View Full Version : Malthouse- you are a stubborn, arrogant, past your used by date hack
TheBushranger
11 Jun 2007, 18:19
I have been critical of Malthouse's selections all year. They are arrogant, ignorant and basically just poor.
Toovey has been the worst player ever to play for Collingwood. I am sure of that. It is a disgrace he was selected today. I don't want to harp on Toovey, we all know he is shit.
Stanley- should not have been selected. Not up to AFL standard. And why was he kept on Robertson for so long.
It is selections like these that frustrate our members and supporters. Everyone should give the club a call this week and demand to know why Toovey was picked, and why Maxwell wasn;t moved onto Robertson, not Stanley and Toovey.
His coaching was a joke today and we deserved to lose because of it. Whenever we get into a good position, his stubborness ****s us up big time.
Ekulman
11 Jun 2007, 18:27
Cox and Licuria should have played imho.
Optimax
11 Jun 2007, 18:27
Toovey will be a good player as will Stanley lay of them it was not their fault the smart man upstairs decided tot hrow them to wolves and let them get killed.
We played poorly, umpires were shit. but MM made some massive errors in match ups today.
Didz_is_God_4
11 Jun 2007, 18:28
I have been critical of Malthouse's selections all year. They are arrogant, ignorant and basically just poor.
Toovey has been the worst player ever to play for Collingwood. I am sure of that. It is a disgrace he was selected today. I don't want to harp on Toovey, we all know he is shit.
Stanley- should not have been selected. Not up to AFL standard. And why was he kept on Robertson for so long.
It is selections like these that frustrate our members and supporters. Everyone should give the club a call this week and demand to know why Toovey was picked, and why Maxwell wasn;t moved onto Robertson, not Stanley and Toovey.
His coaching was a joke today and we deserved to lose because of it. Whenever we get into a good position, his stubborness ****s us up big time.
It's called persistance fool, look back 2 seasons ago at where were with these kids, and look now. Wake up ass clown, the days of Rocca, Buckley etc. are coming to a end, or should we just keep playing them until they die?
Hadders
11 Jun 2007, 18:31
I have been critical of Malthouse's selections all year. They are arrogant, ignorant and basically just poor.
Toovey has been the worst player ever to play for Collingwood. I am sure of that. It is a disgrace he was selected today. I don't want to harp on Toovey, we all know he is shit.
Stanley- should not have been selected. Not up to AFL standard. And why was he kept on Robertson for so long.
It is selections like these that frustrate our members and supporters. Everyone should give the club a call this week and demand to know why Toovey was picked, and why Maxwell wasn;t moved onto Robertson, not Stanley and Toovey.
His coaching was a joke today and we deserved to lose because of it. Whenever we get into a good position, his stubborness ****s us up big time.
I won't even comment on your hatred for Toovey because from the previous rubbish that you've spouted its obvious that whatever anyone says your mind will stay closed.
As for Stanley on Robertson for so long, tell me who else did we have? Maxwell isn't quick enough to go with Robertson and with Harry off we had no one else. Both Stanley and Toovey were destroyed by him but we didn't have anyone else that could go onto him.
Harry going off and not coming back was a defining point in the match.
Blame Mick for losing Presti, Clemo & Harry. :rolleyes:
FFS! Stanners seemed a reasonable replacement for Rhyce who didn't come up.
Lica could have missed a valuable run if he was emergency. Cox should come back soon, but as per my Willi report, he is not in blistering form due to some injury & his discretion was poorly timed for him.
We got exposed for youth. Had to happen at some time. Blaming Mick at this stage is foolish. He is the main reason we are 7-4!
Toovey beat Davey until he was put onto Robertson. He just needs to put the right ****ing boots on though. Stop slipping over.
Agree with you about why Maxwell wasn't given a go on Robertson. Would have thought that was obvious.
TheBushranger
11 Jun 2007, 18:35
It's called persistance fool, look back 2 seasons ago at where were with these kids, and look now. Wake up ass clown, the days of Rocca, Buckley etc. are coming to a end, or should we just keep playing them until they die?
You don't play them if they;re not ready. You don't persist with shit, I don't care what anyone else says, and Toovey is shit. The quicker he is shown the door, the quicker the Collingwood football club will move forward. He is a throw back to the days where we recruited duds like Shackleton, King, Nixon, Mullins etc. He is worse than those four.
We should have played Licuria, Cox or Iles instead of Toovey and Stanley. Absolute joke.
EB&W Pieman
11 Jun 2007, 18:35
Lots of stuff MM did today was mystifying (why did we persist with that defence to their kick ins when it was patently obvious that it was not working?) but any side with their 1-2-3 tall defenders (Presti, Jimmy, Harry)out was going to struggle.
MM's options against Robbo, Neitz, Bate etc were very limited today.
Blame Mick for losing Presti, Clemo & Harry. :rolleyes:
FFS! Stanners seemed a reasonable replacement for Rhyce who didn't come up.
Lica could have missed a valuable run if he was emergency. Cox should come back soon, but as per my Willi report, he is not in blistering form due to some injury & his discretion was poorly timed for him.
We got exposed for youth. Had to happen at some time. Blaming Mick at this stage is foolish. He is the main reason we are 7-4!
well said...we had few options and our defence was obviously overstretched from the beginning but with harry goin out that just hurt us even more. Mick has done pretty well this year a couple of wins away and near once against wce which he believed we could have won, i am not overly disappointed with the season thus far far from it, but disappointed with the game naturally but injuries happen not much u can do. On the bright side, we are still yet to play our best football or field our best 22. The young players have really been doing well in some respects been punching above their weight/experience. Just because we lost doesnt mean its the coaches fault...people tend to forget that perhaps the opposition played well too.
Mick didn't cost us the game, Anthony Rocca did.
Worst game from a senior leader of an AFL club I have seen. His lack of discipline cost us the game pure and simple. He needed to stand up and be a leader. Instead he was lazy, played from behind and gave away a free kick whenever the ball went near him.
He got a lot more moves right than wrong today, it was Rocca and Wakes that really let the side down. In fact he should have left Rocca off the ground, was the only time the forward line structure looked right.
Gee this place is busy after a loss
Lenny29
11 Jun 2007, 18:55
Anyone seen Maxy one-on-one at any time this year? Remember Mitch Clark?
