- Banned
- #926
Thank God Parko, Lethal or Clarkson aren't coaching. Mild mannered coaches.
Each to their own if Chris Scott is the standard setter.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Opinion Mick Malthouse
- Thread starter Stamos
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Each to their own if Chris Scott is the standard setter.
Garth Vader
Club Legend
Our poor kicking skills amongst far too many players (when passing esp) seem to amplify other issues. Curnow, Ellard, Bell, Robbo, Cachia, Armfield, Carrazzo come to mind, and then you have a number of others who are borderline in their skills. These players were at the club well before Malthouse, and often, you can only do so much afterwards. I would only put Gibba, Smurph and Yazz in the elite category. I mean, you don't need to emulate the Hawks, but geeez we are shit at kicking as a team.
As the speed of the game increases and on-field tactics become ever advanced, having a large number of players with above-average or elite kicking skills becomes crucial.
P.S. Ed curnow should be told never, ever to kick the ball again: handball, rugby-pass it, heck, even throw it. Just don't kick it.
As the speed of the game increases and on-field tactics become ever advanced, having a large number of players with above-average or elite kicking skills becomes crucial.
P.S. Ed curnow should be told never, ever to kick the ball again: handball, rugby-pass it, heck, even throw it. Just don't kick it.
Yessum Garth, along with decision making and spacial awareness. You'd be correct.
- Aug 16, 2009
- 7,730
- 11,411
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- North Ballarat
Honestly, if I were a KPP for our club I'd be absolutely filthy on the midfield. They run forward leaving our defenders exposed yet struggle to hit a target. If you're going to cheat forward of stoppages you really must get maximum for your posession, as it stands we are not and in turn get exposed going the other way.
These things can be rectified to a degree with time but it's pretty painful to watch at present.
These things can be rectified to a degree with time but it's pretty painful to watch at present.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #930
Clean up carried out. Thread started to get personal ... and a bit gross. Let's pull it all together before I get my preachy voice on, and we mods exercise our internet egos.
ODN- are you suggesting if we had've continued we'd end up with BT and have councelling this week?
ESKIE
Keeping it Cool.
- Feb 28, 2009
- 33,033
- 56,898
- AFL Club
- Carlton
When I says whoa I means WHOA !
(Yosemite Sam)
(Yosemite Sam)
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #933
ODN- are you suggesting if we had've continued we'd end up with BT and have councelling this week?
I'm suggesting you would have had more time ... for counselling .... mowing the lawn .... cleaning underwear .... whatever strikes your fancy.
After Wayne Brittain was unceremoniously sacked, we had Supercoach #1(Pagan) 0- backwards movement but not his fault; Ratts who certainly moved the team forward and then Supercoach #2 (Mick) - backwards movement when it should be the opposite! That is a decade ++ period and where are we now? Not Mick's fault but it's time for a younger, innovative coach who can kick the bejesus out of the list and mould us (with quality list injections), into the force we haven't been for almost two decades!!!!
Not sure how we fit the counselling in, given the laundry and garden duties!
Yet less than 2 seasons ago we allegedly had one of the best midfields in the comp! What has happened??
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #937
Hearing all this crap about Malthouse's game plan is driving me up the wall! Does anyone here actually know what it is! It seems not, so I will explain what Malthouse's game plan really is...
Our Game Plan Myths
1. Mick wants us to play around the boundary:
This is actually incorrect even though we do a fair bit and a lot of other teams he has coached have as well. I will explain why later. Yes it's part of his game plan but it's the plan B part. When Mick first took over all we did was go around the boundary and as you may remember at the time, he did say that the players had not got a grasp on the game plan yet (despite us using the boundary a lot). Second thing is that he stated at the end of last year that we lacked runners and were a bit slow, obviously you aren't going to get much use out of fast players if you are always going up the boundary into the congestion all the time.
2. Malthouse's Game plan is complicated:
It actually isn't although it has a few more rules and is a bit more restrictive than some of the more free flowing heavy scoring sides. It's 1000X better than Richmond's new game plan (over coached, too restrictive, makes no sense, wastes opportunities to score).
