Opinion Mick Malthouse

What is the next move on Mick?

  • Sack him immediately; replacement coach to see out the year.

    Votes: 192 48.9%

  • Let him coach out the year then show him the door.

    Votes: 70 17.8%

  • Sign him now to give coaches and players some direction.

    Votes: 81 20.6%

  • Not sure yet... still too angry to think clearly.

    Votes: 50 12.7%
  • Total voters
    393
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
MEB_ said:
I'm saying that Cripps deserves the credit for seeking out a running coach in the off season DVB. I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but I feel like you attribute everything positive to Mick and everything negative is someone else's fault. You probably see me as the opposite :p
Click to expand...

Would he be that focused and driven if not for the way Mick introduced him? The same way that he's being positive about Mick, you are being negative.

Anyway, it's already been decided. Woosha will coach us next year without even so much as an interview. You know it's true....he's been openly talking about coaching again for the last few weeks, saying "if the right job comes up, blah blah blah"....he might even start after the bye, the way we are tracking.
 
(I only skimmed the last few pages, so sorry if this has been said already)

Daisy gave an interesting interview today or yesterday too I know Mick is his hero and he would stick up for him, but he was saying that Mick's plans are not being carried out by the players on the weekends. Was saying they were training during the week and following the "system" well, but they just couldn't translate it to game day, so he believes they will be able to turn it around quickly when they start doing that....
 
Paulski19 said:
Daisy gave an interesting interview today or yesterday too I know Mick is his hero and he would stick up for him, but he was saying that Mick's plans are not being carried out by the players on the weekends. Was saying they were training during the week and following the "system" well, but they just couldn't translate it to game day, so he believes they will be able to turn it around quickly when they start doing that....
Click to expand...

It has been a long time in coming (and it may not come) as there seems to be a gulf between language and execution.

I don't think we have the dumbest players going around, so questions deserve to be asked......answering those questions seems to be the hard part, though.

Mick or no Mick, it will be interesting to see how the higher powers handle our current situation........not sure I care to find out though.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Paulski19 said:
(I only skimmed the last few pages, so sorry if this has been said already)

Daisy gave an interesting interview today or yesterday too I know Mick is his hero and he would stick up for him, but he was saying that Mick's plans are not being carried out by the players on the weekends. Was saying they were training during the week and following the "system" well, but they just couldn't translate it to game day, so he believes they will be able to turn it around quickly when they start doing that....
Click to expand...

Then either the plan isn't right or the players needed to execute the plan aren't right. To get rid of players that can't execute the plan, we need to get rid of everybody. If you said at the end of 2012, Mick Malthouse is being signed and we are going to get rid of every player we have, I don't think you'd get the buy in we got.

Certainly after 51 games and 3 preseasons, you'd expect our core playing group would understand how to follow the instructions.

This is rhetoric from the players, only matched by Mick's proclamations of our conquering opponents being a very good team, no matter who they are.
 
The Old Dark Navy's said:
Then either the plan isn't right or the players needed to execute the plan aren't right. To get rid of players that can't execute the plan, we need to get rid of everybody. If you said at the end of 2012, Mick Malthouse is being signed and we are going to get rid of every player we have, I don't think you'd get the buy in we got.

Certainly after 51 games and 3 preseasons, you'd expect our core playing group would understand how to follow the instructions.

This is rhetoric from the players, only matched by Mick's proclamations of our conquering opponents being a very good team, no matter who they are.
Click to expand...

Well lets be honest here, the same core group of experienced players who let Ratts down are doing the same to Mick this year.

Question has to be asked why these players (whom I won't name but I'm sure we know who I am talking about) are getting tired of a coaches message after 3 years or so ???

And who's to say they won't tire of the next coach's message either ?
 
DaVillaBlues said:
Well lets be honest here, the same core group of experienced players who let Ratts down are doing the same to Mick this year.

Question has to be asked why these players (whom I won't name but I'm sure we know who I am talking about) are getting tired of a coaches message after 3 years or so ???

And who's to say they won't tire of the next coach's message either ?
Click to expand...

They've always been a bit flaky but it was less frequent under Ratten. Mick was to address that but it has gone completely the opposite way. They are coach killers no doubt but it should not take 3 years under Mick after 5 years under Ratten to identify this as a problem and do something about it. That is an indictment on the coach.
 
smashbox gill said:
Kirk could definately fix the culture as well
Click to expand...


