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.
I think you have been very generous with your ratings then, if we went into a grand final with some of those players you said are capable, then it really is a testament to the coach who dragged the team there.

You cant say that the coach is culpable for close losses, then laud the players for close wins. It simply does not work that way, as much as you want it too to support argument.

Close games are generally decided by mistakes, who makes mistakes at crucial times. And in saying that all those crucial mistakes are generally skill errors or decision errors. And even when those errors are made, it is from a culmination of errors prior that increases the significance of the final error. Use last nights game as an example. A lot of talk is on cameron wood for his kick to neale and even docherty for kicking it on the full on the wing. If we had no made simple mistakes and taken our chances earlier when the game was not as "hot" we would of been 4 goals up rather then sweating on every skill execution and decision. Again, missing shots on goal, dropping marks, missing wide open targets inside 50 cant be blamed on a coach on match day.
 
1981 said:
Long winded post seen earlier not worth my time

Mick is starting to get things right

It's coming along

More sustained effort, more mentally tough, game plan tweaked is better now

Just need better cattle now

More improvement will then come

We are not far off it, forget the ladder position it is a process and the tide is starting to change

Teams don't necessarily improve at round 1, they improve at some stage during the process, could be round 1 or 6 or 21.

And coaches evolve too. Mick has made mistakes like all of them but the good thing is he learns and makes tweaks and then gets it right

Old dog who can learn new tricks

It's folly to think a coach must be perfect 100% of the time. The game evolves rapidly and coaches must react and tweak

Mick is getting it together. He's installing the right culture, work ethic, attitude, belief, and now what is needed is better players and more depth

If one cannot see this they are blind or don't know much about football

It's actually an exciting time

We showed we can match it against Haw, Coll, Freo, North, etc. top sides.

Wait til Mick gets better players. It's exciting to think of how quickly things could change now that the culture (platform) is being set in place

With all due respect to them as they do work hard, reality is we won't be a great side until we get rid of spray cans like Ellard and Curnow etc

Depth and more talent is needed
Click to expand...

Totally agree , well said
 
etsal1 said:
We lost to crap sides under Ratten too. Let's not go rewriting history.
Click to expand...

We ruined our top four chances in 2011 by choking against the Bulldogs when we were about 30 points up at one stage.

This was after we had been embarassed by the Eagles at Etihad two weeks earlier before as well.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Windhover said:
our wins over Richmond twice at the end of last year/ our last round win over Port last year - are examples IMO of MM's incompetence as an AFL coach since the team won those games more or less in spite of his game plan.
Click to expand...

Can you please explain how the team winning is an example of the coach being incompetent. Makes no sense to me when you also blame the coach for losses.

Seems he is unable to win or lose without it being used to show he is incompetent in your opinion.

Are you sure that is what you meant?
 
Jabba73 said:
Can you please explain how the team winning is an example of the coach being incompetent. Makes no sense to me when you also blame the coach for losses.

Seems he is unable to win or lose without it being used to show he is incompetent in your opinion.

Are you sure that is what you meant?
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that's what he meant. Wins have nothing to do with MM according to Windy, whereas losses...
 
Windhover said: ↑
our wins over Richmond twice at the end of last year/ our last round win over Port last year - are examples IMO of MM's incompetence as an AFL coach since the team won those games more or less in spite of his game plan.
Click to expand...

Oh wow!

So winning makes a coach incompetent.

Now I have seen it all!
 
Windhover said:
I have explained what I regard as being capable. Just reread. As for your last sentence I suppose it would have made as much sense had you written "also depending on your interpretation of capable, you have severely under-rated a (sic) players", though it might not have served your intended purpose.
At least, from your silence, you get my point about mm culpability for our losses to bottom sides.
Click to expand...

Carlton's starting 22 ( this year) are no where near a top4 side week in week out - that is your basic and fundamental error. Your criticism of Malthouse is weakened by your mistake here.

The blokes below on exposed form this year would be mere depth in other Clubs:

Curnow ( everything good except disposal ) , Ellard, Bell ( I hope his disposal and awareness improves) Warnock, McLean, Carrazzo, Tuohey, Rowe, White ...that is 9 starting 22 players off the top of my head.... Graham, Johnson, Docherty Cripps, are too young /soon to tell..I think Docherty/Cripps/Johnson/and Graham are young and enthusiastic enough to make it.

Malthouse is working with a very very thin list - endeavour has slowly improved but now skill errors become obvious...skill errors at AFL level ...

against Fremantle: Casboult dropped more easy marks in one night than he has all year - the rest of his game was (again) quite good. Docherty showed ( again) his kicking can let him down, Cameron Wood (again) showed what a massive waste of money Warnock has been ( I discount his errant kick in the last minute ) Ellard shows endeavour but those two missed kicks for a forward should be kicked every time.

Malthouse has pretty much 'made' Rowe/White/Buckley/Curnow/Wood/Casboult into good role players - for Carlton. He has resurrected Yarran's career and seen Gibbs play rise to a more consistent higher level. Murphy is (finally) starting to play like a Captain and Thomas in the last two games is showing his class. Judd is playing with an enthusiasm (on field) not seen for a while and Waite is playing his best football in years. Jamison and Henderson are consistent.

