smelled the winds of change ( no doubt Swan gave him the heads up about not likely being at Carlton in 2015 ) and Malthouse met with the Board and did what every clever cunning Fox does - when faced with reality, he told the troof. No doubt words along the lines of " the problem with Carlton has been shyte recruiting and development and the list is pretty ordinary and has to be fixed " I need more time...

So now supporters have to swallow the bitter pill of a wasted decade, and the new regime is looking to malthouse as 'the best available and the right man" to get Carlton back to where it should be...( whatever that means)..

I have no doubt that ANYONE could do a better job of recruiting than those who chose a ( for example and with apologies to TG) a Lucas ahead of a Talia etc etc etc- so I also have no doubt that the list under Malthouse will be gradually improved. I expect the new Carlton to be competitive with the better sides - as soon as tackling becomes 'fashionable' and some forwards learn to mark the ball and kick goals.

I doubt very much that Malthouse will be around when carlton next seriously competes for #17 or is it #23 now?

 

[BlueTongue]

I can appreciate you boys don't like the taste of a loss, but we aren't as far away as many seem to think we are.

MM is getting to the bottom of the problem. He has come out and said we are mentally weak and doesn't know why we don't show up against lower sides and the fact we can't seem to string 3 performances together. We have known this for ages, but don't forget MM hasn't watched our club as intimately as we have over the years. The very fact that he has said that it will now be addressed, and I for one think it is the biggest problem that we have. We don't know how to be disciplined for 4 quarters, and we don't know how to be disciplined week after week. Once MM makes this a focus, you are going to see that nobody gets away with dropping off from here on in and our side is going to turn it around.

This seasons done and has been for weeks now, but I fully expect us to be back in 8 next year and causing some real headaches as Mick gets a 2nd year of coaching this club under his belt, and is given a 2nd opportunity to bring in players that he needs and moves on those who don't have what it takes above the shoulders to get the job done.

It is a process and he is tightening things up, and expect the leakage to become less and less and the outfit to become more professional next year.

(In the meantime I am hoping we don't take away too many more wins so we can draft some serious talent over a group of players with no much between them, or have some serious trade currency come years end).

If it took him 6 months to work out we are mentally weak, and only now start addressing it, then we are in big trouble.
...BTW, This IS his 2nd year as Coach!

 

[BluStreak]

I think they went for a coach who was over the hill. I guess he was a better choice than Hafey or Barrassi, but only just.

Windy, who in your opinion would have been a better coach, that was available?

 

[mediumsizered]

You read some of the posts about Malthouse & it is almost de javu of the 2012 season.

The problem with our club is we overrate our players, not necessarily the younger ones, who are knocked for not being Ollie Wines or Chad Wingard, nor the unfashionable journeymen types, who are knocked for not being Martin Pyke or Darren Jolly, rather the better players who play at an adequate level, but who don't have the hunger to be like their counterparts at Hawthorn, Geelong or Sydney.

It is much easier to talk about sacking the coach or, & this is just bizarre, humiliating the coach into resigning. This sort of mentality is what destroyed the Richmond Football Club after their successful era in the '60s & '70s & also what messed us up in the late '80s. It is knee jerk stuff & it very rarely pays dividends, except when you don't limit it to sacking the coach, but going right through the club, from the board right down to some of your better players, ala Hawthorn in the mid '00s.

Sacking the coach (or humiliating him into resigning) won't resolve the real issues at our club. It will just paper over the flaws in our club, much like the change from Ratten to Malthouse did (FWIW, the argument that Ratten needed to be sacked because we had a Top 4 list which was under-performing has been shown up for the furphy that it was & the reality is we now need a coach like Malthouse who will turn over the list & turn boiled lollies into chocolates).

 

[Azul]

You don't sack a coach on top dollar half way through a contract.

That said, you don't extend a contract for a coach that finishes outside the top eight 2 years in a row on the strength of winning a preseason competition. (Pagan)

Is Malthouse the man to take us beyond 2015? I remain unconvinced but he has another 31 games to turn the side around.

A lot can happen in trade week and over a preseason. Who knows, we might even stumble on a mature 18yo with our top 10 pick who demands to be selected from the get-go.

 

[Windhover]

Windy, who in your opinion would have been a better coach, that was available?

Let me be clear BluStreak. I do not believe a Board should sack a coach midway through the contract without cause. I do not see why my membership fees should go towards paying someone NOT to be our coach. If a Board is stupid enough to appoint a coach that mid-contract, the Board thinks was a mistake then the first thing the Board should do is resign. Because the Board has proved it is not competent in its most important function - appointing a coach.

I do not know all the circumstances behind Ratten's sacking so I cannot definitively comment on whether there was cause for sacking him mid-contract. My assumption (happy to be corrected) is that the reason the Board sacked Ratts was NOT because they had lost faith in Ratts but rather they thought MM would be better. That's what Sticks has always said anyway but maybe he is just trying to protect his mate. Certainly nothing suggests sufficient cause for sacking Ratten (otherwise he would not be fit to be an assistant coach). If there was no sufficient cause then Ratts should have continued as coach to the end of his contract.

Assuming there was sufficient cause to sack Ratts at the end of 2012 I do not have an opinion as to who would have been the best coach. What I do know is that a Board that had proven its incompetence once (by having to sack Ratts mid-contract), should have gone through an exhaustive review of ALL coaching options before appointing anyone. We all know MM was a done deal when Ratts was sacked. So a stupid Board enhanced its stupidity by failing to go through any proper selection process. Had I sat on the selection committee that had gone through a proper selection process for all I know MM may have been my choice. (Not that I would regard my opinion on the subject as being of any importance, but you did ask).

