Eddie: Pies selfish

[Boston tiger]

I've seen a few award nights go astray because coach / president wants to have whinge or have an axe to grind.
Everyone should just celebrate be gracious. Just spoils the night otherwise.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

side by side.

Ughh....that's why he's been shown the door genius.

Side by Side has to work both ways otherwise there is no one to stand next to.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Where is the sexism in that post?

He criticised Caro. He's sexist. Don't you know how this works?

 

[RuFiO]

Everyone's shellfish.

 

[Onestitch]

The true succession plan shd have been Bucks take over from Eddie. The man is a diplomat. Pies "played" for MM. They were tight and feared. Bucks is just another administrator to the guys now. I have not seen much passion from this group during his tenure. On the B&F? Well, Collingwood are very insecure and have long been held to account by the words of their song. They "own" their players and will counter no inkling of rejection. Shaw and Thomas would have been on a hiding to nothing if they had attended. I wish them both luck and longevity.

 

[jerry springer]

Eddie bang on again.Stop the presses!

 

[Monkey King]

So he signed the contract... but didn't want too?

Err ... duh! Imagine a bloke says to you, we either kill you now, or you can sign this contract and we'll kill you in 2 years instead. Are you gonna sign it? Of course you are if you want to keep living. Then in two years time everyone says you wanted to die and they didn't murder you, coz you signed a contract.

Turn it up!

 

[Monkey King]

Yep 1 flag in 12 years best coach in VFL/AFL history

LOL. The post you were replying to simply said the team was playing much better under Mick. This reply of yours doesn't even make sense.

FWIW, making the Grannie every third year is a pretty reasonable record. I get the feeling you'll be begging for these kind of results in the years to come mate.

 

[Gone Critical]

Err ... duh! Imagine a bloke says to you, we either kill you now, or you can sign this contract and we'll kill you in 2 years instead. Are you gonna sign it? Of course you are if you want to keep living. Then in two years time everyone says you wanted to die and they didn't murder you, coz you signed a contract.

Turn it up!

Geez MK even by your standards this is over the top. Your rhetoric in these Collingwood threads you pervade is increasingly shrill and repeditive. You pronounce mantras like they are truths and stifle any sensible debate.

What a bizarre example you have above. It doesn't lend itself to any reasonable discussion. Malthouse had choices albeit not the one he really wanted. However as he posted in his own blog as late as 25/7/2011 he did have some choices.


"The final reason I won’t be switching clubs is that I have a contract with Collingwood for a further three years after this one, in a different role to my current position. I signed it in good faith that I could continue to help in developing the team and the club beyond my reign as senior coach.
The day-to-day role of Director of Coaching is still being determined, as it is a difficult position to define. Will it be like Mark Thompson’s assistant coaching role at Essendon? He sits in the box on match days and is involved in team selection and game planning.
Or will it have elements of the David Parkin approach with Wayne Brittain at Carlton, where he seemed to have a close mentoring association with his successor?
The answers here are, no. It won’t look like either of these roles.
The Collingwood role basically needs to justify its existence. It needs to help the club move forward. It should make use of my experience and knowledge, as 28 years of coaching practice has provided me with some tips, techniques and methods to pass on.
However, whatever the role becomes, it must provide the club with what it needs to be successful. Nathan Buckley needs to be comfortable and happy with it, as do the rest of the football department.
Most of all, the Collingwood players need to be happy.
For all the talk, the playing group has known and accepted from day one, that Nathan would be their coach at the end of this season. This isn’t the issue and has never been the issue, despite how it’s been interpreted in the media."


This is from his personal blog. I assume he was under no external pressure to post such statements about how he saw his future. Lets debate how much choice and how both Eddie Bucks and Mick could have acted more constructively to make the whole thing work. However you continue to spout these strident posts implying Mick was almost helpless in the situation he found himself in and was forced, like being at gunpoint , into doing things he didn't want to do. Just patently untrue, compromises were asked by all parties and it didn't work out. Mick isn't just the victim you are so keen portraying him as.

 

[chunkylover53]

I call a Monkey King vs Gone Critical fight to the death.

forwardflanker will be opening his book and taking bets.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

The final reason I won’t be switching clubs is that I have a contract with Collingwood for a further three years after this one, in a different role to my current position. I signed it in good faith that I could continue to help in developing the team and the club beyond my reign as senior coach.

A true man of his word huh? How refreshing in the modern day. Couldn't even wait 3 years!

I guess he knows his coaching days are coming to an end though and this was his last chance. Will be interesting to see what happens to the Blues next year and if they keep him. Got off scott free thanks to Essendon this year.

 

[Monkey King]

What a bizarre example you have above. It doesn't lend itself to any reasonable discussion. Malthouse had choices albeit not the one he really wanted. However as he posted in his own blog as late as 25/7/2011 he did have some choices.

Blogged well after the time had passed where it became obvious, despite the success he'd achieved with the team, it wasn't going to win him a reprieve.

I assume he was under no external pressure to post such statements

Poor assumption given there are parts of that blog that contradict what came out afterwards. Looks more like Malthouse trying to keep a steady keel in the final months of his push to win the 2011 flag. Which is funny, given the stick most Pies posters give him over trying to destablise the club and all that nonsense.

