News Malthouse Vs McGuire

[JuddFevGoal]

Oddly, nearly everyone in the media and most here believe it reflects pretty poorly on Mick. What would a Hawks supporter know anyway?

Whilst few here believe that Ed is enhancing his rep by responding, the simple fact is that Mick has made it clear that he is bitter. Against that background is it any wonder that his blaming of the players and the umpires for the GF loss and other comments he has made about the game plan are seen as an attempt to undermine the club or Bucks in particular?

Some here clearly love Mick and that's fine but it is what it is. He has made it clear that despite incredible support over a long time, he is bigger than the club. The club gave him a 5 year option at a time when many inside and outside the club were calling for his head. That we went on to win a premiership on the back of some pretty audacious recruiting is incidental and those who believe that you can simply reverse a deal of the kind that was in place fail to recognise the fall-out from such an action. I suspect that there is also some overplaying of Mick's role too although you must give him some credit. This is in stark contrast to what Mick has done in return.

It is fairly clear to me now after having seen the goings on over the last 6 months that it is Mick's ego rather than Bucks' that prevented a working relationship between the two. Any man who can absolve himself of blame for a GF loss in the way Mick has brings into question his own credibility. His failure to take any responsibility reeks of a super ego and an inability to accept criticism.

I think you're perspective could be a touch warped. Last night on 'On the Couch', Mike Sheehan said he saw no malice of intent in Mick's comments about the game and the other two commentators agreed. So how does 'nearly everyone in the media and most here believe it reflects pretty poorly on Mick.' work?

 

[PieNSauce]

I think you're perspective could be a touch warped. Last night on 'On the Couch', Mike Sheehan said he saw no malice of intent in Mick's comments about the game and the other two commentators agreed. So how does 'nearly everyone in the media and most here believe it reflects pretty poorly on Mick.' work?

I'm not convinced that Mick especially intended malice but the simple fact is that he potted the players whether intentional or not. At the same time, Mick refuses to concede that the 2011 GF loss had anything to do with him or his game plan. Blind Freddy can see that it takes a massive ego to exhonorate one's self from a failure where you are the man pulling the strings regardless of the failure of others. Whether or not Mick intends to undermine the club or Bucks is irrelevant. The simple fact is that he is and when it's done against the backdrop of obvious bitterness toward the club it makes it hard for anyone to give him much credibility.

 

[JuddFevGoal]

I'm not convinced that Mick especially intended malice but the simple fact is that he potted the players whether intentional or not. At the same time, Mick refuses to concede that the 2011 GF loss had anything to do with him or his game plan. Blind Freddy can see that it takes a massive ego to exhonorate one's self from a failure where you are the man pulling the strings regardless of the failure of others. Whether or not Mick intends to undermine the club or Bucks is irrelevant. The simple fact is that he is and when it's done against the backdrop of obvious bitterness toward the club it makes it hard for anyone to give him much credibility.

I hear you but I think looking at this without Collingwood glasses on (and in my conversations with other club supporters) the problem is that Mick is in the media now and any tiny observation he makes gets turned up to 11.

Mick's most controversial comments (and they're not that big a deal) are really in defence of Eddie's attack on Mick's game plan being 'found out'. I think given Mick's game plan got you into the last two grand finals, won you one of them, and in Eddie's own words, powered the most successful H&A season in the teams' history, it seems very odd to criticise. To a rational observer, Mick is quite justified in taking offense to any attack on, what was essentially a fantastic year of coaching.

If Eddie parted ways with Mick because he was worried another team would snaffle up Bucks, that's fine and he should stick by that justification. But to HINT that Malthouse had to go because his coaching was anything other than first rate just seems downright irrational. Believe me, as a Carlton supporter we were shaking in our boots every time we played you. Ego-maniac or not, Malthouse's on-field strategies and his ability to get the playing group to play for him had a lot to do with why.