The coaching panel must be made up of like-minded people, ex-players like Capt. Kirk are exactly the right type as they would be espousing the same ethos they played under to our players.

Tough, fearless & uncompromising, they are commodities our players & coaches need to have.
 
TheSheik said:
The coaching panel must be made up of like-minded people, ex-players like Capt. Kirk are exactly the right type as they would be espousing the same ethos they played under to our players.

Tough, fearless & uncompromising, they are commodities our players & coaches need to have.
Click to expand...

Malthouse was no wallflower as a player. Voss as courageous as they come. Worsfold courageous and tough.

Clarkson on the other hand, aside from his sniper hit on Aitken was not especially tough or successful.
 
The Old Dark Navy's said:
Malthouse was no wallflower as a player. Voss as courageous as they come. Worsfold courageous and tough.

Clarkson on the other hand, aside from his sniper hit on Aitken was not especially tough or successful.
Click to expand...

Malthouse was quite a tough player back in the old days, but I'm not so sure about the remainder of the coaching panel, Laidley excluded.

We need quality coaches who can develop & inspire our players to greater heights, it helps if the coach can articulate that well and have that mentality.
 
The Old Dark Navy's said:
Then either the plan isn't right or the players needed to execute the plan aren't right. To get rid of players that can't execute the plan, we need to get rid of everybody. If you said at the end of 2012, Mick Malthouse is being signed and we are going to get rid of every player we have, I don't think you'd get the buy in we got.

Certainly after 51 games and 3 preseasons, you'd expect our core playing group would understand how to follow the instructions.

This is rhetoric from the players, only matched by Mick's proclamations of our conquering opponents being a very good team, no matter who they are.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
The Old Dark Navy's said:
Malthouse was no wallflower as a player. Voss as courageous as they come. Worsfold courageous and tough.

Clarkson on the other hand, aside from his sniper hit on Aitken was not especially tough or successful.
Click to expand...

It is strange how it works like this and i fully agree.

What Ex players did on the field means NOTHING as to how good they will be in a HC role but the public perception always seems to be the better they were as a player the better coach they will be but it is mostly always the opposite!

Have a look at Hird ( Jury still out but he sucks IMO ) Tim Watson , Tony Shaw , Danny Frawley , Terry Wallace , Nafan Buckley ( Jury out on him to but he is not much chop as Pendles is saving him ) as well as the names you mentioned and i am sure there are many others who were all great players but disappointed in the HC role.

Leigh Matthews seems to be the 1 genuine champion player who bucked the trend and was also a champion coach.
 
DaVillaBlues said:
Well lets be honest here, the same core group of experienced players who let Ratts down are doing the same to Mick this year.

Question has to be asked why these players (whom I won't name but I'm sure we know who I am talking about) are getting tired of a coaches message after 3 years or so ???

And who's to say they won't tire of the next coach's message either ?
Click to expand...

They didn't let Ratts down, we were creulled by injury.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...injury-crisis-in-a-decade-20120725-22qx4.html

No other reasonable excuse for 2012.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Ellas Ellas said:
They didn't let Ratts down, we were creulled by injury.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...injury-crisis-in-a-decade-20120725-22qx4.html

No other reasonable excuse for 2012.
Click to expand...

It's all relative to expectations. The Gold Coast game killed Ratten off and the way we played was disappointing. However we went in to the game with 3 genuine talks, Kreuzer rucking, Waite and Casboult up forward (Casboult kicked 0.5 that night) and two part time talls in White and McInnes playing key defensive posts. That was a selection blunder for mine. Anyway McInnes goes down in the first minute or so and we end up with Walker trying to fill a key defensive post. We were most definitely cruelled by injuries and still gave the 8 a shake.
 
HARKER said:
Mick wants the players though, to be playing a brand of football that will ultimately lead to being Premiership contenders. I guess every coach wants that but may not be in a position to implement their vision for lack of internal pressures.
Click to expand...
This, for me, is the key.

Playing a brand of football that will win you games and/or is exciting, and playing a brand of football that will lead to being a premiership contender are not mutually inclusive, and I think that is what most supporters don't appreciate.

Many coaches have proven to be good at delivering the former, but only a small percent have proven that they can deliver the latter. Fewer yet have proven it across a different team, and a different era.

