Hot Topic It's Official - Bye Mick

[Magruder]

They've become too focused on outside play and front running, moving away from the contested style that made them competitive in the first place.

yup, but that can be fixed without too much tinkering

 

[HBF]

my bet is not much in case it jeopardises his termination payment

I can't see Carlton paying him out $500-600k without strings attached, unless they are even dumber than I thought --- which is possible

I tend to agree.
Also, there would be prospective media outlets watching tonight and perhaps thinking of employing him next year (even for the rest of this year).
Doubt he'd be that stupid to put that at risk as well.

 

[Wickzki]

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/sa...ts-move-to-crows/story-fndv862c-1227373009811

Sacked Carlton coach Michael Malthouse tells AFL investigators Steven Trigg innocent of draft tampering in Eddie Betts’ move to Crows


-- If already posted, my apologies, says it was posted to the site in the past hour.

 

[Moose1414]

my bet is not much in case it jeopardises his termination payment

I can't see Carlton paying him out $500-600k without strings attached, unless they are even dumber than I thought --- which is possible

I think he'll be pretty measured and mindful of not making himself look too bitter so they probably won't have too much to worry about.

That said, if you sack a bloke surely you're cutting the strings? They've terminated his employment and its in the contract he'll be paid out. But his relationship with the Carlton Football Club is over, he's free to say what he wants isn't he?

 

[Ellas Ellas]

This is Mick's opportunity to shed himself in a decent more reasonable light, I'd be surprised if he doesn't take that opportunity.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Contrary to many opinions, I reckon blowing up a list that had peaked in 2011 was the right thing to do.

It was unbalanced, both in terms of age cohorts and positional cover, and would have likley declined sharply anyway. Many of the moves made were about addressing these shortcomings because it makes targeted rebuilding easier.

Management of expectations around the rebuild is the issue IMO.

Perhaps but a whole list doesn't go sour at the same time. It starts to weaken, you freshen it up. We haven't lost our better players since that time aside from Scotland but obviously Judd has deteriorated.

The issue is that nobody there reconciled to a rebuild even in 2013 when Mick started out. If he did, he doesn't chase Daisy on big coin. He probably doesn't chase Tutt and Jones.

If there was a failure in judgment, then Mick was just as much a part of that as anybody else.

 

[Stamos]

If he did, he doesn't chase Daisy on big coin. He probably doesn't chase Tutt and Jones.

I agree about Daisy (although it could be argued he would benefit the culture of the list), but not so much Tutt and Jones. Whether they're any good is another argument, but they were brought in to address our unbalanced list, and were definitely part of the rebuild.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I agree about Daisy (although it could be argued he would benefit the culture of the list), but not so much Tutt and Jones. Whether they're any good is another argument, but they were brought in to address our unbalanced list, and were definitely part of the rebuild.

Tutt was brought in to replace Garlett because we were smashed for forward pressure and run. Was a stop gap at best.

 

[Magruder]

I think he'll be pretty measured and mindful of not making himself look too bitter so they probably won't have too much to worry about.

That said, if you sack a bloke surely you're cutting the strings? They've terminated his employment and its in the contract he'll be paid out. But his relationship with the Carlton Football Club is over, he's free to say what he wants isn't he?

Ther'll be a non disparagement clause. Standard part of separation provisons in service contracts like this.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

I don't think MM's behaviour is all that bad compared to the great coaches of Association Football, Sir Alex Ferguson especially.

Last year, Arsene Wenger and Jose Mourinho basically had a punch on in the sidelines at Stamford Bridge.

Reckon we as Australians seem to place too much faith in pro sports coaches being 'pillars of the community' ..

I mean, in the UK or USA, most people would have supported Clarko defending that Muppet who got in his face in that SA hotel.

Biggest sin Mick is guilty of is being too damn honest for his own good..

 

[GTOA]

Your board is weak.

First they were going to review Mick's position after the season, then at the bye. Finally they sacked him two weeks from the bye.

It looks like the board caved to media and public pressure. Rather than stick to their initial timeline, they gave in to everyone else's timeline.

