Tough on the outer - Malthouse

[Cousin of Daicos]

Time for Mick to let go

edited for the updated Age article I have posted at the end.

Age story

LIFE after Collingwood has been ''very difficult'', Mick Malthouse has revealed in an exclusive interview with The Age, while he says he has not ruled out the possibility of a return to coaching.

''I'd be lying if I didn't say I've found things difficult,'' he says. ''It's been very difficult, very strange.''

When contacted by The Age, McGuire repeated his earlier claims that Malthouse ''needed a break''.
''It didn't matter how much I asked him, begged him, cajoled him to take more time off over the summer, he was still the first back at the office,'' McGuire said.

''With Mick, we didn't want him to be completely shot. We wanted him to hand the baton over at full pace. We look after individuals, but ultimately the Collingwood Football Club is the most important thing.''

He added: ''Mick always says, whenever somebody starts talking about retirement, never talk them out of it. And at that stage there were a few situations where Mick said things along the lines of 'I don't think I can go on with this' and 'It's just getting too much'.''

Malthouse flatly rejects these claims. ''No, I've never said that,'' he says. ''I'd be the first to get out if I didn't think I had the necessary energy and focus. It's a team sport, so the moment you're thinking about yourself instead of the whole, you're done.''

Hhmmm, who to believe. The outgoing, bitter, childish ex-coach with a history of lies and hypocrisy, or the current president who has a history of backing his men to the hilt based on what THEY told him?

I hope he does come back, and coaches another club that doesn't have Collingwood's resources, or gives him the control he got at Collingwood to see how he deals with it and sees what results he gets at 60 plus.

 

[lgarth80]

Would the lack of 800k p/a be a factor?
I'd find it tough to move from that to a public service job at La Trobe, and a media role with C7 and 3AW probably in the tens rather than hundreds of thousands.

I know he loved the boys and they loved him, so that's enough for me to be happy and grateful for his role in taking a club from a spot where people were almost dying of legionairres disease in the spa baths to the most professional club in the competition, a flag, a chance at more, and involvement in a succession plan which involved mentoring a bloke for over 10 years.

Even if Buckley and Malthouse weren't the best of mates, they worked very well together over that decade, and it certainly wasn't Nathan's fault they didn't share the ultimate success together as player-coach.

All the best in retirement Mick; here's hoping you continue to come down and have a kick with Daisy before the game.

 

[JA27]

mick needs to re-read some sections of his book. retirement and leaving behind members of the army for the greater good of the club, interesting that it was eddie that he left behind.

 

[ipswichpies]

He was great coach and builder with Eddie of the Magpies from the ground up that cannot be denied but by the end he looked like he knew he was finished.

He may well recharge the batteries over the course of this season with no pressure of coaching but he does not have 5 years in him to build a premiership list elsewhere.

He would be doing ok moneywise it is not like he is a pauper but he could have stayed and still done his media stuff he chose not.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

He was great coach and builder with Eddie of the Magpies from the ground up that cannot be denied but by the end he looked like he knew he was finished.

He may well recharge the batteries over the course of this season with no pressure of coaching but he does not have 5 years in him to build a premiership list elsewhere.

He would be doing ok moneywise it is not like he is a pauper but he could have stayed and still done his media stuff he chose not.

This is what I don't get and why I say he is too much of an egomaniac.

He was given the chance to be on 900K a year to basically do not much at all and go on holidays for most of the year but his pride prevented him from accepting that.

Bad luck. Club saves some money, some of which is now going to Rocket who is now probably on more than he was at the Dogs.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Mick's behaviour seems very strange.

It was Mick's decision to leave. Eddie has come out and said that he respects Mick's decision, and thought the guy was stuffed and needed a break.

Why can't Mick just let Collingwood save a little face and let it rest? What's he going to achieve by stirring the pot?

Hey, even when players get the ****'s with clubs and quit they don't come out with this kind of precociousness. You didn't see Leon behave this way. Hey, if I remember correctly even Jack Anthony managed to keep his mouth shut.

Mick's behaviour only reflects badly on himself.

 

[half_back_flank]

Would the lack of 800k p/a be a factor?
I'd find it tough to move from that to a public service job at La Trobe, and a media role with C7 and 3AW probably in the tens rather than hundreds of thousands.

He'd be doing alright.

 

[cobbly]

Gunna be so annoying listening to Mick prattle on all year. Wish he would just retire quietly but I guess that's too much to hope for.

I think it's pretty obvious that Mick didn't feel he was finished, but Eddie did, and Mick is still bitter about it. Hence the bankhanded compliments he keeps giving to bucks. We will never really know who was right, but I'm willing to back eddie on this one.

