Mick Malthouse and his coaching record

[Crow-mo]

You havent countered anything, you just dont agree and have gone to some pre med psychology text book to come up with a term that only serves to make you look even more foolish.

Good luck with that, but your lack of insight into football is even more startling than your defense of the indefensible here.

But dont let me stop you, I always like to know that I am streets ahead of others in terms of lateral thinking

keep it up son

you're not streets ahead of others in lateral thinking, you're a crank.

not the same thing

 

[Nathan Q Brown]

I count four Collingwood supporters on this thread who agree with me.

Are they trolls too ?

far as I know they don't keep getting red-carded. Three since August? must tell you something?

 

[swiftdog]

All of the above plus:

O'Bree for sure

Rusling probably now, he may have some talent, but he is injury prone, much like Davidson and as I said before, its no good being the best player to not grace the field.

Reid is one season off being the next Davidson/Rusling if he doesnt get on the paddock

Bryan, has one booming kick in a season and tries to emulate it again and again with no success, and can some one actually show him how to get both feet off the ground at the same time?

Rocca, sorry anthony, but your time has come, more and more injury prone and being available will actually hold back the development of a younger player, like Dawes who needs to get a spot and know it is his.

Presti, the only problem with presti is that we have zilch to replace an injury prone player who cant get on the park as it is. So getting rid of him really is not such a loss anyway.

We should be looking at getting some value for Fraser who is really a big disappointment. He has no mongrel, we need some mongrel in that side.

I like Lockyer but him getting a game next year will hold back some young bloke from getting one. A player that we might get 10 years out of.

As for Judkins, malthouse picked him and persisted with him. The axe falls on malthouse' head for any of Judkins bloopers. Its called responsibility for all on field matters and recruiting ultimately is an on field matter

Should have rephrased my question better. Do any of these players deserve to be delisted ahead of the players already de-listed?

O-Bree: Are you blind? Blind Freddy knows how important he has been for us over the years. With Burns gone we need an experienced midfielder to lhelp out the kids.

Rusling - May be injury prone but has shown potential and does not mean he will get injured again. No point in delisting him yet. If we did we just would have had some pick 90odd extra who wouldn't get on the park anyway. 2009 will decide his fate.

Bryan - Delisting him would leave us with Fraser, Thoolen and Wood as our rucks. Purely a depth player.

Rocca - Did you not see how much Cloke struggled without another key forward in the side? He should be a depth player by mid-2009 with others taking over him.

Presti - No comment. Do you really want to leave a 20 year old KPP on the best forwards every week if he is getting smashed.

Fraser - His best is very good. we haven't seen his best for years now (injuries). There is a thread on the Pies board if you want to look into it further.

For all your ranting about poor list management you have shown just how inept you are at it yourself.

Why are hawthorn stocked full of talent, when they were in the same boat as us in 2004. They recruited better than us, tey obviously coach their players better than us, they obviously have a game plan that runs rings around our game plan.

Surely, identifying that their game plan is far more effective would make you try and implement a similar game plan for the future development of our younger layers. But NO, malthouse has them playing chess, teaching them how to probably hate playing the game, wheras Clarkson is teaching his players that the game can be fun and won by being direct. Its not rocket science, but malthouse has made the game tedious for all concerned.

Hawthorn are stocked full of talent in the 23-27 age range, the premiership window range. You're right they have recruited better than us, coaching players better than us is very debatable and they have a very good gameplan but also have the players to execute it. Yet again, too much credit to Clarkson, too little to the players.

So you want us to try a similair gameplan to Hawthorn? Is that what Geelong was saying when they saw West Coast win the 2006 grand final? I don't see any similarities in their gameplans, do you? You make a gameplan to suit the players, not make the players suit your gameplan. Wow, most idiotic comment I have ever seen. I'm pretty sure that Collingwood players enjoy playing football. If you don't like watching Collingwood play just don't watch them. Judging from what has been said in your post already it already looks like that you are only watching the game with one eye anyway.

There we have it, character building. the virtue everyone likes to associate Malthouse bringing to the club.

Well, guess what.................. I bet his job description doesnt mention turning boys into men, it probably reads 'winning flags '. This is truly grasping at straws stuff .........' oh but they are valiant in defeat' and 'our boys never gave up, even tho they were flogged shitless'. Thats not character building, ulitmately it is deflating and counter productive. a winning culture is the only culture that he is meant to bring to the club. Until he is hired as moral guardian at the club, how about trying to put a team on the park that goes the kill not the character build.

Think long-term. Patience is a virtue, clearly you don't have it. It teaches the kids the value of hard work instead of letting them take the easy way out. His job description may not include turning boys into men but a bunch of boys isn't going to win you a premiership, you need men for that.