 

[theroach78]

Even with JuddFevGoal's Blueboy glasses on, that makes a lot of sense.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Mick's most controversial comments (and they're not that big a deal) are really in defence of Eddie's attack on Mick's game plan being 'found out'. I think given Mick's game plan got you into the last two grand finals, won you one of them, and in Eddie's own words, powered the most successful H&A season in the teams' history, it seems very odd to criticise. To a rational observer, Mick is quite justified in taking offense to any attack on, what was essentially a fantastic year of coaching.

But tell me this: Why, oh why does Mick need to take offence?!

Why can't he just shrug his shoulders, and say "I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if you stand still in this game, you're going backwards. Collingwood need to evolve the gameplan of the last few years if they're going to stay competitive, and that's exactly what they're doing."

And if what Ed or the club says is such a falsehood and slight on his character, why can't he simply let others go into bat for him? There are plenty who would. Why is he stirring the pot? It's only making him look bitter.

 

[JuddFevGoal]

But tell me this: Why, oh why does Mick need to take offence?!

Why can't he just shrug his shoulders, and say "I've said it before, and I'll say it again, if you stand still in this game, you're going backwards. Collingwood need to evolve the gameplan of the last few years if they're going to stay competitive, and that's exactly what they're doing."

And if what Ed or the club says is such a falsehood and slight on his character, why can't he simply let others go into bat for him? There are plenty who would. Why is he stirring the pot? It's only making him look bitter.

1 - He didn't want to go.

2 - He was proud of his efforts at Collingwood and doesn't want them tarnished in the media.

3 - He still wants to coach and doesn't want his stocks diminished by cheap shots.

4 - He wants his legacy with the playing group to be a positive one.

Should I go on?

 

[theroach78]

Journos like Robinson have been waiting for this to happen, so they can release the pressure they've held in over the years when dealing with Mick...they don't have to be tactfully polite anymore, as they don't need him for their column inches.

 

[76woodenspooners]

1 - He didn't want to go.

2 - He was proud of his efforts at Collingwood and doesn't want them tarnished in the media.

3 - He still wants to coach and doesn't want his stocks diminished by cheap shots.

4 - He wants his legacy with the playing group to be a positive one.

Should I go on?

So then why is he tarnishing his legacy by engaging in all this rubbish?

If he wants to keep his stocks strong, then he should just let it all ride. Engaging in these petty disputes is making him look bitter.

 

[theroach78]

Also, is it too late to bring up the Melbourne woes? #deflectiontime

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

1 - He didn't want to go.

2 - He was proud of his efforts at Collingwood and doesn't want them tarnished in the media.

3 - He still wants to coach and doesn't want his stocks diminished by cheap shots.

4 - He wants his legacy with the playing group to be a positive one.

Should I go on?

And yet he names Tarrant and Swan as reasons why we lost the GF?

Its not the comments about the gameplan that I question, I have no problem with those comments, it is when he starts naming individuals as the reason we lost the 11' GF that I start to think the man is an egomaniac. I think he can defend his gameplan without going into the blame game, especially when most observers would say that MIck had a much bigger influence on the loss by not moving Ben Reid off Hawkins when it was so apparent to everyone but Mick that he was shot.

As for your comment about him not wanting to go, well he could've stayed if he was able to control his considerable ego and play a lesser role as coaching director.

It is so interesting reading opposition supporters write about this, they always leave out Micks singling out comments and focus on the comments about the gameplan. They were terrible self serving comments and there was no need for them.

I have no doubt Malhouse would be a great guy, I'd love to have a chat with him over a beer or a coffee, but the facts are these latest comments, and his unprofessional comments last year on the footy show illustrate that he has no problem putting himself before the betterment of the team, which contradicts everything he has ever preached as a coach.

Hypocrit and egocentric.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Here's what really happened ...

It is midday last Sunday. Mick's home phone rings. He answers it.