3. It doesn't suit our players:
It actually does, it has taken us closer to the top 4 teams than we got under Ratten and making a horrible list competitive with nearly every other side. It has lowered our scoring but has made it hard for opposition teams to get too far in front of us, then shut us down. The only times we have been flogged is when we have been beaten out of the middle. Most of the time we have been within range of our opposition until the last quarter because we are actually hard to get a significant lead against if we are doing well in the center.
What our game plan actually is
1. Don't turn it over in the middle of the ground:
More or less that's it people! This here is the Mick Malthouse game plan. It's not complicated or restrictive or any of that, it's defensive yes but it makes sense. Yes there are some other little things in there as well like zones but manning space is something any AFL player with half a brain can do and we don't zone a lot.
I think for a good while our players had it in their head that they had to go around the boundary and a lot of them kept taking the easy way out and doing so, that and we have a few too many poor kicks in our midfield that find it too risky to go direct plus the options to go to being poor (too slow to be good targets to kick to safely). We lack a few who can take the game on like Yarran and back their abilities and go direct and hit targets, this is what Mick wants.
This is what Micks Game Plan is based on:
AFL footy if you have noticed is played in spurts, particularly when it's finals or when top sides meet. You have periods where your team is on top then it swings around and the opposition are on top then you can bet your team will be back on top soon and so forth. You rarely see AFL sides go goal for goal all day or trade inside 50s evenly all game. You're never going to be on top all game and come finals generally both sides share the same amount of time being on top but it's the team who takes their opportunities (scoring and defending) who wins. Mick wants us to score heavily when we are on top and defend strongly when we aren't. So far our defending has been ok but we have failed to score heavily enough when we are on top. Micks game plan doesn't protect against us being belted out of the middle (Ratten's did a little in the end) however and nor should it because you don't win flags setting up to lose in areas of the ground, we want to be winning it out of there.
Mick wants us to play up the middle at times! We started doing this a bit this year and at times last year and everyone thought we were going back to Ratten's plan. Wrong! When we are on top he wants us to move the ball fast, direct, kick it with precision, use handball and run and get it forward fast but at times we haven't when we should have. Some of our guys like Yarran, Walker and sometimes Judd, Murphy, Gibbs and Docherty are starting to do this. Mick wants us to go around the boundary when nothing is on (when the opposition are on top). Our problem is we lack quality/depth and leg speed in the middle and run out of gas so we can't go direct often enough during games without risking turning it over.
I hope I have cleared things up with our game plan and dispelled a lot of the Myths behind Mick Malthouse's desired style of play. Just because we play a particular way, doesn't mean Mick wants us playing that way!
So again Mick's plan is to move it quickly, directly, use run, carry and handball, but don't turn it over in the middle of the ground (no going to contests in the middle of the ground until you get it deep inside 50). When we stop running we go up the boundary, this is fine, it is supposed to slow the scoring rate down which it does for both sides, hopefully keeping the goals kicked by the opposition when they have a run on to a minimum while we wait for us to get a run on again.
Our problem is we don't always chose the right time to go up the center or to go wide. We don't score heavily enough when we are on top and our periods when we are on top tend to be a bit short which I think may be due to being too slow (poor) in the midfield, having a poor quality bottom end in the midfield and not enough good players to go through there (some of our change players offer nothing as onballers and this is when we get killed). Get a forward line that can score goals, a midfield that can win the clearances against most other teams and a midfield that runs deep with talent, pace, smarts and can run all day and we will win a hell of a lot of games and people will see the true Mick Malthouse plan.
People forget, even though Collingwood went around the boundary a lot under Malthouse, the also kicked a lot of goals going direct, particularly coming direct out of the middle.
We need to pick our moments and take our opportunities a lot better but we need to players first. The game plan is good, we don't have enough players who can execute it in an attacking way. Better than turning it over in the middle of the ground (even though we do still) a lot which at that level is practically giving goals away.
Our Game Plan Myths
1. Mick wants us to play around the boundary:
This is actually incorrect even though we do a fair bit and a lot of other teams he has coached have as well. I will explain why later. Yes it's part of his game plan but it's the plan B part. When Mick first took over all we did was go around the boundary and as you may remember at the time, he did say that the players had not got a grasp on the game plan yet (despite us using the boundary a lot). Second thing is that he stated at the end of last year that we lacked runners and were a bit slow, obviously you aren't going to get much use out of fast players if you are always going up the boundary into the congestion all the time.