I don't reckon he's beaten anyone. I was scared he'd put him onto Robertson - Toovey did okay once he went on.
WakeUpTaz
11 Jun 2007, 18:56
now we can all blame mick, and i will too but if our players did better and injuries didnt happen the oucome might have been different
Toovey should not have been played on robbo
stanley should not have been played on robbo
why not drop rocca in the middle of the backline, might get a touch
why not have a loose man in defence when melbourne are firing, i rather we play like ****ing sydney and win a GF
Gee this place is busy after a loss
And its pretty embarrassing too....lets kill Malthouse....lets shoot Rocca for being the worst off all time and lets forget last weeks 5 goal which prob won us that game....lets play Licca but iam at least sure Licca would be talked about as being slow and pathetic today(hell lets blame him anyway for today's loss)....Toovey is a 8 game player who should have won us the game and disgraced himself...these posts are seriously infantile and reflects poorly on us...its not a constructive critique simply blame and bash....weak...bloody weak...
Barwick17
11 Jun 2007, 18:59
Mick didn't cost us the game, Anthony Rocca did.
Worst game from a senior leader of an AFL club I have seen. His lack of discipline cost us the game pure and simple. He needed to stand up and be a leader. Instead he was lazy, played from behind and gave away a free kick whenever the ball went near him.
He got a lot more moves right than wrong today, it was Rocca and Wakes that really let the side down. In fact he should have left Rocca off the ground, was the only time the forward line structure looked right.
Spot on. Even when he cant get a kick he can impose himself on the contest - run though a pack, big shepherd, something to lift team morale. Rock does not do this with the big imposing body he possesses. All good leaders lead the way - Kernahan and Carey didnt kick 7 every game but their team always knew they were around
doppleganger
11 Jun 2007, 18:59
I have been critical of Malthouse's selections all year. They are arrogant, ignorant and basically just poor.
Toovey has been the worst player ever to play for Collingwood. I am sure of that. It is a disgrace he was selected today. I don't want to harp on Toovey, we all know he is shit.
Stanley- should not have been selected. Not up to AFL standard. And why was he kept on Robertson for so long.
It is selections like these that frustrate our members and supporters. Everyone should give the club a call this week and demand to know why Toovey was picked, and why Maxwell wasn;t moved onto Robertson, not Stanley and Toovey.
His coaching was a joke today and we deserved to lose because of it. Whenever we get into a good position, his stubborness ****s us up big time.
Toovey did well on A.Davey, then he was switched on to Robbo..........because we had no options for Robbo
Bit much to actually expect blokes like Stanley and Toovey to play on an AA quality forward in Robbo, Clement, Presti and Harry would be our first three choices for Robbo, and all were not available
Didz_is_God_4
11 Jun 2007, 19:01
You don't play them if they;re not ready. You don't persist with shit, I don't care what anyone else says, and Toovey is shit. The quicker he is shown the door, the quicker the Collingwood football club will move forward. He is a throw back to the days where we recruited duds like Shackleton, King, Nixon, Mullins etc. He is worse than those four.
We should have played Licuria, Cox or Iles instead of Toovey and Stanley. Absolute joke.
And that's why you're not a coach, you've got no idea.
vinnie_vegas69
11 Jun 2007, 19:04
Toovey played on Davey and on Bruce for a bit - Bruce did nothing all day, and Davey only contributed when Toovey was put onto Robertson.
Malthouse didn't have many options with Clement out and Harry going down early - Obviously Harry is our best fit defender for someone like Robertson.
And Stanley looked okay when not chasing on the lead - I just don't think he's a defender in any way shape or form. Put him into the midfield or at least on a wing.
And its pretty embarrassing too....lets kill Malthouse....lets shoot Rocca for being the worst off all time and lets forget last weeks 5 goal which prob won us that game....lets play Licca but iam at least sure Licca would be talked about as being slow and pathetic today(hell lets blame him anyway for today's loss)....Toovey is a 8 game player who should have won us the game and disgraced himself...these posts are seriously infantile and reflects poorly on us...its not a constructive critique simply blame and bash....weak...bloody weak...
ahhaha lol so true so true...yeap it was liccas fault...definitly...so slow...lonie man he is soft as a marshmallow in the sun...they cost us today
magpies42
11 Jun 2007, 19:16
I have been critical of Malthouse's selections all year. They are arrogant, ignorant and basically just poor.
Toovey has been the worst player ever to play for Collingwood. I am sure of that. It is a disgrace he was selected today. I don't want to harp on Toovey, we all know he is shit.
Stanley- should not have been selected. Not up to AFL standard. And why was he kept on Robertson for so long.
It is selections like these that frustrate our members and supporters. Everyone should give the club a call this week and demand to know why Toovey was picked, and why Maxwell wasn;t moved onto Robertson, not Stanley and Toovey.
His coaching was a joke today and we deserved to lose because of it. Whenever we get into a good position, his stubborness ****s us up big time.
You are absolutely rubbish!
1st- Mick has to balance out winning games and blooding new players.
2nd- Mick made johnson by leaving him on Burgoyne even though he was being raped all day (a few years back) johnson then went on to make a match winning save on the goal line. His career skyrocketed as a result. Mick was probably trying to show the same faith in stanley, not to mention that obrien, clement and presti were out. If you played maxwell small who would have played on the talls?! Maxy would have been given a bath by robertson anyway.
3rd- I am a big supporter of toovey's has played well without being outstanding, i think he will become a really good player come the 50 game mark. He held roberston well when he was moved on him (thats if you dont count him slipping twice and being pushed in the back).
4th- Malthouse is a great coach we are sitting equal second for ****s sakes. what on earth do you want?!
pull your head in
lets forget last weeks 5 goal which prob won us that game
Nothing he did last week can excuse his game today. He is an onfield leader and let his team mates and club down badly today.
He contributed absolutely nothing today, on or off the ball. Showed a lack of respect for his team mates, who generally slogged hard all day.
He should be fined for such an effort, maybe that will teach him some accountability and responisiblity.
BlahzeyBlah
11 Jun 2007, 19:24
We were victims of circumstance today more than anything. Looking at the final score compared to how things rested at quarter time, you'd have to be fairly pleased with our endeavour considering we were missing the senior core of our backline.
