Eddie: Pies selfish

[augie]

[quote"Bunk Moreland, post: 30482742, member: 125179"]Did Eddie have the backing of the board, or did they want MM gone?

If they did, Eddie probably has a little too much power.

Eddie Is a dumbass if the guy thought it would be a good idea to have malthouse sacked in 09 when Collingwood hadb improved.[/quote]

How had Collingwood improved when the decision was made? Just lost a prelim in 2007. 6th in 2008. When the deal was struck we were 4th and looked a long way off the mark - lost by 15 goals to the Saints. But keep making things up if it helps.

 

[Checkside35]

Checkside35 this goes down the same path.

That's not a meltdown. Geez, when did the definition of a meltdown get watered down so much?

 

[bradrowe#32]

I like how people talk about Collingwood more than their own club.

It's nice.

 

[dymot]

Eddie Is a dumbass if the guy thought it would be a good idea to have malthouse sacked in 09 when Collingwood hadb improved.

How had Collingwood improved when the decision was made? Just lost a prelim in 2007. 6th in 2008. When the deal was struck we were 4th and looked a long way off the mark - lost by 15 goals to the Saints. But keep making things up if it helps.[/quote]

you only lost by 4 or 5 to the saints. Geelong got you by 10 goals or whatever in 09.

 

[dymot]

That's not a meltdown. Geez, when did the definition of a meltdown get watered down so much?

Abusing someone because you can't constructively respond to their view is a meltdown.

 

[augie]

Checkside35 this goes down the same path.

Rubbish and you know it. Walk away.

 

[Art Corvelay]

let me fill you in. eddie sacked mick.

yes, it's really that simple.

cue... "but but but, he signed a contract".

The calls for Mick to go were well and truly beating by the time the handover was announced. We were making finals but couldn't progress. What happened after the deal was announced? Mick *finally* addresses the 2 glaring deficiencies in our list - a top line ruckmen (Jolly) and a hard nosed inside mid (Ball). Additionally, kids were keeping senior players out.

I fully believe the announcement delivered us the 2010 flag. I also believe a review should have been done and Mick given more time. Having said that, the majority of 2011's grand final loss rests with Mick. He did nothing to help the club by whinging to the media through out the year, and completely failed to address tactical deficiencies against the Cats.

Will Bucks be a better coach? Hard to say. On current evidence it would be hard to make a case for yes, however, he's got complete buy in now and we won't die wondering. Last nights Copeland really has raised my expectations for 2014.

 

[Dynamics]

Look its good Eddie has come out and said what he has said but the underlying thinking seems to be that only attitude prevents pies from being a challenger.

Their list is pretty iffy. I can't seen them being top 4 next year and with Swan, Pendles reaching the twilight a drop out of the top 8 isn't beyond the realms of possibility.

The hell you say? Funny, I could have sworn Scott Pendlebury was 25 years old.

The amount of rubbish in this thread from all corners is outstanding, even by BF standards. I'm really impressed. Even the obligatory "my mate works with the cousin of the hairdresser who grooms Daisy's merkin".

From my perspective I was happy with what was said last night. The fact that the usual suspects want to make this about Dale Thomas and Mick Malthouse is as predictable as it is irrelevant to the future of the club.

 

[Monkey King]

What a surprise to see you appear here. We get it. Mick is great. Collingwood is stupid.

And of course it's no surprise to see me here. Eddie makes noise about winning the flag and being a quarter off your best ever season the following year and how you got there by being side-by-side. Surely even you blokes can see the irony in his comments, given he's the one who pushed ahead with his outdated plan to install his untried love-child.

Now I don't know about great, but Mick is one of the best coaches in the biz. Collingwood were pretty stupid for shunting him right at the minute he had the team in a rare vein of dominance.

 

[Monkey King]

You tried to say we dumped him after winning the flag. Fact is it's a blatant lie that plenty of people try to peddle.

But you did. No lie. He was coach one day and then not coach the next. Plenty were discussing whether or not you should go through with your outdated plan. No one held a gun to your heads.

 

[augie]

How had Collingwood improved when the decision was made? Just lost a prelim in 2007. 6th in 2008. When the deal was struck we were 4th and looked a long way off the mark - lost by 15 goals to the Saints. But keep making things up if it helps.

you only lost by 4 or 5 to the saints. Geelong got you by 10 goals or whatever in 09.[/quote]

St Kilda loss you refer to was in the finals, well after the decision was made.

Monday, 11 May Collingwood 5.10 (40) def. by St Kilda 20.8 (128)

 

[augie]

And of course it's no surprise to see me here. Eddie makes noise about winning the flag and being a quarter off your best ever season the following year and how you got there by being side-by-side. Surely even you blokes can see the irony in his comments, given he's the one who pushed ahead with his outdated plan to install his untried love-child.

Now I don't know about great, but Mick is one of the best coaches in the biz. Collingwood were pretty stupid for shunting him right at the minute he had the team in a rare vein of dominance.

No, they shunted him when the team had stagnated in his 10th year.

You lose the argument when you make ridiculous, childish comments like love-child. Immature and pathetic.

 

[Smoky]

But you did. No lie. He was coach one day and then not coach the next. Plenty were discussing whether or not you should go through with your outdated plan. No one held a gun to your heads.

You are obsessed with Collingwood threads and this MM being sacked etc story you appear to be driving.

FYI... being offered (and signing) a 5 year contract (2 as head coach and 3 as director of coaching) is not being sacked...

Or was the gun you talk about being held to Micks head???


P.s... trolling is a crime.

 

[smiddaz123]

But you did. No lie. He was coach one day and then not coach the next. Plenty were discussing whether or not you should go through with your outdated plan. No one held a gun to your heads.

In 2010? It was announced in 2009. He left after 2011. The flag fell smack bang in the middle.