Character building isn't based on outside perceptions like "we tried hard" etc. It comes from within and when it comes down to it we don't really know the players that well. It may be deflating for you and the rest of the supporters (including me) but I'm confident that Mick says more to the players than "you never gave up and I'm proud of you, even though you were flogged shitless". I've played in a team full of guns (I was shit) that couldn't give a shit about each other and a team that had been on the end of a few floggings throughout the year, one of these teams made it to a grand final. As they say you learn more from your losses than your wins and the only way this group of Collingwood kids are going to grow is if they experience and learn from these losses, there is no way around it.

Oh my effen Gawd. Understand this, he oversaw all the recruting, they are his responsiblity. The buck stops with him. Someone has to take responsibility for everything that goes wrong and at 850 large, that person is malthouse. And with the ruck stocks so poor, he continually chose to not go and seek an good quality ruck. Even Everrit in 2001 would have been a good get, far better than Fraser as a ruck option. Everitt was shopped around that year, eventually going the next, so he was available. And two things Everrit can do, or culd do, was tap at the centre bounces and he was an extraordinarily good kick for a big bloke

BTW, Fraser is not a B, let alone A grade ruckman. He is poor poor poor as a ruck option. He may actually be better propped up at FF

This argument is seriously flawed. I work at a supermarket. Lets say that the owner is coming down from the CBD on sunday and I am working then. Obviously the store is going to have to be in tip-top shape. What you are saying is that I can get away with doing no work and insulting customers because it's my bosses responsibility to make sure I'm doing the right thing? After all, my boss is the one that hired me.

I love hindsight, don't you? Everyone can make their teams stronger in hindsight.

Malthouse again. he chose Judkins and probably told Judkins to go for the plodders, much like he likes O'Bree ploughing up mud in the midfield. Judkins is Malthouse's responsibility. There is no arguing against that.

And Judkins has a responsibility to do his job properly, which he didn't.

And how pray tell? The on field structures and game plan are perilously flawed. Things are not looking up, things are looking veneered over

Still only 50/50 roughly even in the good years. Maybe 55/45 at best. hardly a period of domination. And if after 9 years he is only 50/50 overall, then its time to take a deep hard look at your own position. It is not what they would have expected 9 years back. His tenure has not been a success.

Things are looking venereed over? The youngest team to win a final in 8 years and things are looking down? And as for your eventual reply of Adelaide are no good, we still had to get into the finals, which we did with such a young team.

 

[JohnD]

far as I know they don't keep getting red-carded. Three since August? must tell you something?

So are they right or wrong ?

Given that, in your opinion, Clarkson had achieved nothing prior to the GF win (precisely the same was what MM has achieved at Collingwood), are you satisfied with Collingwood record under Malthouse ?

Are you prepared to now admit that Clarkson has achieved something in football ? Are you prepared to admit he is a better performed coach than Malthouse ?

Don't let the question marks scare you off macpie. Get daring - trying answering a question.

 

[Selggad]

except you still haven't commented on where they were, and what had happened before he arrived.

is it because you don't know?






judge is a bitter old hack, WC finished 3rd or 4th from bottom when Micky took over. they sacked 2 coaches, and the holding company was bankrupt.

that sure sounds like a basketcase to me.



had no context. that you cannot identify the contect, is that the reason you have not responded to it. I'm pretty sure that a reference to a particular time, and a comment about the overall state at that time is a fairly specific and easy to follow context

do you need a english tutor?



well I'm smarter than you, and I know what the word context means. so make of that what you will.

and you still haven't even tried to counter my assertion with anything other than forward events, which doesn't say much for your knowledge, understanding or cognitive process.

Someone who counters a statement based on a position at a given moment in time, (ignoring the history leading to that moment in time) with comments about future events is either: A) lazy and peculiar in that they didn't take the time to think about what it was they were disagreeing with, or B) just a little a simple. you are also free to make your choice.

hell, I even gave you the contextual markers in Alexander, Todd & Indian Pacific, and still it all went over your head. nice work brainiac.

Ps. I am just pissed off people like you come on, argue away and don't have the feintest clue what they are talking about, and then wonder why they get short shrift. I mean for ****'s sake, Ron Alexander & John Todd were both miles ahead of Kenny Judge, and they didn't get anywhere with that list either. that's why they went, and got the best victorian coach about, to turn around their fortunes.
but anyway, ignoring the actual ignorance of your posts, if you want to argue with what I am saying, how about you do just that - and talk about what they were like when Malthouse took over, instead of some waffle about what happened afterwards.