Toovey, whilst I'm not yet sold on as a player, is being unfairly judged a little I feel. I think most Collingwood supporters, if notified prior to the game that Toovey was going to be playing on Robertson for any period of time, would have submitted themselves to a bad outcome. Toovey was stretched to his limitations by having to play a role that none of us, nor the people in charge, would have wanted to present him with.
Unfortunately, missing Presti, Clement and losing O'Brien in the opening term, mismatches were going to occur and a few players were going to be found out.
I haven't seen much of Williamstown or Stanley for that matter, but I'm reserving my judgement based on today's game. I'm happy for Malthouse to persist with players like Goldsack, Stanley and even Toovey at this point, especially considering that based on our injuries at the moment he may be left with little choice.
Rocca had a dirty game and was unable to stand up when we needed him to. But keeping in mind, for a majority of the game we weren't able to find much fluency when bringing it into our forward fifty. Rocca will have days like these, this isn't his first and it won't be his last. He's partly responsible for the loss, but not solely.
As for the positives... Heath Shaw, just incredible. To come out sore as he was and perform like he did is a testament to his spirit. Travis Cloke, although missing a goal he shouldn't have, continues to improve and is really taking the next step. His contested marking seems to be getting better by the week.
Goldsack, although a little suspect at times in marking competitions, found his feet after quarter time and seems to have some composure about him. I don't know if defence will be his forte, whether that is what we're grooming him for or we're just trying to improve the defensive side of his game, but I think we might just be able to make a player out of him.
Once again I'm happy for the club to persist with players such as Toovey, Stanley, Goldsack and any of the young players we've blooded this year. A couple of years ago Swan looked to be a one dimensional plodder who had little to offer, but has since blossomed. Even players like Ben Johnson seemed a little suspect at the early stages of their career, given some time in the system who knows what might pan out for the likes of Toovey and co.
As long as we don't hold on to players who clearly, beyond a shadow of a doubt, can't cut it. This plagued us during 2004 and 2005, our recruiting seems to have improved dramatically since then and hopefully our list management follows suit.
As for the umpires, well... I think the effect of their performance today was epitomised in that goal to Robertson at the opening stages of the final quarter. Just seemed to take the wind out of our boys, who had busted a gut to work themselves back into the game. Disgraceful effort, that also covers the decision against Brock McLean in the dying stages, although that had less of an impact on the overall proceedings.
We're a good side, that much I'm sure of, but we're still developing a lot of players and as such we're not without weaknesses. A few players, through lack of experience or possibly talent once we know more about them in a year or so, were exposed today. Things are still looking bright, as long as we learn as much as we can from our losses and work towards continual improvement.
Get your hand off it likka.
Rocca had a bad game, he probably wouldn't have played if he wasn't such an important part of the team (he is carrying some kind of injury), get over it.
Catsace
11 Jun 2007, 19:27
I have Toovey in my supercoach team, i remember his first game he kicked 2 or 3 goals as a dangerous looking crumbing forward. Playing on a guy like Robbo seems an awful mismatch for a young bloke who has played maybe 10 games. He also is named as the centre on the team sheet, i think putting him down back on dangeropus forwards is very tough on him.
In a way you can blame ME for Collingwood losing, i dropped Robbo when he got injured. If i had kept him in my side, he would either still be out injured or maybe wouldn't get a kick. He's that sort of player, very hard to catch. He did it to Geelong late in 2005 with a 7 goal bag, you can pencil him in for an effort like that once or twice a season. Just one of those days i'm afraid.
BlahzeyBlah
11 Jun 2007, 19:40
I have Toovey in my supercoach team, i remember his first game he kicked 2 or 3 goals as a dangerous looking crumbing forward. Playing on a guy like Robbo seems an awful mismatch for a young bloke who has played maybe 10 games. He also is named as the centre on the team sheet, i think putting him down back on dangeropus forwards is very tough on him.
In a way you can blame ME for Collingwood losing, i dropped Robbo when he got injured. If i had kept him in my side, he would either still be out injured or maybe wouldn't get a kick. He's that sort of player, very hard to catch. He did it to Geelong late in 2005 with a 7 goal bag, you can pencil him in for an effort like that once or twice a season. Just one of those days i'm afraid.
Toovey's first game, he just managed to slip under the radar, happened to be in the right place at the right time and we were up against poor opposition. There wasn't too much that was convincing about his three goal haul that caused any of us to feel he would have been a viable forward option on a continual basis.
He ended up in the back line today for lack of a better option, he's more of a run-with player than anything and it seems that out of our new crop of youngsters, he might be the one with the most defensive mindset. That's more due to his lack of weapons heading the other way though. He wasn't our worst and as you said, Roberston was always going to do some damage, it just depended on the extent.
Wilbur35
11 Jun 2007, 19:43
Sorry Bushranger but this has to be one of the worst posts I have ever seen anywhere on BF and makes me embarassed to be a Collingwood supporter.
Toovey played very well today and Danny Stanley looked composed for his first game and had some nice possessions. The Pies were victims of circumstance and were caught short (literally) with O'Brien going off. Although I am not too sure who would have stopped Robbo who was being very well looked after by the likes of McLean and Johnstone during that first quarter onslaught. Even Jimmy Clement would have struggled.
Maxwell was not a viable option, too slow.
All credit to the Pies for coming back when faced with a 34 point deficit which showed great fight in the face of adversity. :thumbsu:
goalpie
11 Jun 2007, 20:05
Toovey to me looks a little slow in the head for AFL. Bit like Milne.
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 20:09
Bushranger - you sure you're not a Richmond supporter?
You sure do like to sink the boot in to first gamers.
As for Mick, I too was mystified by his decisions today, like allowing the huddle to continue and not shifting Rocca into the ruck or even get him the backline as an extra tall.
However, I stop short of criticising Mick and calling him a hack. I have faith in his ideas, because he's a 2 time permiership coach and I'm not, and he's taken us damn close twice already and I get the feeling he's going to take us all the way in the near future.
Go pies and go Stanley and Toovey - good kids that can play.
TheBushranger
11 Jun 2007, 20:15
It amazes me the support that Toovey gets, but the criticism that was directed towards Cloke and Egan, two younger players who have plenty of talent and will be great footballers.