 

[HFF]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...-strategy-switch/story-e6frf9jf-1226313932816

Very interesting article which shows what we all saw and thought last season- we never really used the press as much as season 2010- particularly in the finals.

IMO, I can't agree with Pendles here that Mick got it right. We have a proven formula that works- why would you go with something so unplanned on the eve of finals, particularly the GF?

Mick was spooked foolishly. The team in round 24 was going through the motions, there was no "pick the press apart" at all. Mick fielded a strong side that didn't care for the result and fooled himself and we had hurt bodies to come out of it too.

He thought he had to act when he didn't. If anything, the press was not the issue, it was our predictable ball movement down the boundary. The only thing Geelong picked apart was setting up their numbers boundary side because they knew that was the only way we were going to go forward.

Mick got it horribly wrong I'm afraid.

The press works and nobody does it better than us- yet for some strange reason, Mick opted to not use it.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...-strategy-switch/story-e6frf9jf-1226313932816

Very interesting article which shows what we all saw and thought last season- we never really used the press as much as season 2010- particularly in the finals.

IMO, I can't agree with Pendles here that Mick got it right. We have a proven formula that works- why would you go with something so unplanned on the eve of finals, particularly the GF?

Mick was spooked foolishly. The team in round 24 was going through the motions, there was no "pick the press apart" at all. Mick fielded a strong side that didn't care for the result and fooled himself and we had hurt bodies to come out of it too.

He thought he had to act when he didn't. If anything, the press was not the issue, it was our predictable ball movement down the boundary. The only thing Geelong picked apart was setting up their numbers boundary side because they knew that was the only way we were going to go forward.

Mick got it horribly wrong I'm afraid.

The press works and nobody does it better than us- yet for some strange reason, Mick opted to not use it.

Which is what I was saying for most of last season.

You could see out on the ground that we weren't using the press, and for the life of me I couldn't figure out why.

The only logical reason was that it was Bucks' gameplan and Mick didn't want to leave the club winngin 2 flags with his successor's gameplan. He's too proud to let that happen. Childish. As usual, all about Mick putting himself before the club. Cost us a flag.

The press wasn't 'picked apart' because West Coast used ti just fine for the entire year, and aside from the prelim, had no issue using it, INCLUDING beating Geelong during H&A, something we couldn't do.

So I'm hoping that when Bucks says "thinkgs won't change much", I'm hoping that means THE PRESS IS BACK IN FULL FORCE and we start choking teams to death again.

Unless it's PROVEN that our press has been beaten, we should be using it.

 

[mattys123]

So I'm hoping that when Bucks says "thinkgs won't change much", I'm hoping that means THE PRESS IS BACK IN FULL FORCE and we start choking teams to death again.

Unless it's PROVEN that our press has been beaten, we should be using it.

Don't worry Ed, The Press will be back.

I saw most of our practice matches in full, and in each game we gradually built up to using the old "2010 extreme press".

Then against St Kilda we went full on, and for the first 2 quarters the Saints couldn't clear out forward half, it was the stuff that makes your spine tingle.

The Hawks will not know what is going to hit them tonight, even Clarkson said "it's the same old Collingwood game plan" or words to that effect yesterday, yet tonight he will get the same old Collingwood, but it will be the 2010 old Collingwood.

We can't win a flag without the manic forward press, that was proven last year.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Don't worry Ed, The Press will be back.

I saw most of our practice matches in full, and in each game we gradually built up to using the old "2010 extreme press".

Then against St Kilda we went full on, and for the first 2 quarters the Saints couldn't clear out forward half, it was the stuff that makes your spine tingle.

The Hawks will not know what is going to hit them tonight, even Clarkson said "it's the same old Collingwood game plan" or words to that effect yesterday, yet tonight he will get the same old Collingwood, but it will be the 2010 old Collingwood.

We can't win a flag without the manic forward press, that was proven last year.

I'll be there tonight and I'll be watching very closely to see if Bucks has in fact re-instated our press, which in all honesty when is used in full force is all but unbreakable.

I think we need to send a message to the comp that says "F**k with us at your own peril".

 

[HeavyPop]

I think you guys are going a bit overboard with this press business. Most teams use it now, while we were basically the only side using it in 2010.

 

[lgarth80]

Now now guys, let's not rewrite history.

Fact is the press is tremendously difficult to implement for a full game with sub rule.

Eagles probably did it better than any team during the year given their improvement from wooden spoon to prelim. It shows the strategy can work...but it does have limitations, as proved by Geelong in the PF.

Mick's great strength was an ability to create a gameplan the players believed in, that suited the strengths of the team, and meant that no matter the opponent we could go in confident of winning.