This quote from you before is quite clearly rubbish.

"You won the 2010 flag by being side-by-side ... and then you dumped your coach."

So by your logic, the succession plan didn't actually change the fact the club was side-by-side, since....you know....it was there for the event you claimed happened while side-by-side.

 

[smiddaz123]

but Mick is one of the best coaches in the biz. Collingwood were pretty stupid for shunting him right at the minute he had the team in a rare vein of dominance.

Any particular reason you think his side lost twice to Buckley to dud in 2013?

 

[smiddaz123]

FYI... being offered (and signing) a 5 year contract (2 as head coach and 3 as director of coaching) is not being sacked....

This is what gets lost on some people. Mick was compliant in all this and was pretty public about needing a break from coaching and he talked about his desire to spend more time with his grand kids while they were still growing up.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

No one boos Heath Scotland

I do. But that's because the tosser campaigner eye-gouged a Collingwood player in 2005, and not because he's an ex-Collingwood player.

 

[Monkey King]

No, they shunted him when the team had stagnated in his 10th year.

You lose the argument when you make ridiculous, childish comments like love-child. Immature and pathetic.

I agree that in 2009 it looked like a good plan. But shit changes and in life and business you need to adapt to change, not obstinately stick with outdated ideas that are no longer relevant. Do this and you're fried.

You can criticise the love-child comment all you like, but Ed's feeling about Buckley clearly played a massive role in this coaching changeover. It's a fair comment, if not a childish means of expression.

 

[Monkey King]

You are obsessed with Collingwood threads and this MM being sacked etc story you appear to be driving.

Not obsessed, but I do have a strong interest in the outcome of the succession plan. For a minute I thought you blokes were going to equal our premiership record, so when Eddie pushed ahead with the succession plan in 2011, I thought it was just arrogant madness; which is why I find these comments of his so ironically amusing and worthy of comment.

FYI... being offered (and signing) a 5 year contract (2 as head coach and 3 as director of coaching) is not being sacked...

Mick had a job as head coach ... a job he wanted to keep. He was told he couldn't keep it. That's being dumped mate, no matter the window dressing.

 

[Monkey King]

Any particular reason you think his side lost twice to Buckley to dud in 2013?

I have never called Buckley a dud. I just think when you have a set up producing Grand Finals and premierships that you don't **** with it for no good reason.

Why did Carlton lose twice to Buckley/ I'd say the foremost reason is that you have a better side.

"You won the 2010 flag by being side-by-side ... and then you dumped your coach."

So by your logic, the succession plan didn't actually change the fact the club was side-by-side, since....you know....it was there for the event you claimed happened while side-by-side.

Not sure of your point here tbh. You did dump your coach after he won a flag. Bad move and I think that's being played out now right in front of your eyes. Yes the succession plan was in place when the flag was won, but who was thinking about it. The players probably thought if they won a flag that sense would prevail and Mick would retain his job. In 2011 though, when it was becoming obvious that Ed was going to plough ahead with the outdated plan, players talked of petitioning the board. It's clear that from this point, side-by-side was under strain. If Ed's pointing fingers, he should not hold himself immune.

 

[invinciBlues]

Everyone has their own perspective and I respect your opinion, but with respect to you in my personal opinion you are not a true passionate supporter of your club.

I doubt you'll find a single Carlton supporter prepared to boo Betts. I cant speak for the others but I just cant bring myself to even say a bad word about him. Got some great years from him and he wears his heart on his sleeve.

Maybe that will change, but I really dont think it will.

 

[dickballsack]

Why is any of this talk a surprise to anyone? It was front page news everywhere in the pre season that a group of players led by Luke ball confronted pert and maguire about some disturbing behaviour of a group of team mates which culminated in pert asking for a league wide forum on drugs. Unfortunately the wrong player(s) where implicated but I think we can guess where the issues were. Also the 2 players who were always reported to be the ring leaders of the push against any change were BJ who was brought up on stage while bucks let everyone know that 'he was the glue that held the club together' and swan who said ' I will never play for another club, I am a pie for life, you will never see me walk out of this club'. Pies supporters that were up in arms pre season when these stories surfaced should now know they had substance and everyone should know that swan and johnno (and didak actually) were wrongly included in the stories.

 

[Dynamics]

Why is any of this talk a surprise to anyone? It was front page news everywhere in the pre season that a group of players led by Luke ball confronted pert and maguire about some disturbing behaviour of a group of team mates which culminated in pert asking for a league wide forum on drugs. Unfortunately the wrong player(s) where implicated but I think we can guess where the issues were. Also the 2 players who were always reported to be the ring leaders of the push against any change were BJ who was brought up on stage while bucks let everyone know that 'he was the glue that held the club together' and swan who said ' I will never play for another club, I am a pie for life, you will never see me walk out of this club'. Pies supporters that were up in arms pre season when these stories surfaced should now know they had substance and everyone should know that swan and johnno (and didak actually) were wrongly included in the stories.

We can thank Caroline Wilson for that. She wrote a piece demanding that Swan be sacked by Collingwood. I haven't bought The Age since and won't while she works there.

 

[dickballsack]

We can thank Caroline Wilson for that. She wrote a piece demanding that Swan be sacked by Collingwood. I haven't bought The Age since and won't while she works there.

Absolutely! It's the thing everyone hates about journos. They get a story like the one we're discussing about a serious issue at the pies and she uses a hunch to beef up the story with no factual evidence, a year on its clearly proved false but that doesn't help swan ( or his friends and family that would've questioned him) and there's zero accountability on Wilson for a blatant misrepresentation on someone.

 

[SBYM]

In other news I just put my old fella on the kitchen table and whacked it with the heel of my shoe...

Turns out it was more fun than the tired shit doing the rounds in this thread...who would've thought?