TheBushranger
11 Jun 2007, 20:16
Toovey to me looks a little slow in the head for AFL. Bit like Milne.
He's just shit.
I agree with Bushranger to a certain extent.
Stanley on Robbo was never going to work. Malthouse thought that just because he did well on him a few weeks ago at Willi, that this would somehow repeat at top level. Stupid way of thinking to say the least. Then he kept him on Robbo far to long. You'd have to be blind if you couldn't tell that Robbo had Stanleys measure. Not to mention what that will do to Stanley's confidence. He's a midfielder ffs, not a key position defender.
Then, to move Toovey onto him was the ultimate stupidity. Maxwell was always the obvious choice.
Yes I agree MM's options were limited, still doesn't excuse the fact that he made the wrong decistion not once, twice but 3 times, and in the end, it cost us the game.
Hadders
11 Jun 2007, 20:30
I agree with Bushranger to a certain extent.
Stanley on Robbo was never going to work. Malthouse thought that just because he did well on him a few weeks ago at Willi, that this would somehow repeat at top level. Stupid way of thinking to say the least. Then he kept him on Robbo far to long. You'd have to be blind if you couldn't tell that Robbo had Stanleys measure. Not to mention what that will do to Stanley's confidence. He's a midfielder ffs, not a key position defender.
Then, to move Toovey onto him was the ultimate stupidity. Maxwell was always the obvious choice.
Yes I agree MM's options were limited, still doesn't excuse the fact that he made the wrong decistion not once, twice but 3 times, and in the end, it cost us the game.
Maxwell would have been destroyed on Robertson, he just doesn't have the pace on the lead to go with him. The perfect example of this was Bate carving him to pieces on the wing, as he burned Maxwell off to accept the second kick from the kickouts on numerous occasions.
MM had nothing else and I actually thought Toovey was somewhat serviceable on Robertson. Contested well but was beaten when he slipped on a couple of occasions.
Frederlick
11 Jun 2007, 20:37
Gee this place is busy after a loss
:D :thumbsu:Have I been caught in a time warp and jumped forward to GF day? Tumbleweeds when we win and lynch mobs when we lose. Is there a mob with flaming torches at the Lexus Center? When they throw MM in the Yarra if he floats he is a witch and should be burnt at the stake, but if he sinks he is innocent.Mogodon anyone?:)
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 20:42
Toovs and Stanners were the only options on Robbo.
Moving Toovs onto him was robbing Peter to pay Paul as he was doing a good job on Davey. Toovs moved onto Robbo, did well despite a push out and 2 unfortunate slips and suddenly Davey came into the game.
No way Wakelin or Maxwell could take Robbo on the lead and the only other option was Heath Shaw, which would really mess up our structure.
If you move Maxwell onto Robbo, does Stanley go to Neitz?
I mean seriously, get a grip.
Robbo got sensational blocks form his fellow forwards and got silver service from his midfield, sometimes you just can't stop that sort of thing. Especially in your first game.
Christ, if Rocca had got the free kicks he should have he would have kicked 4 and ya'd all be saying he won the game for us.
Trav's miss from 15 and Lockyer's out on the full from the edge of the square certainly didn't help.
Licca, Cox or Iles? Which one of them would have stopped Robbo?
Optimax
11 Jun 2007, 20:55
Christ, if Rocca had got the free kicks he should have he would have kicked 4 and ya'd all be saying he won the game for us.
Trav's miss from 15 and Lockyer's out on the full from the edge of the square certainly didn't help.
Licca, Cox or Iles? Which one of them would have stopped Robbo?
Cox is a big tall backman could've done the job.
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 21:59
yeah a tall backman is just the matchup for robbo....:thumbsd:
Not much we could do today. MM should have given Maxwell a crack at Robbo but i agree he would have been to slow but the guy kicked 7 so we didn't have much to lose. Its funny i haven't heard about Mick all year now one bad game which for the most part he had no control over and its get rid of him.
Not happy we didn't win today even with the players out but we have to be happy with the future. Some of the young kids didn't set the world on fire today but did a few good things under pressure to show they are the best group coming through since the late 80s. I'm sure we all remember what about from that. Remember we were a fair way down and with mostly kids we got back to 1 point down. Be unhappy with the result but be happy with the future.
Optimax
11 Jun 2007, 22:04
yeah a tall backman is just the matchup for robbo....:thumbsd:
Would've been better than Toovey an undersized backman will make a good tagger but never a AFL stanard full back (and i like toovey).
You cant tell me Cox wouldnt have done a better job he would of at leasted been harder to nudge off the ball since he is a bigger player as well as natrual defender.
Maxwell would have been destroyed on Robertson, he just doesn't have the pace on the lead to go with him. The perfect example of this was Bate carving him to pieces on the wing, as he burned Maxwell off to accept the second kick from the kickouts on numerous occasions.
MM had nothing else and I actually thought Toovey was somewhat serviceable on Robertson. Contested well but was beaten when he slipped on a couple of occasions.
Maxwell has played on Robertson in the past and has done well on him. I recall 2-3 Queens Birthdays ago he held him to 1 goal and a couple of kicks.
As for Maxwell's pace, well Stanley and Toovey are hardly known for there pace now are they, I wouldn't think that either are that much quicker then Maxwell.
Maxwell on Robertson, Stanley on Bate, I would of thought these were the obvious match ups.
Malthouse clearly made the wrong decisions, and was ridiculously outcoached by ND. Why Melbourne were allowed to play the huddle all throughout the game. Once again, it was clear for all to see that he needed at least a partial zone, cause manning up one on one at there kick outs just wasn't working.
I'm staggered that so many here feel the need to defend MM. Yes he's coached well this year, however, today wasn't one of his better days.
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 22:14
Toovey and stanners were both good options.
When Toovs moved onto him he had an immediate impact until he had two stupid slips and the one where he got front position and was pushed out.
Robbo did his best work on the lead early, so a quick agile bloke who can compete in the air was the best matchup. Stanley and Toovey both meet this criteria.
I've said this a few times, sometimes you just can't stop good footy. robbo was leading hard and smart, getting good blocks and the service was exceptional. I seriously doubt Clement or Scarlett or many people could have done anything about it.
I've seen Nathan Brown kick 5 in a quarter on Clement, and Clement didn't really do anything wrong - it was just good footy.