WCE finished 8th in their first year with Alexander as coach. A very creditable results. They backed in it up with 5th in the second season with Todd coaching. Yet you say Alexander and Todd got nowhere with the list? I think you have just proven yourself as 1) ignorant and 2) a complete idiot. Maybe you should check your data before making your ridiculous claims

Third year in the comp they dropped to 11th, in a large part due to injuries. Indian Pacific were in financial strife. There were detractors due to the loss of support and money going to the WAFL (maybe it was Westar, I can't recall the branding at the time). There was even talk about them disbanding. They didn't. They re-organised, survived and prospered. Not what basket cases do. Or do you credit Malthouse with turning around the club off-field? Did he stop them being a supposed basket case? No, nufty, the board did.

So you little stupid keyboard warrior, why don't you bugger off. You obviously think you are some kind of authority, however, as I commented before, your arguments are poorly articulated and have no backing. You make broad, stupid sweeping statements with out context (by the way dumbo, check the spelling c-o-n-t-e-x-t and which, because I like to help those less fortunate, means the circumstances or facts surrounding an event) and then when people disagree you respond with abuse.

Do you need to do an anger management course? Do you need to get a life?

I'd say probably yes to both.

Looking forward to your response. Careful you don't pop a vein, or, given you are probably extremely old, have a stroke.

 

[Nathan Q Brown]

So are they right or wrong ?

Given that, in your opinion, Clarkson had achieved nothing prior to the GF win (precisely the same was what MM has achieved at Collingwood), are you satisfied with Collingwood record under Malthouse ?

Are you prepared to now admit that Clarkson has achieved something in football ? Are you prepared to admit he is a better performed coach than Malthouse ?

Don't let the question marks scare you off macpie. Get daring - trying answering a question.

3 reds = sack'o'shit = ignore

 

[JohnD]

My argument is in tatters and I have no safe ground to retreat to other than attacking the poster = ignore

Edited for accuracy.

 

[Rohan Coventry]

Still fishing I see Johnny.

 

[JohnD]

MM chalks up another honourable loss, this time in the IR, to maintain his image as the best coach in the land struggling to get a sub-standard list over the line.

 

[Godfrey Jones]

^LOL... funny post

but crow-mo has once again risen to the top.

 

[JohnD]

Thought crow-mo suffered at the hands of a disgruntled Collingwood supporter expecting more personally.

 

[tess]

I count

I doubt it!

 

[AsianWithAFro]

Good coach but very stubborn. He does have a lot of faith in the kids but sometimes leaves them on opponents for too long when they are beyond being slaughtered.

 

[FuManchu]

Good coach but very stubborn. He does have a lot of faith in the kids but sometimes leaves them on opponents for too long when they are beyond being slaughtered.

That is his lack of a plan B

Case in point: Brown on Riewoldt in the Semi.

 

[JohnD]

I do

I'm sure.

 

[shoe]

Move him on.

Give me one side who successfully used the wings all the time. Don't bother, there isn't one.

WCE 06 didn't use the central corridor much. Always forced wide.

 

[Selggad]

WCE 06 didn't use the central corridor much. Always forced wide.

WCE 92 and 94 were a bit similar which was no big surprise with Mainy and Matera on the wings. Playing subi is a bit different generally

 

[shoe]

WCE 92 and 94 were a bit similar which was no big surprise with Mainy and Matera on the wings. Playing subi is a bit different generally

Very true.

2 premiership winning teams who took advantage of the wings.
Nothing wrong with using the wings as long as your kicking/decision making is good.

 

[rickyp]

I started a thread a few years ago saying that we will never win a premiership with Tarrant on our list and Malthouse coaching. However, here we are, Tarrant has gone, and it's almost accepted that Malthouse will be next. Ahh to be right

 

[Godfrey Jones]

^cant believe you're taking pleasure out of that

 

[rickyp]

I love being right!

 

[JohnD]

btw - when Clarkson actually achieves ONE thing then feel free to use him as an example in your essays

You still haven't said whether it's OK to claim that Clarkson has achieved anything yet. I'm thinking it might be, but in the name of forum harmony I did want to get your ruling - especially seeing as you comment on every one of my posts these days.

What do you reckon Nathan Q Brown ?

Has Clarkson actually achieved one thing yet ?

How does his record stack up against Malthouse's at Collingwood ?

Are you prepared to accept that Clarkson can now be used as an example of a successful coach ?

 

[fairdinkum]

Can't believe this thread never got bumped.

A few posters looking like dills in this thread.

Maybe bigfooty should set up a 'big bump' board where these sorts of threads can be bumped for regular posters' amusement.

I mght even go and recommend such a board on the 'Customer Service' board now.