Micks' great weakness was an ability to change the flow of a game (otherwise known as "NO PLAN B") during when it was flowing. He did inspire a few matches where a comeback ensued however (finals in 2009/2011). A bit more Sheedy in his makeup and he probably would have retired with 4 flags given the amount of attempts he had at the big prize.

That said, would love it if the Pies have got the fitness levels raised now to be good enough to pump the press for the whole game, and test it out on Hawthorn tonight.

 

[Jelly Bean]

The only logical reason was that it was Bucks' gameplan and Mick didn't want to leave the club winngin 2 flags with his successor's gameplan. He's too proud to let that happen. Childish. As usual, all about Mick putting himself before the club. Cost us a flag.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I have read (even on this forum) for a very long time.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

This is one of the most ridiculous things I have read (even on this forum) for a very long time.

Don't care. All evidence in front of me suggests this is the case.

 

[lgarth80]

I think you guys are going a bit overboard with this press business. Most teams use it now, while we were basically the only side using it in 2010.

Including Geelong now and that's a huge thing.
Chris Scott wasn't the type of person to get sucked in again to playing the Geelong free flowing game plan.

Much better for them to instead of getting hundreds of handballs a match, to pump the ball long, then apply their own press with 3 or 4 small aboriginal forwards.

So yeah, now it again becomes down to whether we are better man-for-man than Geelong, and when I line the teams up, I still see them slightly in front unless we develop some more in the next 20 weeks.

Hawthorn have depth which was created by injuries last year, but that doesn't necessarily mean that when their best 22 come back that their team improves.

It's one of these catch 22 situations where you have an injured player who is part of the best 22, then the replacement actually plays better during their time in the role, and you only realise that when the old good player comes back and the team gets worse.

Peverill in 2001 at Essendon is a classic example. Was hardly thought to be best 22 when he got re-demoted to the rookie list, but in the end a fit Pev could have been better than a returning player with injury cloud such as Mercuri/Misiti/etc.

 

[micksolo]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...-strategy-switch/story-e6frf9jf-1226313932816

Very interesting article which shows what we all saw and thought last season- we never really used the press as much as season 2010- particularly in the finals.

IMO, I can't agree with Pendles here that Mick got it right. We have a proven formula that works- why would you go with something so unplanned on the eve of finals, particularly the GF?

Mick was spooked foolishly. The team in round 24 was going through the motions, there was no "pick the press apart" at all. Mick fielded a strong side that didn't care for the result and fooled himself and we had hurt bodies to come out of it too.

He thought he had to act when he didn't. If anything, the press was not the issue, it was our predictable ball movement down the boundary. The only thing Geelong picked apart was setting up their numbers boundary side because they knew that was the only way we were going to go forward.

Mick got it horribly wrong I'm afraid.

The press works and nobody does it better than us- yet for some strange reason, Mick opted to not use it.

That's pretty harsh....I'd say it'd have more to do with the fact we had a lot of players coming back from injuries and who were underdone, pressing for 120 mins probably just wasn't possible and they had to adjust accordingly.

 

[HFF]

That's pretty harsh....I'd say it'd have more to do with the fact we had a lot of players coming back from injuries and who were underdone, pressing for 120 mins probably just wasn't possible and they had to adjust accordingly.

It's not harsh at all.

It's probably fact.

Why would you try something out of the blue so late and deep into the finals when the very plan you have been executing for almosgt 2 years now is a proven performer? Do not buy into the whole "Geelong picked our press apart" theory. They didn't.

What they did do is pick apart our ball movement going forward- they defended the boundary side of the corridor, placed all their numbers in there and all of a sudden the supposed "get out kick down the line" was a total scrap with bodies everywhere. When Geelong won the footy they would then bring it back through the corridor and into the fat side of the ground where all the open space was.

So all of a sudden, instead of marking space and territory which would have squeezed and cut down Geelong's avenues and space, we opted for man on man which left all their players the freedom to move into open spaces at will with our guys trailing in behind.

Because we had so many players hurting, it was unwise to play man on man because these players did not get the assistance and help of the team zone/press that the press would have provided- point in case Ben Reid on Hawkins. All of their players got one-on-one contests which was to the detriment of the team whereas our guys were always outnumbered- point in case Travis Cloke after he started like a house on fire.

 

[migz]

It's not harsh at all.

It's probably fact.

Why would you try something out of the blue so late and deep into the finals when the very plan you have been executing for almosgt 2 years now is a proven performer? Do not buy into the whole "Geelong picked our press apart" theory. They didn't.