I think everyone knows Malthouse wanted to keep coaching. He signed on with the deal, as he wanted to continue coaching. Denying it is like burying your head in the sand. He may well have seriously considered the Director role at some point, but it seems from everything he says, that he'd have only gone on with it if the, as yet unspecified role, would have kept him involved at a certain level and that that level be acceptable to a range of parties. In the end it wasn't. He was denied the role he wanted. I couldn't think of any other way to put it than he was shunted from both his existing role and the role he sought.

 

[Smoky]

Err ... duh! Imagine a bloke says to you, we either kill you now, or you can sign this contract and we'll kill you in 2 years instead. Are you gonna sign it? Of course you are if you want to keep living. Then in two years time everyone says you wanted to die and they didn't murder you, coz you signed a contract.

Turn it up!

Seriously dude...

Get some help.

 

[Monkey King]

Seriously dude...

Get some help.

Pfft! I haven't drunk from the well of Collingwood delusion, so it must look like I'm insane right.

 

[frantelle]

Err ... duh! Imagine a bloke says to you, we either kill you now, or you can sign this contract and we'll kill you in 2 years instead. Are you gonna sign it? Of course you are if you want to keep living. Then in two years time everyone says you wanted to die and they didn't murder you, coz you signed a contract.

Turn it up!

Think a lot of people forget that at the time that contract was signed, there was a lot of conjecture as to whether Malthouse would even be offered another contract

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Think a lot of people forget that at the time that contract was signed, there was a lot of conjecture as to whether Malthouse would even be offered another contract

True. But ultimately they did give him one, and then he won a flag.

It's this trying to plan something for implementation, 2-3 years out, that stuffed it. The world doesn't work like that. Things change.

I think what Melbourne and Roos are doing is smarter. Yeah we're appointing someone, he'll be the successor most likely, but there some flex in it - no 5 year deals, definite dates, or defined role changes 3 years down the track.

Whole thing always had a degree on Eddie being a control freak about it, trying to be everything to everyone - himself, the board, the supporters, MM and Bucks. That's hard to do.

 

[Smoky]

Pfft! I haven't drunk from the well of Collingwood delusion, so it must look like I'm insane right.

These analogies remind me on a MM presser

 

[Gone Critical]

Poor assumption given there are parts of that blog that contradict what came out afterwards. Looks more like Malthouse trying to keep a steady keel in the final months of his push to win the 2011 flag. Which is funny, given the stick most Pies posters give him over trying to destablise the club and all that nonsense.

Okay if you beleive ther were parties putting pressure on him to write things in his personal blog who were they. Eddie?, Bucks? the Board?

 

[Gone Critical]

I think everyone knows Malthouse wanted to keep coaching. He signed on with the deal, as he wanted to continue coaching. Denying it is like burying your head in the sand. He may well have seriously considered the Director role at some point, but it seems from everything he says, that he'd have only gone on with it if the, as yet unspecified role, would have kept him involved at a certain level and that that level be acceptable to a range of parties. In the end it wasn't. He was denied the role he wanted. I couldn't think of any other way to put it than he was shunted from both his existing role and the role he sought.

I don't think there was any doubt MM's preference was to continue coaching. Has anyone suggested otherwise?

Again you are just speculating and not surprisingly speculating Mick as the victim and Collingwood as the bully. All I have seen written about this is there was no real role definition that was arrived at. My reading was it was Mick more than anyone who didn't address that because by late 2011 he had probably decided he wasn't going to take the role.My real point here is that MM had choices in 2009 , he didn't have a gun to his head.

 

[F_therest]

So Buddy Franklin attends Hawks B+F, gets applauded and even has a 3 minute highlight video of him played...nice one Collingwood

 

[laminex]

It's all tattoos and 40 disposal games at Collingwood. Where's the heart?

LOL really, mate look at yr team and mine for that matter. No heart should be our slogans.

 

[loki04]

I believe it's the Collingwood equivalent of the "Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence" award.

It's the your shit but try hard award, there is good reason why Maxwell dominated the award for like 5 years straight.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

So Buddy Franklin attends Hawks B+F, gets applauded and even has a 3 minute highlight video of him played...nice one Collingwood

If true I find that a bit bizarre. Too far the other way.

Acknowledge him yes, but a prolonged tribute to somebody who's just taken a giant shit all over your club? Weird.

 

[Gone Critical]

So Buddy Franklin attends Hawks B+F, gets applauded and even has a 3 minute highlight video of him played...nice one Collingwood

Almost right. Buddy didn't attend the night. In his absence he was thanked and a tribute video played. Collingwood also thanked the players who had retired at their B&F, those present and absent. Couldn't do anything of the same for Daisy and Heater as they haven't left yet and chose not to attend the night.

 

[Monkey King]

Think a lot of people forget that at the time that contract was signed, there was a lot of conjecture as to whether Malthouse would even be offered another contract

I don't forget. I've actually said a number of times that I think the plan looked like a decent one in theory back when it was devised in 2009. But as Leigh Matthews said, two years is an eternity in modern football. Which brings me to my issue, being that by mid-2011, it wasn't looking like a very good idea at all, in theory or practice; and that someone should have stepped up, down, or in from the side, to try and rejig the succession plan into something more sensible than moving on the reigning premiership coach. Sometimes good ideas are all about the timing.