2. Malthouse's Game plan is complicated:
It actually isn't although it has a few more rules and is a bit more restrictive than some of the more free flowing heavy scoring sides. It's 1000X better than Richmond's new game plan (over coached, too restrictive, makes no sense, wastes opportunities to score).
3. It doesn't suit our players:
It actually does, it has taken us closer to the top 4 teams than we got under Ratten and making a horrible list competitive with nearly every other side. It has lowered our scoring but has made it hard for opposition teams to get too far in front of us, then shut us down. The only times we have been flogged is when we have been beaten out of the middle. Most of the time we have been within range of our opposition until the last quarter because we are actually hard to get a significant lead against if we are doing well in the center.
What our game plan actually is
1. Don't turn it over in the middle of the ground:
More or less that's it people! This here is the Mick Malthouse game plan. It's not complicated or restrictive or any of that, it's defensive yes but it makes sense. Yes there are some other little things in there as well like zones but manning space is something any AFL player with half a brain can do and we don't zone a lot.
I think for a good while our players had it in their head that they had to go around the boundary and a lot of them kept taking the easy way out and doing so, that and we have a few too many poor kicks in our midfield that find it too risky to go direct plus the options to go to being poor (too slow to be good targets to kick to safely). We lack a few who can take the game on like Yarran and back their abilities and go direct and hit targets, this is what Mick wants.
This is what Micks Game Plan is based on:
AFL footy if you have noticed is played in spurts, particularly when it's finals or when top sides meet. You have periods where your team is on top then it swings around and the opposition are on top then you can bet your team will be back on top soon and so forth. You rarely see AFL sides go goal for goal all day or trade inside 50s evenly all game. You're never going to be on top all game and come finals generally both sides share the same amount of time being on top but it's the team who takes their opportunities (scoring and defending) who wins. Mick wants us to score heavily when we are on top and defend strongly when we aren't. So far our defending has been ok but we have failed to score heavily enough when we are on top. Micks game plan doesn't protect against us being belted out of the middle (Ratten's did a little in the end) however and nor should it because you don't win flags setting up to lose in areas of the ground, we want to be winning it out of there.
Mick wants us to play up the middle at times! We started doing this a bit this year and at times last year and everyone thought we were going back to Ratten's plan. Wrong! When we are on top he wants us to move the ball fast, direct, kick it with precision, use handball and run and get it forward fast but at times we haven't when we should have. Some of our guys like Yarran, Walker and sometimes Judd, Murphy, Gibbs and Docherty are starting to do this. Mick wants us to go around the boundary when nothing is on (when the opposition are on top). Our problem is we lack quality/depth and leg speed in the middle and run out of gas so we can't go direct often enough during games without risking turning it over.
I hope I have cleared things up with our game plan and dispelled a lot of the Myths behind Mick Malthouse's desired style of play. Just because we play a particular way, doesn't mean Mick wants us playing that way!
So again Mick's plan is to move it quickly, directly, use run, carry and handball, but don't turn it over in the middle of the ground (no going to contests in the middle of the ground until you get it deep inside 50). When we stop running we go up the boundary, this is fine, it is supposed to slow the scoring rate down which it does for both sides, hopefully keeping the goals kicked by the opposition when they have a run on to a minimum while we wait for us to get a run on again.
Our problem is we don't always chose the right time to go up the center or to go wide. We don't score heavily enough when we are on top and our periods when we are on top tend to be a bit short which I think may be due to being too slow (poor) in the midfield, having a poor quality bottom end in the midfield and not enough good players to go through there (some of our change players offer nothing as onballers and this is when we get killed). Get a forward line that can score goals, a midfield that can win the clearances against most other teams and a midfield that runs deep with talent, pace, smarts and can run all day and we will win a hell of a lot of games and people will see the true Mick Malthouse plan.
People forget, even though Collingwood went around the boundary a lot under Malthouse, the also kicked a lot of goals going direct, particularly coming direct out of the middle.
We need to pick our moments and take our opportunities a lot better but we need to players first. The game plan is good, we don't have enough players who can execute it in an attacking way. Better than turning it over in the middle of the ground (even though we do still) a lot which at that level is practically giving goals away.