Mick: "G'Day, Malthouse residence."
...: "G'Day Mick, it's Ed here."
Mick: "Oh, G'Day mate, how ya doin?"
Ed: "Well, did you see Friday night's result?"
Mick: "Oh, yeah, I was really sorry to see that mate."
Ed: "Have ya got a moment for a quick chat?"
Mick: "Yeah mate, was just playing scrabble here with Nanette, but it's OK"
Ed: "I need a favour."
Mick: "Of course Ed, anything I can do to help out."
Ed: "Look, we're copping a bit of stick about the Carlton result."
Mick: "Gee, that sucks Ed."
Ed: "Well, more particularly, Buck's is copping some stick."
Mick: "Oh mate, that's just wrong, he needs time to get it together."
Ed: "Yeah, so I was wondering if you could create a diversion in the media."
Mick: "What do ya have in mind?"
Ed: "I dunno, maybe I take a pot shot at ya game plan or something silly."
Mick: "Oh, and you want me to bite?"
Ed: "Yeah that's it"
Mick: "Ya reckon that'll work?"
Ed: "Ya'd be surprised Mick, people love a good drama."
Mick: "Oh sure, Ed, no worries, easy as pie."
Ed: "That's great Mick, I really appreciate this."
Mick: "Think nothing of it Ed, anything I can do to help the club."
Ed: "Oh, and a few of the senior lads are on board too, Swanny and Tarrant."
Mick: "Ya want me to take pot shots at them too?"
Ed: "Yeah, ya know how much they love Bucks. They want to cover his back."
Mick: "Yeah, no worries, leave it to me."
Ed: "That's awesome Mick, I owe ya one mate."
Mick: "No worries at all."
Ed: "Give my regards to Nanette."
Mick: "Will do mate, say hi to Carla."
Ed: "Cheers mate."
Mick: "Alright, cherio now!"

 

[entourage]

Damien Barret has decided to join in the party. What an ultimate tool he is.

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tabid/208/newsId/133272/Default.aspx

 

[PieNSauce]

I hear you but I think looking at this without Collingwood glasses on (and in my conversations with other club supporters) the problem is that Mick is in the media now and any tiny observation he makes gets turned up to 11.

Mick's most controversial comments (and they're not that big a deal) are really in defence of Eddie's attack on Mick's game plan being 'found out'. I think given Mick's game plan got you into the last two grand finals, won you one of them, and in Eddie's own words, powered the most successful H&A season in the teams' history, it seems very odd to criticise. To a rational observer, Mick is quite justified in taking offense to any attack on, what was essentially a fantastic year of coaching.

If Eddie parted ways with Mick because he was worried another team would snaffle up Bucks, that's fine and he should stick by that justification. But to HINT that Malthouse had to go because his coaching was anything other than first rate just seems downright irrational. Believe me, as a Carlton supporter we were shaking in our boots every time we played you. Ego-maniac or not, Malthouse's on-field strategies and his ability to get the playing group to play for him had a lot to do with why.

And just which game plan is that? The one that failed to win us any GF until 2010 and which somehow won us the 2010 GF with the inclusion of a decent ruck option for the first time in years and one of the best inside mids in the competition or is it the one adopted just prior to the 2011 GF which almost handed a GF berth to Hawthorn and allowed an injured Ben Reid to continue playing on a clearly dominant Tom Hawkins while a fully fit Tarrant could have made a better go of it? Perhaps you can refresh our memories on that.

Obviously there are some around here with very short memories. The same people who were telling us in 2009 that Mick was finished now seem so insightful with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight!

 

[HFF]

Damien Barret has decided to join in the party. What an ultimate tool he is.

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tabid/208/newsId/133272/Default.aspx

How can this guy be taken seriously?

All last season he was raving about how one of Daisy, Swanny or Pendles would go, he was wrong but he continued almost weekly to push his own "agenda".

Now, he comes out with this rubbish.

