Malthouse V Buckley

[Hump 17]

Just in regard to this forced union between the two. What sort of division do you think the Leon Davis situation is having on the two. Its no secret that one of Buckleys biggest flaws as a player was his attitude towards some of his team mates. Leon was one player as a commentater that Buckley would often target also. Now Bucks has Leon in his forward line and playing well below standard. Its no secret that Leon is one of Micks favourites which means Buckley is lumped carrying a passenger into each game. Not a healthy way to operate and surely putting massive preasure on the two groups.

 

[Pie eyed]

Just in regard to this forced union between the two. What sort of division do you think the Leon Davis situation is having on the two. Its no secret that one of Buckleys biggest flaws as a player was his attitude towards some of his team mates. Leon was one player as a commentater that Buckley would often target also. Now Bucks has Leon in his forward line and playing well below standard. Its no secret that Leon is one of Micks favourites which means Buckley is lumped carrying a passenger into each game. Not a healthy way to operate and surely putting massive preasure on the two groups.

Hahha.
Pretty lame scenario.

Bucks is an assistant coach. He can worry about that when he's a coach.
Ask Harry'O, he'll set you straight Grant.

 

[PieLebo87]

Just in regard to this forced union between the two. What sort of division do you think the Leon Davis situation is having on the two. Its no secret that one of Buckleys biggest flaws as a player was his attitude towards some of his team mates. Leon was one player as a commentater that Buckley would often target also. Now Bucks has Leon in his forward line and playing well below standard. Its no secret that Leon is one of Micks favourites which means Buckley is lumped carrying a passenger into each game. Not a healthy way to operate and surely putting massive preasure on the two groups.

How has he been a passenger?

He has been applying tremendous forward line pressure and applying tackles. Just because he isn't getting 20 possessions and kicking multiple goals, doesn't mean he is a passenger.

As Malthouse already stated, he isn't getting dropped in the immediate future because his work-rate is still up, even though he isn't getting plenty of it.

Bucks prides himself on work-rate, and Davis, in everyone's view, is providing it.

 

[Hump 17]

Yeah nice answer. Mick has already potted Bucks for the performance of the forward line so its hardly fair he has to carry one of Micks favourites.

 

[The Big League]

Seems like a pretty standard scenario for any club. The forward coach works off the directive of the head coach. If the forward coach is unhappy i'm sure Mick would listen, however ultimately it is Mick's choice who plays and who doesn't.

Buckley, despite what you may wish to believe is not a petulant little child who is going to cause rifts within the club because Davis is getting a game.

 

[JeffDunne]

From the comments Mick made a few weeks back about 'tension' being there after some of the articles in the press, it's clear the relationship hasn't been as smooth sailing as Ed would have us believe.

Mick obviously felt the need to put Buck's in his place.

While that all seems to be sorted now, does that really do Buckley's standing within the playing group any good long term? I mean he is going to be the senior coach and Mick apparently is still going to be there.

Can't imagine that's a good position for a senior coach when his boss has already knocked him down a few pegs in front of the playing group?

 

[Pie eyed]

Yeah nice answer. Mick has already potted Bucks for the performance of the forward line so its hardly fair he has to carry one of Micks favourites.

It is not for Bucks to carry anyone. All he has to do is his job until it is his job to be the head coach. Then he can carry or drop whoever he wants to.

Why would you care anyway?

The less stability the better for you....

 

[Hump 17]

Only that most head coaches havnt got the bloke theyve been shunted for as there assistant.

 

[Gone Critical]

Just in regard to this forced union between the two. What sort of division do you think the Leon Davis situation is having on the two. Its no secret that one of Buckleys biggest flaws as a player was his attitude towards some of his team mates. Leon was one player as a commentater that Buckley would often target also. Now Bucks has Leon in his forward line and playing well below standard. Its no secret that Leon is one of Micks favourites which means Buckley is lumped carrying a passenger into each game. Not a healthy way to operate and surely putting massive preasure on the two groups.

None would be my answer. Buckleys problems with expectations of team mates occured early in his playing career. He finished as a loved and admired captain.

Leon was always a bit of a protege of Bucks also. In his media career I heard him extoll Davis a number of times. Claimed him to be the hardest trainer at the club in Buckleys final years playing.

 

[Nardz]

Mick has already potted Bucks for the performance of the forward line so its hardly fair he has to carry one of Micks favourites.

From the comments Mick made a few weeks back about 'tension' being there after some of the articles in the press, it's clear the relationship hasn't been as smooth sailing as Ed would have us believe.

links?

why is everyone concerned about this except for collingwood supporters?

trying to make a story out of nothing.

 

[Hump 17]

links?

why is everyone concerned about this except for collingwood supporters?

trying to make a story out of nothing.

Isnt the commonly used excuse that its a Football story and were talking football. Theres clearly an issue there so its being discussed.

 

[MarkT2]

Given the ladder right now I think any argument that the Malthouse/Buckley scenario hasn't been a success is based on wishing rather than objectivity. It's astounding that so many people can believe the list is ordinary and the coaching situation is problematic yet the side is 2 points off top place. You can search long and hard for evidence of tension but overlook the the most objective evidence there is - the results.

Honestly some of you need to look at yourselves rather than Collingwood. It's many of you who have the issues I'm afraid.

 

[JeffDunne]

Given the ladder right now I think any argument that the Malthouse/Buckley scenario hasn't been a success is based on wishing rather than objectivity.

How has the position improved since last season?

Not sure I'd be calling it a 'success' yet, the main act has yet to be played out.

There's no doubt Malthouse put his foot down and made sure everyone knew who was boss. The question is, is that good grooming for a head coach in front of those he'll be coaching and considering Mick will ultimately be his boss?

