Bring on the Magpies says Malthouse

Remove this Banner Ad

Monkey King said:
That's a matter for Hine, not Malthouse. For Mick, he had shown a willingness to trade first rounders for ruckmen well before Jolly and the succession plan.
Click to expand...

Not for short term ruckmen though. With Jolly (and Ball for that matter) it was the first time he traded with IMMEDIATE results in mind. The only other time he came close to chasing a name player while we were in the window was with Woewodin, a plodding midfielder our plodding midfield didnt really need.
 
Timmy from Thomastown said:
Not sure how that helps your argument. Morrison was a filler player that Malthouse was quite happy to fill the list with.
Click to expand...

Yes. Mick traded for players right through his tenure. His offer for Ball was not out of line with any past action. Nothing special. Nothing unique. Nothing inspired by a sense of urgency.

Timmy from Thomastown said:
Its trades like that that could easily have seen him sacked many years ago. It was only the faith and vision of Maguire that kept him at the club when we had a few down years post 02 and 03.
Click to expand...

LOL. "Only the faith and vision of Maguire ..."

mirror-delusion-deluded.jpg

Deluded!​
 
Timmy from Thomastown said:
Collingwood strategised to get their man. They got their man. What happened at the trade table and on draft day has got nothing to do with Malthouse walking away from anything. What a nonsense suggestion.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. Collingwood had a limit on what they wanted to pay ... unders. Nothing they hadn't done with other targeted players who were forced into the draft. Their strategy was let him pass if they had to pay his price. In the end, with a slice of luck, they got their man. If Mick was all about urgency, he would have reached for Ball. He didn't. The suggestion is plain stupid in fact.

Timmy from Thomastown said:
He wanted Ball and he wanted Jolly....and coicincidence or not (believe what you want to believe) he didnt chase any players of their calibre in his entire tenure until after the succession plan was in place.
Click to expand...

Crap. Jolly was a good player for the Swans, but we're not talking All Australian ruckman here. He worked out well for the Pies and was just what they needed, but you blow this up into much more than it is. He walked from the Swans and was available; Malthouse took him for basically what he took Wood with a couple of years before, when he was available. Chances are if Jolly put himself on the market back then, it wold have been him instead of Wood who was taken.

As for Ball, the calibre of before and after he was taken by the Pies is quite different. Mick was willing to put up as much for a trade as he always had been; and in fact, was willing to pass if that wasn't accepted, which he did. He'd done the same with similar quality in Nick Stevens before, the only difference being that Stevens wasn't a broken body unavailable for medical screening and was thus taken before the Pies could snaffle him for cheap.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

who gives a crap about what he did or didn't, he was instrumental in 2010 and the number of finals we made. He also had many assistants etc and they also played a hand, as of course the players. It was a team and club effort not just one man. So even if Carlton have malthouse have they the other cattle to get the truck moving? this question will be answered over the coming years. I just wish I knew why he wanted to go to Carlton, it still makes no sense, but that is my sentiments taking over.
 
malteaser said:
who gives a crap about what he did or didn't, he was instrumental in 2010 and the number of finals we made. He also had many assistants etc and they also played a hand, as of course the players. It was a team and club effort not just one man. So even if Carlton have malthouse have they the other cattle to get the truck moving? this question will be answered over the coming years. I just wish I knew why he wanted to go to Carlton, it still makes no sense, but that is my sentiments taking over.
Click to expand...
Ego would have a lot to do with it:thumbsu:
 
Monkey King said:
.

As for Ball, the calibre of before and after he was taken by the Pies is quite different. Mick was willing to put up as much for a trade as he always had been; and in fact, was willing to pass if that wasn't accepted, which he did. He'd done the same with similar quality in Nick Stevens before, the only difference being that Stevens wasn't a broken body unavailable for medical screening and was thus taken before the Pies could snaffle him for cheap.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the reason why Collingwood are the best run club in the AFL
 
Based on one half-assed pre-season game, I think Carlton may still struggle handling monster forwards like Travis Cloke. Even though Jamison didn't play in the GWS game, nobody handled Patton well at all. In Collingwood they'll have both Cloke and Lynch to contend with.

Collingwood are still a top team and deserve to be favorites, even with history aside.

It'll be a cracker regardless.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Old Spice said:
Mick only came to Collingwood after Eddie promised to feather the nest for him, just as WC did before us. When the infrastructure aint there and Mick is standing naked in his glory - a la Doggies - his record isn't so flash.
Click to expand...

So why did the Eagles get him?

Putting aside the fact that this is the umpteenth 'OMG, Champion Data says the 2012 Blues are just like the 2006 Geelong team!!!' thread by the OP: kudos to Malthouse for breathing life into a rivalry that has become somewhat stale for neutrals over the past 20 years or so. Over that time, Collingwood and Carlton have finished less than 12 premiership points apart only six times: the wacky 1993 season; and five times when both sides were mediocre or worse. Both teams have not been serious premiership contenders at the same time for a generation.
 
Timmy from Thomastown said:
Not for short term ruckmen though. With Jolly (and Ball for that matter) it was the first time he traded with IMMEDIATE results in mind. The only other time he came close to chasing a name player while we were in the window was with Woewodin, a plodding midfielder our plodding midfield didnt really need.
Click to expand...

and from memory melbourne approached collingwood about doing the deal.
 
MC Extra Dollop said:
Putting aside the fact that this is the umpteenth 'OMG, Champion Data says the 2012 Blues are just like the 2006 Geelong team!!!' thread by the OP...
Click to expand...

You do know that I was calling the shots many months before the Champion Data analysis was made, right?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Bring on the Magpies says Malthouse

Similar threads

lizard man
Bring back the super goal!
2
Replies
31
Views
707
Elixuh
Elixuh
Cleric
Expansion Are FS and Academy Juniors exempt from bring taken by Tasmania?
Replies
7
Views
152
Cleric
Cleric
Bucking Bronco
Analysis Who did it better - Malthouse or Clarkson?
Replies
10
Views
421
M Malice
M Malice
Taper
Andrew Dillon flags interest in bringing back State of Origin
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
164
Views
4K
Howard Littlejohn
Howard Littlejohn
J
Roast Why do people keep saying choking a lead will be a good lesson for the losing team?
Replies
2
Views
221
Mr Cheese
Mr Cheese
Taper
Graham Cornes says Port are mentally fragile
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
4K
Freomaniac
Freomaniac
ibd77
Opinion Bringing Back The “Night Time Premiership"
Replies
19
Views
1K
jim boy
jim boy

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top