Take for instance, Hinkley. I've seen many supporters bemoan that we didn't go after a guy like him when we recruited Mick. Yet, all Hinkley and Port Adelaide have proven thus far is that they are good at delivering on the former. That's it. He may yet prove to be one of the few that can deliver, but as it stands he is a dime a dozen coach, and yet supporters seemingly think a Hinkley MkII is going to be our savior.

This method of coaching is good for one thing, keeping the supports at bay.

Ratten was an expert at it. He never had us playing a brand of football that would ever have us as premiership contenders; he played for wins, and excitement. All the while he was taking us further and further away from being premiership contenders with every passing year, despite our contrary rise up the ladder, and we applauded him for it. It surprise me how supporters to this day still cannot see this, and more surprising still is that some even suggest we never should have gotten rid of him.

Mick isn't past it. He hasn't taken the team backwards. I believe he is getting us closer to a premiership despite our contrary drop down the ladder.

He has always said he is looking for players that can stand up under pressure. Our game plan isn't to blindly bang it forward, it's not to avoid running it through the centre at all costs and certainly it's not to turn it over at every opportunity.

We are crumbling under pressure because most of our players aren't up to playing accountable football. It's that simple. Many players are in the latter stages of their careers, and the sad truth is for most, time is against them to change how they play. They've unfortunately spent the majority of their career learning unaccountable football, and they aren't equipped to cope with the relentless pressure they're being asked to play through.

We were close to ten years off it when Mick took over, and thankfully despite the talk of rebuilding only occurring this year, our list management clearly shows Mick knew this and started it from day one.

If the club has the courage to absorb the external pressure, in 3-5 years Mick will leave us with a core playing group that will have only ever known tough accountable football, right when they are about to hit their prime, and that is how you build a premiership team.
 
Cipher said:
This, for me, is the key.

Playing a brand of football that will win you games and/or is exciting, and playing a brand of football that will lead to being a premiership contender are not mutually inclusive, and I think that is what most supporters don't appreciate.

Many coaches have proven to be good at delivering the former, but only a small percent have proven that they can deliver the latter. Fewer yet have proven it across a different team, and a different era.

Take for instance, Hinkley. I've seen many supporters bemoan that we didn't go after a guy like him when we recruited Mick. Yet, all Hinkley and Port Adelaide have proven thus far is that they are good at delivering on the former. That's it. He may yet prove to be one of the few that can deliver, but as it stands he is a dime a dozen coach, and yet supporters seemingly think a Hinkley MkII is going to be our savior.

This method of coaching is good for one thing, keeping the supports at bay.

Ratten was an expert at it. He never had us playing a brand of football that would ever have us as premiership contenders; he played for wins, and excitement. All the while he was taking us further and further away from being premiership contenders with every passing year, despite our contrary rise up the ladder, and we applauded him for it. It surprise me how supporters to this day still cannot see this, and more surprising still is that some even suggest we never should have gotten rid of him.

Mick isn't past it. He hasn't taken the team backwards. I believe he is getting us closer to a premiership despite our contrary drop down the ladder.

He has always said he is looking for players that can stand up under pressure. Our game plan isn't to blindly bang it forward, it's not to avoid running it through the centre at all costs and certainly it's not to turn it over at every opportunity.

We are crumbling under pressure because most of our players aren't up to playing accountable football. It's that simple. Many players are in the latter stages of their careers, and the sad truth is for most, time is against them to change how they play. They've unfortunately spent the majority of their career learning unaccountable football, and they aren't equipped to cope with the relentless pressure they're being asked to play through.

We were close to ten years off it when Mick took over, and thankfully despite the talk of rebuilding only occurring this year, our list management clearly shows Mick knew this and started it from day one.

If the club has the courage to absorb the external pressure, in 3-5 years Mick will leave us with a core playing group that will have only ever known tough accountable football, right when they are about to hit their prime, and that is how you build a premiership team.
Click to expand...

That's a nice sermon but the fact remains that it doesn't take 3 years to recognise that some players can't play under pressure and do something about it. If our leaders are letting us down under pressure, why are they still our leaders? We have turned over half our list, sunk all the way to the bottom of the ladder and the half of the list we have left and many of the ones we brought in to replace the departed half show no signs of standing up under pressure. So did we get rid of the wrong half and did we recruit the wrong players to replace them? I don't think so.