It won't be a success unless there's a smooth transition and the team doesn't go backwards as a result.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

While I can't WAIT for Malthouse to go, this is a non-story.

Amazing how there' s no Roos-Longmire 'issues'. Just Malthouse-Buckley lol.

 

[Hump 17]

Roos was happy to go the same cant be said about Malthouse. There was a strong backing for Malthouse to be released last year only it was seen that Eddie didnt have the acorns to do it. He then created a system that seems to have major flaws in it.

 

[JeffDunne]

Amazing how there' s no Roos-Longmire 'issues'.

Only when he smiles.

Collingwood supporter too.

 

[Gone Critical]

Roos was happy to go the same cant be said about Malthouse. There was a strong backing for Malthouse to be released last year only it was seen that Eddie didnt have the acorns to do it. He then created a system that seems to have major flaws in it.

Bit too much wishful thinking here

Better intepretation would be Eddie had a conundrum in wanting to keep MM and not lose Bucks that couldnt be solved by a conventional appointment.

So he had the acorns to try something novel that has the potential to be a big win win for the club. Also has a potential downside if it falls over but there is no evidence of that so far except speculation by those wishing it to fail

Also pretty instructive when Mark T2 and Shpshel Ed who are the Collingwood posters most looking forward to MM going pour cold water on your theories

 

[MarkT2]

How has the position improved since last season?

2 points off top spot with a better % and a team playing with cohesion.

Not sure I'd be calling it a 'success' yet, the main act has yet to be played out.

Ultimately a flag is the indisputable mesure but the side is performing to it's ability. The coaching set up is a success if the team performs near optimum. Any shortfall in Collingwood's results is list related as it stands now.

When the time comes for Malthouse to make way a lot of things could happen but none of them are currently negatively impacting the results if any of them are indeed negative.

There's no doubt Malthouse put his foot down and made sure everyone knew who was boss. The question is, is that good grooming for a head coach in front of those he'll be coaching and considering Mick will ultimately be his boss?

It won't be a success unless there's a smooth transition and the team doesn't go backwards as a result.

There is simply no evidence that any of it has done any harm. As I said, down the track is for later and it can be dealth with when appropriate if need be. You are looking for potential future negatives. Nothing is certain. Two years after a flag Clarkson was under pressure. A year before 2 flags and a second Thompson was nearly sacked. If MM and Buckley can't work together MM will be sacked. If MM wants to coach senior footy he'll walk.

Meanwhile the team is performing and is better than last year.

 

[Hump 17]

2 points off top spot with a better % and a team playing with cohesion.



Ultimately a flag is the indisputable mesure but the side is performing to it's ability. The coaching set up is a success if the team performs near optimum. Any shortfall in Collingwood's results is list related as it stands now.

When the time comes for Malthouse to make way a lot of things could happen but none of them are currently negatively impacting the results if any of them are indeed negative.
There is simply no evidence that any of it has done any harm. As I said, down the track is for later and it can be dealth with when appropriate if need be. You are looking for potential future negatives. Nothing is certain. Two years after a flag Clarkson was under pressure. A year before 2 flags and a second Thompson was nearly sacked. If MM and Buckley can't work together MM will be sacked. If MM wants to coach senior footy he'll walk.

Meanwhile the team is performing and is better than last year.

Do you beleive you honestly have close the gap between StKilda and Geelong? I mean they both were undermanned and fixed you up relativly easy.

 

[MarkT2]

Do you beleive you honestly have close the gap between StKilda and Geelong? I mean they both were undermanned and fixed you up relativly easy.

We were a lot more competitive than last year and we beat the Dog's relatively comfortably twice. I think we are better but still not good enough. That doesn't mean anything in the Malthouse/Buclkey context other than their interaction and relationship has had no negative impact on the improved on field performance.

 

[Gone Critical]

Young Hump 17 you are determined to come up with the "glass half empty" senarios for Collingwood.

If you want to look at things that way you can also argue Collingwood and St Kilda failed last year. While both are progressing this year they are each more likely to not win the flag in 2010 so this year will merely be another failed campaign

All true in a way but not particularly instructive

 

[PieLebo87]

Only when he smiles.

Collingwood supporter too.

Huh? What does what Roos was doing in a Collingwood game have to do with him and Longmire having/not having a 'potential' rift?

So what your saying is that you havnt improved then. You have had a dream run with injuries while the Saints Geelong WB and Freo have been pegged back due to them yet your still ranked only slightly better than two and below the other two.

How is that even relevant to this Malthouse/Buckley thread?

Is there something St Kilda supporters know about the inner sanctums of the CFC which I don't know about? Because it seems like it.

Hey JeffD, since you're so good at posting up links, why don't you now put up one of proof that there is any rift between Bucks and Malthouse.

 

[mattys123]

So what your saying is that you havnt improved then. You have had a dream run with injuries while the Saints Geelong WB and Freo have been pegged back due to them yet your still ranked only slightly better than two and below the other two.

Yep dream run with injuries.

Yep, Brad Dick, John McCarthy, Josh Fraser, Paul Medhurst, Heath Shaw, Luke Ball, Nick Maxwell, Simon Prestigiacomo, Alan Didak.

All of those names, and plenty more, have missed games because of injury.

While we haven't had a terrible run, it's by no means a "dream run".

Brad Dick, when fit is on our best side by so far it isn't funny, yet he's played 2 games.

Try again.

 

[Tas]

If Bucks turns out to be half as good as Scott he will still be a good coach.

 

[Nardz]

Theres clearly an issue there so its being discussed.

oh is there?

as i have previously said.. the only people that think there is an issue there are non-collingwood supporters

if there was an issue i'd have no problem with it being discussed. but there is no evidence of there being an issue - only a bunch of hack journalists cooking up some innuendo to sell some papers. and you idiots fall for it.