Barwick17
11 Jun 2007, 22:15
Would've been better than Toovey an undersized backman will make a good tagger but never a AFL stanard full back (and i like toovey).
You cant tell me Cox wouldnt have done a better job he would of at leasted been harder to nudge off the ball since he is a bigger player as well as natrual defender.
Agree... prob played toovey 1 game too long
Toovey and stanners were both good options.
When Toovs moved onto him he had an immediate impact until he had two stupid slips and the one where he got front position and was pushed out.
Robbo did his best work on the lead early, so a quick agile bloke who can compete in the air was the best matchup. Stanley and Toovey both meet this criteria.
I've said this a few times, sometimes you just can't stop good footy. robbo was leading hard and smart, getting good blocks and the service was exceptional. I seriously doubt Clement or Scarlett or many people could have done anything about it.
I've seen Nathan Brown kick 5 in a quarter on Clement, and Clement didn't really do anything wrong - it was just good footy.
He kicked 7 goals. If they were 'good options' then I'd hate to see how many he would of kicked if we used the 'bad options'.
Clement would of kept him to 2 or 3 goals, I have no doubts about that. I think your overrating Robertson games, he took at least 3-4 marks that should have been spoiled.
Toovey slipping didn't help, and Stanley quite clearly was out of his league. Bit rough playing a guy, recruited as a midfielder, in his first game on an All Australian forward.
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 22:18
Maxwell on Robertson, Stanley on Bate, I would of thought these were the obvious match ups.
Ok, so does Toovey take Neitz or the resting ruckman??
Wakelin gets one - who gets the other?
Ok, so does Toovey take Neitz or the resting ruckman??
Wakelin gets one - who gets the other?
huh?
Toovey stays on Davey, who, up till that point was doing a good job on him and keeping him quiet.
Wakelin stays on Neitz, though he did get comprehensively beaten, we truly had NO other options.
Maxwell on Robbo, and Stanley on Bate.
Marklar_33
11 Jun 2007, 22:21
Anyone seen Maxy one-on-one at any time this year? Remember Mitch Clark?
I don't reckon he's beaten anyone. I was scared he'd put him onto Robertson - Toovey did okay once he went on.
If only the ****er could learn to stand!
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 22:21
He kicked 7 goals. If they were 'good options' then I'd hate to see how many he would of kicked if we used the 'bad options'.
Clement would of kept him to 2 or 3 goals, I have no doubts about that. I think your overrating Robertson games, he took at least 3-4 marks that should have been spoiled.
Toovey slipping didn't help, and Stanley quite clearly was out of his league. Bit rough playing a guy, recruited as a midfielder, in his first game on an All Australian forward.
He kicked 2 early on O'Brien, 2 on Stanley and 3 on Toovey.
Toovey was a fair option, but all 3 goals were mistakes by Toovey, not by Malthouse. Malthouse can't think "oh I can't move Toovey onto Robbo, he might slip twice and get an obvious push that isn't paid that will cost us 3 goals"
When Toovey kept his feet, he contested and spoiled well, unfortunately moving Toovey freed up Davey to get plenty of footy late and bob up for an important goal.
If Maxwell can't play on players like Robertson under the circumstances we were in today (missing our best defenders), then the question must be asked, what does he add to our team.
Like who can Maxwell play on? He was beaten by Bate (another MM mismatch), was beaten by Clarke against the LIons.
I'd like to think he's going through a form slump, however, if you all truly believe that Maxwell is not good enough to play on 2nd or 3rd forwards, then he gives us nothing and should be trade bait at the end of the season.
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 22:24
huh?
Toovey stays on Davey, who, up till that point was doing a good job on him and keeping him quiet.
Wakelin stays on Neitz, though he did get comprehensively beaten, we truly had NO other options.
Maxwell on Robbo, and Stanley on Bate.
That doesn't answer the question.
When O'Brien went down - the D's stationed their resting ruckman permanently in the forward line to mess up our matchups. This forced Wakelin to take him and Maxwell onto Neitz. Remember than 6'7" bloke who took 3 marks on the lead in the first quarter but missed the shots?
Based on your structure he currently doesn't have an opponent over 6' tall.
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 22:25
If Maxwell can't play on players like Robertson under the circumstances we were in today (missing our best defenders), then the question must be asked, what does he add to our team.
Like who can Maxwell play on? He was beaten by Bate (another MM mismatch), was beaten by Clarke against the LIons.
I'd like to think he's going through a form slump, however, if you all truly believe that Maxwell is not good enough to play on 2nd or 3rd forwards, then he gives us nothing and should be trade bait at the end of the season.
From O'Briens injury onwards Maxwell had Neitz - who kicked 0 goals.
Toovey was a fair option, but all 3 goals were mistakes by Toovey, not by Malthouse. Malthouse can't think "oh I can't move Toovey onto Robbo, he might slip twice and get an obvious push that isn't paid that will cost us 3 goals"
What do you base that on. How was he a 'fair' option as you put it. He kicked 3 on him, all in the last quarter.
When Toovey kept his feet, he contested and spoiled well, unfortunately moving Toovey freed up Davey to get plenty of footy late and bob up for an important goal.
Maxwell was clearly the better option for Robertson. He's played on him in the past, beaten him, and Maxwell is a defender, has much more experience then Toovey, and has played on KPP players in the past.
Toovey was already doing well on Davey, why move him? Stanley onto Bate, Maxwell onto Robertson.
It was the obvious move, and at the end of the day, it was the stupid MM decisions that cost us the game.
From O'Briens injury onwards Maxwell had Neitz - who kicked 0 goals.
:confused:
Nietz was off the ground for most of the 3rd quater. For the rest of the game Wakelin was on him?
As far as I am aware, Maxwell was never on Neitz. Maxwell was on Bate for most of the game, after Goldsack was moved off him in the first quarter.
Did we watch the same game?
I disagree with the whole Malthouse being stubborn point to an extent.
Stanley shouldn't be punished because the other 17 players on the park didn't help him out. Let's face it, we didn't play well today, umpires (if thats what you call them) certainly didn't help things either.
No Presti, Clement, Rhyce Shaw, Harry O went off injured... our defence which is the platform of our performances wasn't at it's best to say the very least.