At the same time - Malthouse is being patient and careful with injured players, especially the young one - never rushing them back.

Ratten based his game style on chaos football - a bunch of plodders as fill and a sprinkle of star dust to motivate and win the occasional shoot out. Go back and review semi final losses against Brisbane/Sydney to see a team capitulate to sides they should have beaten ( back then) Ratten's best year was 2011 - but sans Gibbs and Kreuzer - an ordinary West Coast was able to stop a thin list which in previous week destroyed EssenDONE.

Kernahan and Ratten BS'd far too much to supporters and were far too short term in their thinking about the list.

I'll take (even an ex Collingwood coach ) Malthouse over a football mentality which saw Ratten not on speaking terms with parts of the football department, a part time coach of the VFL team and a bunch of list cloggers ignored and rotting the list management for years to come. We are still paying the cost of silly management.

Malthouse was hamstrung in his first year - by a bunch of outrageous contract extensions paid to players who were never going to help the Club win the next flag - first chance he got he made (what?) ten list changes? Give some of the younger kids a chance to come through under better development - Everitt/Thomas and Docherty are proof that malthouse knows how to trade. Time will show wether he also knows how to draft.
 
Mick building his greatest legacy
Head out Waverley way and you will find budding Prime Ministers on Hawthorn’s list, with the obvious in Shaun Burgoyne, Josh Gibson, Luke Hodge, Jordan Lewis, Sam Mitchell, Jarryd Roughead and Brad Sewell, and the less obvious in Jed Anderson, Ben McEvoy, Liam Shields and Brendan Whitecross.
Click to expand...
LOL.

What?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Our leaders in Murphy, Simpson, Gibbs, Thomas, Henderson alone are good enough but we've also got Carrazzo, Judd, Jamison and I personally love the work of Armfield in the VFL while Cripps, Buckley and apparently Graham are good too.
 
Aphrodite said:
Oh wow!

So winning makes a coach incompetent.

Now I have seen it all!
Click to expand...
You certainly do "see it all" if you can extract the generalisation "so winning makes a coach incompetent" from the particular examples of my post. I explained why those particular wins did not reflect well on MM (because they were won after his "game plan" had been abandoned - i.e. in spite of his best efforts). Do you think I am wrong in that particular conclusion just because we won?

On the other hand drawing unwarranted generalisations usually does lead to ridiculous conclusions. If this a reflection of your thinking process (it would be an unwarranted generalisation on my part to assume you frequently did this) you would do well to rectify it. Your post adds nothing to the debate.
 
Fair dinkum, Windy. Do you really think people care that much? At what stage do you agree to disagree? Leave it alone and get some fresh air. Hope that adds to "the debate".
 
JustaBattler said:
Watch the Fremantle game - last year they rag dolled Carlton - this year we managed to find a way to lose ( just). Massive improvements - just massive.
Click to expand...

You know what I liked about it?

The fact Malthouse didn't talk the opposition up, leading into the game.
 
Butera said:
I think you have been very generous with your ratings then, if we went into a grand final with some of those players you said are capable, then it really is a testament to the coach who dragged the team there.
Click to expand...
I will be misinterpreted as a "ratts" supporter but, here goes.
In the 2011 final against a more or less full strength West Coast there were 13 players who did not play in the team against Freo. Of those 13, 5 are definite losses: Scotland was a very good player in 2011 and has retired, Duigan was fair in 2011 and has retired, Betts has gone to another club, Walker is out injured and Robinson suspended.

Of the remaining 8 players, Warnock, Armfield and Garlett remain on the list but did not play. Each should be better than they were in 2011, or at least no worse. We must presume their places were taken by better players.

Five who played in the 2011 final are no longer with the Club: Laidler, Ohailpin, Thornton, Joseph and Davies. Although others disagreed with me I expressed in 2011 that Thornton was a dud (and his first half in the final to an extent did not support me), each of Ohailpin, Laidler, Joseph and Davies have been seen by the club to be duds since they were each let go.

The 13 replacement players are: Gibbs, Daisy, Wood, Graham, Casboult, Waite, Rowe, Bell, Curnow, Docherty, McLean, White, and Johnson.
IMO Gibbs, Daisy, Waite, Curnow and Docherty are collectively better than Scotland ('11), Duigan, Betts, Walker and Robinson.

I think most would agree:
Casboult is better than Ohailpin
McLean is better than Joseph
White is no worse than Davies
Rowe is no worse than Thornton

Wood was preferred to Warnock
Graham was preferred to Armfield
Bell was preferred to Garlett
and although: Laidler is better than Johnson, this was MM's call.

In short, comparing our last start team with the team that very nearly made it to the semi-finals in 2011 (I still think Walker should have been awarded a free kick against Glass) man for man IMO the current team is way better than that 2011 team. The big difference is the coach. So many of the 2011 team have gone backwards or gone altogether. And age is not a factor. Only Judd and Carrazzo have reached the stage where age has an influence on their output, but so many young players of the 2011 team should have been moving forward.