The point is not to look backwards (as your question directs) but to look forward. For reasons already given I do not think the Board should sack MM. They were stupid enough to appoint him so why trust them to suddenly grow brains. On the other hand it is my firm opinion that we will go nowhere fast with MM as our coach. We can do all the recruiting and trading we like but with MM we can go nowhere.

I did not reach this opinion as a "knee-jerk" reaction. I thought MM might well envigorate a good list hit by injury with a new approach to game plan and training routine. I waited all 2013 waiting to see our players adopt with success the MM game plan. Regrettably I did not see it. Our best wins occurred when, having been beaten all day, the game plan was thrown away and the players just attacked the footy and ran forward. Round 23 against Port is a classic example. At the end of 2013 I was unhappy with MM but even then I thought, ok, maybe it can take a while for a coach and team to click and I withheld judgment. I was not happy about the recruitment of a "favourite son", particularly not one who was under an injury cloud. How right the Pies were not to pay Daisy what he demanded.

I went to our first game this year against Port. We jumped them in the first quarter and I thought maybe we were getting something going. After quarter time Port killed us in general play and there was simply no response from MM to the Port running game. We were very lucky to be in front at 3/4er time and the last quarter was as distressing as it was predictable. Very. Still I reserved judgment, after all that was only one game.

Half-way through the second quarter against Richmond in round 2 I am afraid I lost faith in MM. At that stage of the game we were being thrashed in general play by a team I (rightly) predicted would not amount to much. I could not believe the number of times we kicked long out of the backline down the line to 3 opposition players and maybe 1 blue. This gave Richmond uncontested possession on the wing with the whole forward-line opened out like a can of sardines. I was utterly unsurprised by our losses to Melbourne, Brisbane and GWS (even though I did not predict any of them). I was surprised by our loss to Geelong. I thought even MM would know how to win a game 7 points up with minutes left on the clock. I over-estimated MM on that one.

So I wait for MM to go. He should not be sacked nor should he be resigned. Hopefully he will gain some self-knowledge and have a longer and happier retirement than he will otherwise have without that self-knowledge. I repeat, until MM is gone, we can go nowhere.

(PS. If Ratts had seen out his contract we may have been in the market for Roos. It certainly hasn't taken Roos 2 years to impose his method on the Melbourne list. Just saying.)

 

[ESKIE]

Lot of I's in there

 

[Moody Blue]

Malthouse is not the problem yet, but he is not the guru many have made him out to be. His comments this season have been so contradictory. At the start of the season he made a valid point which has probably been forgotten in that 18 or 20 players had surgery during the off season which really set the club back in pre season. Since then he has gone back and forth about windows, and turning over the list, and as recently as last week he came out and stated that the club would not be cutting as many players as everyone predicted, even though a month before he was talking about bringing in another 10 players to compliment the change made to last season's list. Malthouse will not play young players for the sake of giving them experience. There is some merit in what he says, but we now have a barometer to measure which path is the right way.

St.Kilda appointed Richardson at best a competent assistant and they have aggressively traded and play as many young players as they can to give them experience. Seven players under 21 years of age. They have suffered some big losses and if it continues Richardson will get the sack. In three years they could be back to the drawing board as many of their so called recruits just don't develop, or they could be challenging for a top 6 spot or they could watch as their players are picked off by opposition clubs offering them huge contracts.

Melbourne have done well with their boring footy and as they pick up players may become a threat but Roos will move on in 2 years and Melbourne will be back to their dysfunctional best. Richmond is probably in a worse position than Carlton at the moment with their list and Hardwick is now under pressure from the ferals. The Bulldogs have been developing for five years and they are no closer to reaching their goals despite having a very experienced 'coach'.

Then you have Port. Down and out and their list was considered useless. Hinkley turned it all around in a couple of years and there he was sitting under everyone's noses being ignored and passed up for jobs.

Mick has 700 games under his belt and a wealth of knowledge and it would be foolish to disregard this. When his contract is due then we can have a look at what is around.

 

[BluStreak]

Thanks Windy for your reply.
I wanted Ratten to see out his contract as well and then for us to have a go at Roos. The Club saw it a different way. I accept that.

I have no idea why our players have not brought into Mick's game plan. But when watching our players last year it appeared they were in 2 minds on where to go.
It appeared to me that they wanted to go one way but would go the other because they thought that was what the coach wanted.
Those times you mentioned when the game plan was 'thrown out' were times when I believe Mick said just back yourself.

This year we have performed worse (win/loss) but again I believe it is on the back of numerous players who are not fit or are out of form and we do not have anyone in the reserves pushing for selection. I do not believe we are playing the boundry line this year. I believe that Mick has adjusted and we are no longer hugging the boundry.
I also believe that we are seeing improvements in the way our football department is structured and run ( Northern Blues playing a similar game to Carlton, being coached to the same game plans, player development is more visible to see etc). Yarran is playing consistently, Gibbs is playing better football, Cas is kicking with confidence etc.
There is a plan.
Being based in Canberra means that I can not see these things with my own eyes (other than FTA and internet) but we have reliable posters in Harker, MSR, HBF and others who do.

On Daisy, I believe that his fitness levels have increased but he still lacks strength in his ankle. This will be rectified over the next preseason. I am happy with his acquision as he improves our team. He encourages, adds voice, is not a shrinking violet, trains hard, is not a 'soft c...' and livens up our playing group.
No idea what he is being paid but I do not believe that it is above $700K as purported in the media.

Sorry for the long winded response.