61 inside 50's, for 11 goals. Rocca got no space to run and jump to take a mark, cloke was controlled to a point, Didak, Medhurst, and Davis didn't have much of a say on things either.
We just didn't play smart enough.
I think not moving Stanley from a fundamental point of view was good, the side will either learn a lesson, or not. On the other hand it was stupid as one could argue it ultimately cost us four points.
Meh.
That doesn't answer the question.
When O'Brien went down - the D's stationed their resting ruckman permanently in the forward line to mess up our matchups. This forced Wakelin to take him and Maxwell onto Neitz. Remember than 6'7" bloke who took 3 marks on the lead in the first quarter but missed the shots?
Based on your structure he currently doesn't have an opponent over 6' tall.
How long did that last for? 5-10 minutes?
Hadders
11 Jun 2007, 22:33
That doesn't answer the question.
When O'Brien went down - the D's stationed their resting ruckman permanently in the forward line to mess up our matchups. This forced Wakelin to take him and Maxwell onto Neitz. Remember than 6'7" bloke who took 3 marks on the lead in the first quarter but missed the shots?
Based on your structure he currently doesn't have an opponent over 6' tall.
Yep. Hit it on the head. If Maxwell moves to Robertson, Johnson immediately moves forward and monsters Goldsack, Stanley or whoever is unlucky enough to play on him.
We were hurt by the loss of Harry and had very few options unfortunately not much MM could do IMO.
And as for Maxwell, I think he has been pretty poor at a lot of times during the season. He has courage but just doesn't have the height to be a key position backman or the pace to play on the smaller types.
If his form continues the way it has I can see him going the way of a Jason Cloke because at the moment he is getting found out and its only injuries that are keeping him in the side.
Yep. Hit it on the head. If Maxwell moves to Robertson, Johnson immediately moves forward and monsters Goldsack, Stanley or whoever is unlucky enough to play on him.
We were hurt by the loss of Harry and had very few options unfortunately not much MM could do IMO.
And as for Maxwell, I think he has been pretty poor at a lot of times during the season. He has courage but just doesn't have the height to be a key position backman or the pace to play on the smaller types.
If his form continues the way it has I can see him going the way of a Jason Cloke because at the moment he is getting found out and its only injuries that are keeping him in the side.
I would of much rathers Johnson taking marks for them then Robertson. Kicked 2 behinds from memory.
Maxwell was on Bate anyway. Could of easily sent Bryan down to keep Johnson honest.
Thommo 42
11 Jun 2007, 22:46
In my opinion, despite the rest of the argument and who played on who else.
If they moved Johnson forward again to screw our matchups, we should have thrown Rocca back there.
I have been critical of Malthouse's selections all year. They are arrogant, ignorant and basically just poor.
Toovey has been the worst player ever to play for Collingwood. I am sure of that. It is a disgrace he was selected today. I don't want to harp on Toovey, we all know he is shit.
Stanley- should not have been selected. Not up to AFL standard. And why was he kept on Robertson for so long.
It is selections like these that frustrate our members and supporters. Everyone should give the club a call this week and demand to know why Toovey was picked, and why Maxwell wasn;t moved onto Robertson, not Stanley and Toovey.
His coaching was a joke today and we deserved to lose because of it. Whenever we get into a good position, his stubborness ****s us up big time.
Malthouse has been regarded by many as the coach of the year to date. Despite man injuries and playing youth was sit 7 and 4 and you want his head. You are an idiot.
Firstly Id like you to explain to me what more stanley could have done. Not sure if you understand much about our game but when a decent forward gets the pin point deliverary that robbo got yesterday he is going to kick a bag. Robbo barely had more than a metre on him. His attempts to spoil where good. When he did get the footy he did not fumble and did not turn it over. I dont reckon it would have mattered who played on him robbo would have kick a bag. The dees mids where outstanding by foot going inside 50 and ours where not and that was the difference.
Also how much do you think stanley would have learnt yesterday? I reckon he got 5 games experience in his first game and mick knows this. Despite having those goals kick I thought stanley showed more than enough to suggest he could have a future.
I to dont understand why mick is playing toovey. I suspect it for his fitness, suprising pace and ability to run with. He run with davey for much of the game and apart from that goal I dont remember davey having a huge influence.
Let me let you in on a little secret re malthouse. He likes giving kids challanges. The way they handle the challanges and the way they respond to the odd belting is who he finds out what makes them tick. He has enourmous belief in the kids and this is the reason we are getting so much out of our kids. The best thing you can do for a young person as a leader is believe in them and mick does this better than any coach in the comp. You probably would have been the first to bag mick if obrien got towelled up by lucas earlier in the year but instead it was the making of the kid.
I hope stanley gets another run next week and I hope he plays well so people like you can shut your gob.
Im not sure with mick is the best coach going around and he does have is deficiancies but It really annoys me when he has been doing a fantastic job and we have 1 loss(against a very good side) and people start calling for his head.
Its very poor form by some on this board.
jimmy35
12 Jun 2007, 09:28
Other than the two slips and a push out I thought Toovey went okay on Robbo . At that stage he was marking everything that came his way , Toovey started getting some pressure on him . Can't coach for those slip types of things . Once Harry went down we had 3 of our 4 best defenders out . That will hurt any side in the competition .
After that Mick was left shuffling deck chairs .
I thought Stanley showed a lot of composure and got some good possesions after he was moved off Robbo as well . I like the look of him .
The Demons kick ins were the most perplexing thing for mine . It worked every time and almost always went to their forward line untouched by us .
Have a look at our side and the inexperirence in there . If you were offered our position now before the season you would jump at it .
Timmy from Thomastown
12 Jun 2007, 09:46
Blame Mick for losing Presti, Clemo & Harry. :rolleyes:
FFS! Stanners seemed a reasonable replacement for Rhyce who didn't come up.
Lica could have missed a valuable run if he was emergency. Cox should come back soon, but as per my Willi report, he is not in blistering form due to some injury & his discretion was poorly timed for him.
We got exposed for youth. Had to happen at some time. Blaming Mick at this stage is foolish. He is the main reason we are 7-4!