Last edited:
happydude
Brownlow Medallist
- Nov 20, 2009
- 10,023
- 11,958
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Port Melbourne, Ice, Raven
It involves exiting the back line a little wide then centring towards the HF line as turn over at HB in the middle of the ground is going to come back at goals Alot quicker.
When the players don't move it fast enough etc we get wide and don't turn in fast enough and the corridor is flooded with opposition players so our guys look lost.
When the players don't move it fast enough etc we get wide and don't turn in fast enough and the corridor is flooded with opposition players so our guys look lost.
- Aug 16, 2009
- 7,730
- 11,411
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- North Ballarat
Our top handful of mids was/is top notch, it just falls away quickly after that.
Our midfield depth and runners are deplorable at present.
Ellas Ellas
All Australian
Because, we've lost, and I want to hear what he has to say, all I get is this attitude, it's stupid and it reflects poorly on the club and as a member I see that as his opportunity to tell us what went wrong during the game and he doesn't. It's like he thinks he's above it all.
Ellas Ellas
All Australian
With all due respect, this is just wrong. We have lost to three of the four bottom teams this year and been beaten by 10 goals on a few occasions. Under Ratten we were premiership favs after we knocked off the previous year's grand finalist by 10 goals.
happydude
Brownlow Medallist
- Nov 20, 2009
- 10,023
- 11,958
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Port Melbourne, Ice, Raven
Faves for 5 mins.
Ellas Ellas
All Australian
Point being we beat a top four side and everyone rated us. Look where we are just three years later and with the supposed development of Murphy, Gibbs, Yarran, Warnock, Garlett et al. Sorry but whilst our list isn't good enough to win the big one, we are worth way more than 5 wins at this stage of season. We have gone backwards at a significant rate and I have no doubt that trend will continue next season, at least Mick 'Not My Fault' House will have run out of excuses by then.
Moody Blue
Premiership Player
Are you seriously suggesting that was a penalty? The Cheats were totally spent from all of those 'supplements'. Compare their penalties to what we copped in 2002. By any measure using banned substances is a far worst offence as it places the players lives at risk.
Listening to SEN atm. Banging on about Mick. Coming off the back of hearing nothing but Mick yesterday afternoon, then talking Footy and Footy classified. The amount of sore bottoms he causes embarrassing.
I've been a big defender of Mick's, to friends, family, various forums etc, but even I have to admit, he's making it harder and harder.
Don't like the stuff with Ling (right or wrong) and the negative shadow it casts on our club, and I'm tiring of the on going war with the media. I get that a lot of the questions are rubbish, but some aren't and I'd actually like to hear some answers. Hell, on MMM over here, they have a segment every week called "Mad Mick Monday" dedicated to his media performances on the weekend.
It's all becoming quite draining
Don't like the stuff with Ling (right or wrong) and the negative shadow it casts on our club, and I'm tiring of the on going war with the media. I get that a lot of the questions are rubbish, but some aren't and I'd actually like to hear some answers. Hell, on MMM over here, they have a segment every week called "Mad Mick Monday" dedicated to his media performances on the weekend.
It's all becoming quite draining
Yeh, I am.
- Nov 14, 2012
- 12,365
- 20,282
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Thankyou gbatman for articulating what many of us could see from the stands, even the couch.
Our gameplan is about fast play on footy, quite often through the corridor when we have momentum. Attritional, boundary line and saftey based when we don't have the big mo.
As the list becomes better this style of footy will win games through bursts when we are up but also by reducing the damage when the opposition gets a run on.
I can see how it feels like the polar opposite though. At present the list doesn't have sufficient talent to identify when attacking opportunities should be pursued nor recognise when a saftey first approach should be taken. Hence a sense of confusion and times when we are scored upon quite quickly.
Our gameplan is about fast play on footy, quite often through the corridor when we have momentum. Attritional, boundary line and saftey based when we don't have the big mo.
As the list becomes better this style of footy will win games through bursts when we are up but also by reducing the damage when the opposition gets a run on.
I can see how it feels like the polar opposite though. At present the list doesn't have sufficient talent to identify when attacking opportunities should be pursued nor recognise when a saftey first approach should be taken. Hence a sense of confusion and times when we are scored upon quite quickly.
- Status