What they did do is pick apart our ball movement going forward- they defended the boundary side of the corridor, placed all their numbers in there and all of a sudden the supposed "get out kick down the line" was a total scrap with bodies everywhere. When Geelong won the footy they would then bring it back through the corridor and into the fat side of the ground where all the open space was.

So all of a sudden, instead of marking space and territory which would have squeezed and cut down Geelong's avenues and space, we opted for man on man which left all their players the freedom to move into open spaces at will with our guys trailing in behind.

Because we had so many players hurting, it was unwise to play man on man because these players did not get the assistance and help of the team zone/press that the press would have provided- point in case Ben Reid on Hawkins. All of their players got one-on-one contests which was to the detriment of the team whereas our guys were always outnumbered- point in case Travis Cloke after he started like a house on fire.

I love this post. So true. Its exactly how geelong beat us. They zoned the wing and locked us in there then cut us up through the corridor.

 

[danielnajdek]

It's not harsh at all.

It's probably fact.

Why would you try something out of the blue so late and deep into the finals when the very plan you have been executing for almosgt 2 years now is a proven performer? Do not buy into the whole "Geelong picked our press apart" theory. They didn't.

What they did do is pick apart our ball movement going forward- they defended the boundary side of the corridor, placed all their numbers in there and all of a sudden the supposed "get out kick down the line" was a total scrap with bodies everywhere. When Geelong won the footy they would then bring it back through the corridor and into the fat side of the ground where all the open space was.

So all of a sudden, instead of marking space and territory which would have squeezed and cut down Geelong's avenues and space, we opted for man on man which left all their players the freedom to move into open spaces at will with our guys trailing in behind.

Because we had so many players hurting, it was unwise to play man on man because these players did not get the assistance and help of the team zone/press that the press would have provided- point in case Ben Reid on Hawkins. All of their players got one-on-one contests which was to the detriment of the team whereas our guys were always outnumbered- point in case Travis Cloke after he started like a house on fire.

Yep your spot on.

When I read that article in the HS today I was thinking why the hell change a game plan for the last game of the year. It still hurts thinking about that GF last year :-(

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Don't care. All evidence in front of me suggests this is the case.

Strong historical revisionism.

The press was not in evidence at all tonight. I think Buck's is his own man with his own vision and supporters are trying fervently to rewrite history to blame the coach that left for the GF loss, not the team that was outplayed.

I strongly doubt it was a childish spat to tweak the gameplan, or some Machiavellian plot to feed his own egomania.

Malthouse had a very strong bond with the playing group and it was obvious how much he had emotionally invested in the team winning.

Geelong busted the press 4 times last year, wielded by its two best exponents.

Collingwood have a fantastic squad, but I think tonights showing solidly contradicts both the assumption that Bucks was the main or sole driving force behind the press and that it will be the main tactical focus of your gameplan.

Malthouse is a tremendous coach, you should be celebrating him for the success he brought the club, not trying to rewrite history out of spite.

 

[Rohan25]

Malthouse is a tremendous coach, you should be celebrating him for the success he brought the club, not trying to rewrite history out of spite.

What? You mean you can't see all the compelling evidence that conclusively proves Mick Malthouse lost a Grand Final on purpose purely out of bitterness? I guess we're very lucky on this forum to have a genius like Shpeshal Ed to enlighten us all.

 

[ipswichpies]

Ed may have something against MM but I do not and poor coaching and MM ,s lack of focus after his performance on the TFS were factors in our late season fade out.

It should be admitted that suspensions and injuries were the main causes but were not the only things,we know that Eddie and Mick are the reasons that the club is in such a good position today but there is a bit of reverse revisionism here if people think MM should not get his share of the blame.

I do have tremendous admiration for MM but he was outcoached by Worsfold Clarkson and Scott during the finals and he looked like he run his race.

 

[jonbe54]

Strong historical revisionism.

The press was not in evidence at all tonight. I think Buck's is his own man with his own vision and supporters are trying fervently to rewrite history to blame the coach that left for the GF loss, not the team that was outplayed.

I strongly doubt it was a childish spat to tweak the gameplan, or some Machiavellian plot to feed his own egomania.

Malthouse had a very strong bond with the playing group and it was obvious how much he had emotionally invested in the team winning.

Geelong busted the press 4 times last year, wielded by its two best exponents.

Collingwood have a fantastic squad, but I think tonights showing solidly contradicts both the assumption that Bucks was the main or sole driving force behind the press and that it will be the main tactical focus of your gameplan.

Malthouse is a tremendous coach, you should be celebrating him for the success he brought the club, not trying to rewrite history out of spite.

Think what you like about Mick but accept that he spent the last half of the season destabilizing his own club in the press, just plain childish petulance.