I dont think at this stage that you should select all three of Stanley Goldsack and Toovey in the same 22. You are just asking for trouble if you get an injury, which is what happened yesterday. Licuria should have come into the team yesterday, just on the grounds of "team balance" between experience and inexperience. Probably Cox as well instead of Goldsack, who has been struggling for weeks. Cox didnt do anything wrong (on-field) to be dropped in the first place. I'm also a bit perplexed why we droppped Richards, who finally played a half decent game last week. Are we taking horses for courses a bit far?
I wouldnt call for MM's head or anything that stupid, but I do believe that we lost the plot a bit at the selection table.
I dont think at this stage that you should select all three of Stanley Goldsack and Toovey in the same 22. You are just asking for trouble if you get an injury, which is what happened yesterday. Licuria should have come into the team yesterday, just on the grounds of "team balance" between experience and inexperience. Probably Cox as well instead of Goldsack, who has been struggling for weeks. Cox didnt do anything wrong (on-field) to be dropped in the first place. I'm also a bit perplexed why we droppped Richards, who finally played a half decent game last week. Are we taking horses for courses a bit far?
I wouldnt call for MM's head or anything that stupid, but I do believe that we lost the plot a bit at the selection table.
I think it's tough playing Stanley, Toovey and Goldsack also but i'm not sure Cox is the answer yet. A kid in for a kid out? Sadly, i dont know who else he can bring in to fix the holes that have been opened up by injury. Losing our best fullback (presti) and our best backman (Clement) and a guy who is killing everyone he lines up on (O'Brien) is what we have to deal with. I wouldn't want to be Mick with that problem.
Timmy from Thomastown
12 Jun 2007, 10:26
I think it's tough playing Stanley, Toovey and Goldsack also but i'm not sure Cox is the answer yet. A kid in for a kid out? .
I would have been happier with Cox in for Goldsack, Licuria in instead of Stanley. I dont mind playing the kids, but you need to (a) rotate them and (b) not have too many of them especially when players like Licuria are available.
Timmy from Thomastown
12 Jun 2007, 10:28
I wouldn't want to be Mick with that problem.
Its very difficult. Now they will have to consider rushing Lonie back in just to add some experience to the backline.
Its very difficult. Now they will have to consider rushing Lonie back in just to add some experience to the backline.
Would Lonie have been given a run with Robbo? He's tall enough and quick. Plays well on Pavlich.
Timmy from Thomastown
12 Jun 2007, 10:35
Would Lonie have been given a run with Robbo? He's tall enough and quick. Plays well on Pavlich.
Maybe but after eight weeks off with o-p he would not have lasted long.
Somebody
12 Jun 2007, 11:20
That doesn't answer the question.
When O'Brien went down - the D's stationed their resting ruckman permanently in the forward line to mess up our matchups. This forced Wakelin to take him and Maxwell onto Neitz. Remember than 6'7" bloke who took 3 marks on the lead in the first quarter but missed the shots?
Based on your structure he currently doesn't have an opponent over 6' tall.
then MM should have tried Rocca on the ruckman, and if that didn't work Cloke. they are both good defenders.
Hadders
12 Jun 2007, 11:54
then MM should have tried Rocca on the ruckman, and if that didn't work Cloke. they are both good defenders.
Rocca may have been an option but with the day he was having he probably would have given away 3 goals in free kicks.
And Cloke? He was the only one that was presenting in the forward line and the only one who could hold his head up. By moving him back, it would have made our already ineffective forward line without any options at all.
Timmy from Thomastown
12 Jun 2007, 13:04
then MM should have tried Rocca on the ruckman, and if that didn't work Cloke. they are both good defenders.
Bryan should have gone back, Rocca into the ruck, Fraser forward.
The Don
12 Jun 2007, 13:08
I think alot of people are really missing the point especially bushranger. It wasn't Stanley's fault or Goldsack or Toovey's. It was the midfield. We were killed in the midfield clearences and delivery into the forward line. Robertson's second goal of the final quarter which killed us off came about because we had the ball but weren't able to clear it. It was a skill error that will disappear over time. Melbourne's delivery was first class, ours was about what you expect from Macdonalds. Absolute crap. How many times did we bomb it inside fifty when Melbourne had the numbers in the last quarter. Got to be smarter than that. I can't recall many times that we kicked it to the advantage of our forwards but it really is not the end of the world.
On a positive not we had 8 kids 21 and under I believe. thats over a third of our side. For them to be able to fight their way back after quarter time shows great signs considering losind Harry O which hurt big time.
I thought both Stanley and Goldsack showed great composure when they had the ball. Stanley's one on one mark got me excited and Goldsack taking on Davey was sensational.You need to look at the little positive's when a kid is playing his first game. You can't expect a top class game first up or sustained quality for a whole season. It just doesn't happen. The reality is we are not going to win the flag this year unless everything went out way including injuries and alot of luck. Enjoy watching the young kids development as we build towards a flag or two.
Chase the Ace
12 Jun 2007, 14:17
I think alot of people are really missing the point especially bushranger. It wasn't Stanley's fault or Goldsack or Toovey's. It was the midfield. We were killed in the midfield clearences and delivery into the forward line. Robertson's second goal of the final quarter which killed us off came about because we had the ball but weren't able to clear it. It was a skill error that will disappear over time. Melbourne's delivery was first class, ours was about what you expect from Macdonalds. Absolute crap. How many times did we bomb it inside fifty when Melbourne had the numbers in the last quarter. Got to be smarter than that. I can't recall many times that we kicked it to the advantage of our forwards but it really is not the end of the world.
On a positive not we had 8 kids 21 and under I believe. thats over a third of our side. For them to be able to fight their way back after quarter time shows great signs considering losind Harry O which hurt big time.
I thought both Stanley and Goldsack showed great composure when they had the ball. Stanley's one on one mark got me excited and Goldsack taking on Davey was sensational.You need to look at the little positive's when a kid is playing his first game. You can't expect a top class game first up or sustained quality for a whole season. It just doesn't happen. The reality is we are not going to win the flag this year unless everything went out way including injuries and alot of luck. Enjoy watching the young kids development as we build towards a flag or two.
Finally someone with some sense
magpies42
12 Jun 2007, 14:35
"Stanley had in fact lined up on Robertson in the VFL three weeks ago, keeping him to one goal, although Robertson kicked a couple more on other defenders. He discovered on Monday that standing Robertson with Melbourne’s senior team on song was a tougher challenge" CFC site
Here is the logic behind micks decision to play stanners on robbo. There has obviously been something else added to this equation eg, the melbourne midfiled dominating especially from the kick ins! Midfield pressure was very poor at times.