Ed will stay as long as he likes and has the blessings and full support of the entire Magpie Army. The longer the better because there is nobody out there who has served better for the interests of a football club than Eddie McGuire and continues to want to take it to new heights. He is not only the greatest serving Prez IMO our club has ever had but I daresay he is the greatest Prez of any football club of all time.

Everyone wants our club weakened and doomed to failure. You can read it in their articles, you can hear it in their tones of voice and you can see it on their facial expressions.

Side By Side or Us Against Them!

We will rise from this. We will be laughing last, like we always have.

 

[mattys123]

Damien Barret has decided to join in the party. What an ultimate tool he is.

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tabid/208/newsId/133272/Default.aspx

He's just a joke, I have a mate who is a cadet journalist for the Australian now, and he says there's certain journos that even journos laugh at, and Barrett is one.

I didn't ever read most of that article, no need to after the opening paragraph.

Oh, and Gratz on the Didaka award Entourage.

 

[dubber]

The knives are out for Mick. Google 'Years of living morosely threaten Malthouse'

 

[entourage]

Thanks Matty! To be honest, I didn't even read the first paragraph. I quit at the headline title of the article. lol.

 

[il Blu]

When the deal was done the whole football world asked the same question.... "What if Mick has won or is in the process of winning a premiership?" At the time - I don't think anyone would have seen it. But what came to be was a very formidable Collingwood Unit! I remember thinking that Ed's love affair with Bucks was laughable - Still is! But as an onlooker you can't help but side with Mick.... You create a premiership winning formula and for the privilege you're shown the door. People will argue that contracts were in place and all sorts of things! Truth of the matter is.... If Eddie wanted Mick to stay then he would have. Today Barrett writes an article and the whole Collingwood Faithful are up in arms! I personally suggested when the deal was done that this could see the demise of Eddie as President. Think about it from the perspective of someone in the outer.... If the club is seen to go backwards now (within reason) then surely Eddie should / would be held accountable! As a Carlton Supporter.... When you guys won the 2010 Cup and I read the you were the second younger team in the history of the game to do so.... I thought that a new dynasty was forming (Massive Nightmare!). As it looks at the moment - That may not be happening anymore and if that were the case then someone needs to be held responsible....

 

[PieNSauce]

When the deal was done the whole football world asked the same question.... "What if Mick has won or is in the process of winning a premiership?"

Not my recollection at all. The move was mostly praised as visionary and revolutionary. So much so that a number of clubs chose to copy the idea. Collingwood had endured 9 years of being bridesmaids and the general consensus from my memory was that change was needed.

At the time - I don't think anyone would have seen it. But what came to be was a very formidable Collingwood Unit! I remember thinking that Ed's love affair with Bucks was laughable - Still is! But as an opposition fan you can't help but side with Mick.... You create a premiership winning formula and for the privilege you're shown the door. People will argue that contracts were in place and all sorts of things! Truth of the matter is.... If Eddie wanted Mick to stay then he would have. Today Barrett writes an article and the whole Collingwood Faithful are up in arms! I personally suggested when the deal was done that this could see the demise of Eddie as President. Think about it from the perspective of an opposition supporter.... If the club is seen to go backwards now (within reason) then surely Eddie should / would be held accountable! As a Carlton Supporter.... When you guys won the 2010 Cup and I read the you were the second younger team in the history of the game to do so.... I thought that a new dynasty was forming (Massive Nightmare!). As it looks at the moment - That may not be happening anymore and if that were the case then someone needs to be held responsible....

Assuming that you can pinpoint the reasons then someone may well be held responsible. A fair amount of crystal ball gazing in such a prediction though.

P.S. I fixed a few typos for you (bolded)

 

[il Blu]

Not my recollection at all. The move was mostly praised as visionary and revolutionary. So much so that a number of clubs chose to copy the idea. Collingwood had endured 9 years of being bridesmaids and the general consensus from my memory was that change was needed.