So why are we still struggling to understand a game plan and still failing under pressure?
 
The Old Dark Navy's said:
That's a nice sermon but the fact remains that it doesn't take 3 years to recognise that some players can't play under pressure and do something about it. If our leaders are letting us down under pressure, why are they still our leaders? We have turned over half our list, sunk all the way to the bottom of the ladder and the half of the list we have left and many of the ones we brought in to replace the departed half show no signs of standing up under pressure. So did we get rid of the wrong half and did we recruit the wrong players to replace them? I don't think so.

So why are we still struggling to understand a game plan and still failing under pressure?
Click to expand...

Fair question and one that's hard to understand when the junior players seem to have got it playing in the lower league.

I think there may be more than one answer to the question and applying the percentages to the respective situations, may not be an easy task............although one that needs answers pretty quickly. We're not a 'wait and see' club.
 
Cipher said:
This, for me, is the key.

Ratten was an expert at it. He never had us playing a brand of football that would ever have us as premiership contenders; he played for wins, and excitement. All the while he was taking us further and further away from being premiership contenders with every passing year, despite our contrary rise up the ladder, and we applauded him for it. It surprise me how supporters to this day still cannot see this, and more surprising still is that some even suggest we never should have gotten rid of him.

Mick isn't past it. He hasn't taken the team backwards. I believe he is getting us closer to a premiership despite our contrary drop down the ladder.
Click to expand...

Not sure about the overall optimism but this paragraph is dead on. The selective amnesia from some people on here is beyond comprehension. Apart from two games in the 2011 finals, Ratten's side were inconsequential frontrunners who posed no threat to any team of substance. If we're going to hang our hat on occasionally beating Geelong or St Kilda in the first half of the season, we may as well give up and become Richmond supporters.
 
Ellas Ellas said:
They didn't let Ratts down, we were creulled by injury.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...injury-crisis-in-a-decade-20120725-22qx4.html

No other reasonable excuse for 2012.
Click to expand...

Well then we're in agreement is that was a short-sighted, arrogant and misguided move by the club to say Ratts.

Mind you, I still believe some players that year were happy to see Ratts gone, I recall Hampson chucking a wobbly over being benched/subbed out against the Suns on the Gold Coast.

We absolutely have to go through due diligence on our next coach, assemble a expert footy panel to interview and evaluate our next coach, IE Gerard Healy and others of that ilk.

I don't mind ol Woosha as our next coach, problem is, I honestly heard Mathieson wanted Worsfold to replace Mick as coach in the middle of last season, and if we hired him, it shows we are still in the thrall of the pokies king ..
 
DaVillaBlues said:
Well then we're in agreement is that was a short-sighted, arrogant and misguided move by the club to say Ratts.

Mind you, I still believe some players that year were happy to see Ratts gone, I recall Hampson chucking a wobbly over being benched/subbed out against the Suns on the Gold Coast.

We absolutely have to go through due diligence on our next coach, assemble a expert footy panel to interview and evaluate our next coach, IE Gerard Healy and others of that ilk.

I don't mind ol Woosha as our next coach, problem is, I honestly heard Mathieson wanted Worsfold to replace Mick as coach in the middle of last season, and if we hired him, it shows we are still in the thrall of the pokies king ..
Click to expand...


Agree with every bit of that.
 
F the Rest said:
Not sure about the overall optimism but this paragraph is dead on. The selective amnesia from some people on here is beyond comprehension. Apart from two games in the 2011 finals, Ratten's side were inconsequential frontrunners who posed no threat to any team of substance. If we're going to hang our hat on occasionally beating Geelong or St Kilda in the first half of the season, we may as well give up and become Richmond supporters.
Click to expand...

I don't know. Ratts was building every year except his last. Was his so called front runner team over performing, because the current side is bottoming out 3 years after Ratten was sacked and we stripped away the game plan, and most of the exciting elements of that team. If it was so obvious, why has it taken 3 years for Mick and the club to recognise it?

I see Cripps, Docherty and a few possibles being part of this side that is closer to a premiership that Ratten's side was. Is that a poor return after 3 years of change? I see rumours of players wanting out because they want success so they don't see the upside of this team.

I'm starting to miss those front running days that used to frustrate me every now and then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top