"Stanley had in fact lined up on Robertson in the VFL three weeks ago, keeping him to one goal, although Robertson kicked a couple more on other defenders. He discovered on Monday that standing Robertson with Melbourne’s senior team on song was a tougher challenge" CFC site
Here is the logic behind micks decision to play stanners on robbo. There has obviously been something else added to this equation eg, the melbourne midfiled dominating especially from the kick ins! Midfield pressure was very poor at times.
At times? I was appalled at how easily they were able to work the ball the length of the field unopposed. Any decent mid delivering to a leading forward with as much time as he likes will have a day out. Even Licca and O'Bree could pull that off.
I think alot of people are really missing the point especially bushranger. It wasn't Stanley's fault or Goldsack or Toovey's. It was the midfield. We were killed in the midfield clearences and delivery into the forward line. Robertson's second goal of the final quarter which killed us off came about because we had the ball but weren't able to clear it. It was a skill error that will disappear over time. Melbourne's delivery was first class, ours was about what you expect from Macdonalds. Absolute crap. How many times did we bomb it inside fifty when Melbourne had the numbers in the last quarter. Got to be smarter than that. I can't recall many times that we kicked it to the advantage of our forwards but it really is not the end of the world.
On a positive not we had 8 kids 21 and under I believe. thats over a third of our side. For them to be able to fight their way back after quarter time shows great signs considering losind Harry O which hurt big time.
I thought both Stanley and Goldsack showed great composure when they had the ball. Stanley's one on one mark got me excited and Goldsack taking on Davey was sensational.You need to look at the little positive's when a kid is playing his first game. You can't expect a top class game first up or sustained quality for a whole season. It just doesn't happen. The reality is we are not going to win the flag this year unless everything went out way including injuries and alot of luck. Enjoy watching the young kids development as we build towards a flag or two.
well done mate, its good to see someone on here who knows how to analise a game of footy. The delivary to each sides forward line was the difference in the game. Robbo had it lace out almost everytime. There is not a lot you can do about that.
I have been critical of Malthouse's selections all year. They are arrogant, ignorant and basically just poor.
Toovey has been the worst player ever to play for Collingwood. I am sure of that. It is a disgrace he was selected today. I don't want to harp on Toovey, we all know he is shit.
Stanley- should not have been selected. Not up to AFL standard. And why was he kept on Robertson for so long.
It is selections like these that frustrate our members and supporters. Everyone should give the club a call this week and demand to know why Toovey was picked, and why Maxwell wasn;t moved onto Robertson, not Stanley and Toovey.
His coaching was a joke today and we deserved to lose because of it. Whenever we get into a good position, his stubborness ****s us up big time.
Malthouse is actually the best coach going around . He is finally at a stage in his Collingwood coaching career where he has a plethera of kids who are learning the caper and they are playing for him.
You're being very harsh on Toovey & Stanley.
Toovey is still very raw and will take some more time to develop. Wait until he gets a couple more seasons under his belt and you can see another Nick Maxwell in the making.
Stanley's 1st game. What do you expect ? I thought he did some nice things.
He's got a good size frame and good footy smarts. Has been excellent at Williamstown and deserved his promotion in my opinion.
I'm putting this loss against Melbourne as a 'horses for courses' dilemma that we can't seem to conquer. Bring on Geelong I say !
TheBushranger
12 Jun 2007, 21:52
Malthouse is actually the best coach going around . He is finally at a stage in his Collingwood coaching career where he has a plethera of kids who are learning the caper and they are playing for him.
You're being very harsh on Toovey & Stanley.
Toovey is still very raw and will take some more time to develop. Wait until he gets a couple more seasons under his belt and you can see another Nick Maxwell in the making.
Stanley's 1st game. What do you expect ? I thought he did some nice things.
He's got a good size frame and good footy smarts. Has been excellent at Williamstown and deserved his promotion in my opinion.
I'm putting this loss against Melbourne as a 'horses for courses' dilemma that we can't seem to conquer. Bring on Geelong I say !
I don't rate Maxwell, so not a good analogy for mine.
bradrowe#32
12 Jun 2007, 22:44
Bryan should have gone back, Rocca into the ruck, Fraser forward.
Yes, agree with that. Rocca definately should've been put in the ruck. Just let the big fella run around for 20 mins without the shackles of a defender. Bryan has the athleticism to play down back, especially with our lack of experienced personnel. Josh is a proven goal kicker. MM just needed to throw the team around a bit. We actually looked better (in the 2nd quarter I think) when Rocca wasn't on the ground.
We also need to have a mix of the young blokes playing. I'm not opposed to the idea of Toovey, etc playing a couple and then going back to the VFL.
PieLebo87
12 Sep 2007, 15:18
I'm suprised/disappointed that Malthouse hasn't been credited on this board for his performance on Saturday night. He outcoached the Grand Final coach of the last two seasons, and had a blemish-free game.
Top job against the Swans MM! Hopefully he can repeat it at Subi.
Tarkyn_24
12 Sep 2007, 16:41
I'm suprised/disappointed that Malthouse hasn't been credited on this board for his performance on Saturday night. He outcoached the Grand Final coach of the last two seasons, and had a blemish-free game.
Top job against the Swans MM! Hopefully he can repeat it at Subi.
One good game does not make a good coach.
But I agree, we have been to harsh.
Tarkyn_24
12 Sep 2007, 16:42
I step aside at FreoI'm suprised/disappointed that Malthouse hasn't been credited on this board for his performance on Saturday night. He outcoached the Grand Final coach of the last two seasons, and had a blemish-free game.
Top job against the Swans MM! Hopefully he can repeat it at Subi.
I'm suprised/disappointed that Malthouse hasn't been credited on this board for his performance on Saturday night. He outcoached the Grand Final coach of the last two seasons, and had a blemish-free game.
Top job against the Swans MM! Hopefully he can repeat it at Subi.
i have always sided with malthouse, if it is a difference of opinion i would always go for the man who has coached and played at the top level for over 20 years compared to a few couch potatoe experts who think they know whats best. if they throw up some credentials then i might listen to them