Assuming that you can pinpoint the reasons then someone may well be held responsible. A fair amount of crystal ball gazing in such a prediction though.

P.S. I fixed a few typos for you (bolded)

I remember Eddie suggesting the the move was visionary and revolutionary. However I remember the wider football community thinking otherwise, while many including myself felt the repercussions could be devastating to some or all involved. I can understand how you'd want to defend a man that has been nothing but good for your beloved football club (I'd feel the same) - But lets call a spade a spade here.... Collingwood Football Club (Inside a very REAL premiership window) decided to move forward with an untried and raw senior coach while a premiership winning coach with decades of valuable experience was forced into premature retirement. Now this could well turn out to be a masterstroke but the fact remains that it may not - This all remains to be seen.... But no need to the offence....

PS - Very appreciative of you correcting my typos! Awfully generous of you!

 

[Markfs]

It is so interesting reading opposition supporters write about this, they always leave out Micks singling out comments and focus on the comments about the gameplan. They were terrible self serving comments and there was no need for them.

I have no doubt Malhouse would be a great guy, I'd love to have a chat with him over a beer or a coffee, but the facts are these latest comments, and his unprofessional comments last year on the footy show illustrate that he has no problem putting himself before the betterment of the team, which contradicts everything he has ever preached as a coach.

Hypocrit and egocentric.

well said. Malthouse has been a disappointment in the last year. I add the instance of Malthouse resigning from the club in the post-grand final meeting with the players. The players were already emotional but Mick had to make the moment about himself. What about the Collingwood VFL players? Couldnt Mick have gathered everyone at the club the next day and told them? As Eddie has said, Malthouse had his legacy in place. In time, I will praise him again but not this self-centred version of Malthouse.

 

[PieNSauce]

I remember Eddie suggesting the the move was visionary and revolutionary. However I remember the wider football community thinking otherwise, while many including myself felt the repercussions could be devastating to some or all involved. I can understand how you'd want to defend a man that has been nothing but good for your beloved football club (I'd feel the same) - But lets call a spade a spade here.... Collingwood Football Club (Inside a very REAL premiership window) decided to move forward with an untried and raw senior coach while a premiership winning coach with decades of valuable experience was forced into premature retirement. Now this could well turn out to be a masterstroke but the fact remains that it may not - This all remains to be seen.... But no need to the offence....

PS - Very appreciative of you correcting my typos! Awfully generous of you!

Unfortunately we will have to agree to disagree on the wider football community unless you happen to be talking about after 2010. Wonderful thing 20/20 hindsight. My recollection completely disagrees with your on events prior to 2010.

The fact is that the "very real premiership window" you speak of came about after Collingwood secured the services of Ball and Jolly which in turn came about after the plan was put in place. Selective memory you have but chronologically challenged no doubt.

 

[EXNICKS]

well said. Malthouse has been a disappointment in the last year. I add the instance of Malthouse resigning from the club in the post-grand final meeting with the players. The players were already emotional but Mick had to make the moment about himself. What about the Collingwood VFL players? Couldnt Mick have gathered everyone at the club the next day and told them? As Eddie has said, Malthouse had his legacy in place. In time, I will praise him again but not this self-centred version of Malthouse.

Since MM has left, I cant remember him saying a good thing about the Club or Buckley, to that fact. I was a big MM fan, not so much for Bucks, but after the latest episode, I have huge respect for Bucks, and 90% less for MM.
On 3AW Tonite,he (MM) still couldnt say anything good about Buckley, even though Bucks backed him up today.
MM, you signed the Contract in 2009, you didnt have to, dont blame Buckley!

 

[SuperSub17]

Did anyone see in the hsun today that this year we are still the no. 1 team for using the boundary?

 

[Knightmare]

I like the classy way Nathan is handling himself with this issue happening.

He 100% has the right approach and showing his respect (which is genuine) to Malthouse is the way to go about it.