If, "dragging this team" to a grand final would be testament to the coach, as you put it, what must you have thought of Ratts efforts in 2011? Either Ratts was a brilliant coach who overachieved with rubbish or, as I would have it, the 2011 team had the makings of a team ready to challenge for the Premiership in 2012 - and the current team should be there or thereabouts.

Butera said:
You cant say that the coach is culpable for close losses, then laud the players for close wins. It simply does not work that way, as much as you want it too to support argument.
Click to expand...
I agree it "does not work that way" in the simplified ("strawman") manner in which you present it. Amusingly (to me) MM claims that the players are making a habit of losing the close ones and implicitly blames the Freo close loss on the players failure in this regard. Correctly MM says that if the wins and losses of the close ones were more or less even then no pattern emerges but, darkly, he indicates there is a pattern and it will need to be addressed "in the pre-season".

What do the facts tell us. IMO "within 12 points - 2 goals" = "a close game".
On this definition are win/loss ration has been:
Year Close losses Close wins
2009 5 2
2010 3 0
2011 3 2
2012 2 3
2013 4 3
2014 5 2

Looking at these "facts" there was a strong bias for close losses over wins starting in 2009 which was finally balanced in 2011 and 2012. Since MM it remained balance in 2013 and has gone sloppy in 2014.

MM says that this problem arising in 2014 needs to be addressed in the pre-season. Why this Isn't a tacit admission by him that he failed to properly train the players to deal with close game scenarios, but is rather some fault of the players has me beat. Perhaps you, or some other MM apologist, can explain it.

In any event IMO simply looking at the win/loss ration without looking at the circumstances in the game that might have led to the narrow win/loss rewards meaningless statistics over reality. After the Geelong loss I was highly critical of MM's coaching at the end of the game. MM had gone into the game with a plan that worked. We went man on man all over the field with each player knowing what he had to do to beat his direct opponent and contribute to the team effort. MM deserves plaudits for the successful implementation of this not entirely original strategy and I freely acknowledge it. It required much coaching skill and forward planning to work, which it did.

Unfortunately, with 2 minutes to go and 7 points up MM failed to respond to the Geelong challenge. For the last 5 minutes or so of the game Geelong players/coach realised that they were not going to win the game by playing in accordance with their "game plan" and promptly went on all out attack. This frequently happens when sides have been beaten all day playing the way they were instructed to play (as we did against Richmond and Port last year). MM stuck to his "man on man" guns. This is why when Selwood broke free from the pack at half forward and kicked the penultimate goal there was no one standing goalside of the pack as there should have been. This is why when the ball was kicked deep to the goal-square the Geelong player who kicked the sealer was on his own when Hawkins knocked it to him - because Simpson had run off his man in order to be at the drop of the ball. In each instance had we had the extra man in defence it is most unlikely the goals would have been scored.

IMO the Geelong loss was clearly due to an elementary coaching failure by MM, after having one of his best coached games for Carlton preceding the error. I suspect MM was too exhausted and emotionally involved to think straight. This is a sign in itself that he is passed it.

In any event if we directly blame the Geelong loss on a failure to flood the defence (i.e. treat the loss as a "win" for statistical purposes when looking at how we go in the close ones) then our close losses this year are 5 - 1 = 4 and our close wins are 2 + 1 = 3 which is not a trend at all.


Butera said:
Close games are generally decided by mistakes, who makes mistakes at crucial times. And in saying that all those crucial mistakes are generally skill errors or decision errors. And even when those errors are made, it is from a culmination of errors prior that increases the significance of the final error. Use last nights game as an example. A lot of talk is on cameron wood for his kick to neale and even docherty for kicking it on the full on the wing. If we had no made simple mistakes and taken our chances earlier when the game was not as "hot" we would of been 4 goals up rather then sweating on every skill execution and decision. Again, missing shots on goal, dropping marks, missing wide open targets inside 50 cant be blamed on a coach on match day.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct that missing shots on goal, dropping marks etc can't be blamed on the coach. Such errors are no doubt due to the individual player's ability either generally or to cope with the pressure of the moment. I do not blame MM for the loss against Freo.

On the other hand Lyon, who is a very defensively minded coach, clearly instructed his team to play much more attackingly in the last quarter. They played on and attacked down the middle much more than they usually do. That Freo did so and were able to win despite being 2 players down in the rotations is full credit to them. Their coach, with a little bit of help from the mistakes, pressure induced or otherwise, made a difference. Kudos to Lyon. Our coach didn't make a difference. That is NOT to blame MM. It is just a fact (or, more properly, an opinion dressed as fact).
More importantly, if MM goes away from the Freo game thinking "if only we knew how to handle the close games" we would be a much more successful team, for the reasons I have expressed I disagree with the diagnosis.
 
Sector 7G said:
I like how journalists keep on talking about resting Champions in the forward pocket like Matthews in the 70's. It's not like we expect a tired champion midfielder to apply defensive pressure or need to have them fresh when they go back into the middle.
Click to expand...

Can I quote your post in 5 years time when an evergreen Juddman at 35 is still clocking up 35 goals a season? :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top