This is why I am glad that we had Frank Costa as a president. In 2006, there was pressure by the media and the members (including me) to sack Mark Thompson.

Instead of caving in, Costa backed in the coach, got people around Bomber to help him, and then he went onto coach us to two flags. If our board was weak, we would have got rid of a potential premiership coach.

Who knows, Mick could have turned things around second half of season. But you will never know, because people couldn't wait that long. Impatience and weakness has caused a three-time premiership coach to go out the door.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Your board is weak.

First they were going to review Mick's position after the season, then at the bye. Finally they sacked him two weeks from the bye.

It looks like the board caved to media and public pressure. Rather than stick to their initial timeline, they gave in to everyone else's timeline.

This is why I am glad that we had Frank Costa as a president. In 2006, there was pressure by the media and the members (including me) to sack Mark Thompson.

Instead of caving in, Costa backed in the coach, got people around Bomber to help him, and then he went onto coach us to two flags. If our board was weak, we would have got rid of a potential premiership coach.

Who knows, Mick could have turned things around second half of season. But you will never know, because people couldn't wait that long. Impatience and weakness has caused a three-time premiership coach to go out the door.

What the **** were they supposed to do when Mick came out on radio and flamed the shit out of them?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Your board is weak.

First they were going to review Mick's position after the season, then at the bye. Finally they sacked him two weeks from the bye.

It looks like the board caved to media and public pressure. Rather than stick to their initial timeline, they gave in to everyone else's timeline.

This is why I am glad that we had Frank Costa as a president. In 2006, there was pressure by the media and the members (including me) to sack Mark Thompson.

Instead of caving in, Costa backed in the coach, got people around Bomber to help him, and then he went onto coach us to two flags. If our board was weak, we would have got rid of a potential premiership coach.

Who knows, Mick could have turned things around second half of season. But you will never know, because people couldn't wait that long. Impatience and weakness has caused a three-time premiership coach to go out the door.

You don't know what their thinking was. You don't know what damage was being caused. You don't know what Mick might have done and you seem to have bugger all idea as to how we have been travelling and why something needed to change. Geelong stuck with Thompson a decade ago ... so what? Not all situations are the same.

We've been down on our own board on here but plenty who are still think Mick had to go.

It's the Carlton forum and we will slam our own board, but we don't need others coming in here to sink in the slipper because they think it's the popular opinion. We're a family. We'll fight like cats and dogs with each other, but look out outsiders who come in her to do the same thing.

 

[Magruder]

Your board is weak.

First they were going to review Mick's position after the season, then at the bye. Finally they sacked him two weeks from the bye.

It looks like the board caved to media and public pressure. Rather than stick to their initial timeline, they gave in to everyone else's timeline.

This is why I am glad that we had Frank Costa as a president. In 2006, there was pressure by the media and the members (including me) to sack Mark Thompson.

Instead of caving in, Costa backed in the coach, got people around Bomber to help him, and then he went onto coach us to two flags. If our board was weak, we would have got rid of a potential premiership coach.

Who knows, Mick could have turned things around second half of season. But you will never know, because people couldn't wait that long. Impatience and weakness has caused a three-time premiership coach to go out the door.

Thank you for your completely unwelcome advice. Probably not the way to visit other team's boards.

You know the way out... Don't be shy about ****ing right off

 

[Moose1414]

What the **** were they supposed to do when Mick came out on radio and flamed the shit out of them?

Pretty clear he did so because he and everyone else in the universe knew the decision was made and letting the circus roll on another 2 weeks in the face of certain thrashings would be no good for anyone. If he had even the slightest inkling they would back him to finish the season it would of been a whole other conversation.

 

[Moose1414]

Ther'll be a non disparagement clause. Standard part of separation provisons in service contracts like this.

Possibly someone gave him a friendly reminder of this, was pretty categorical on Footy 360 that Steven Trigg had done nothing wrong. Which was basically the only actual controversy to come from the SEN interview, the rest was pretty mild.

 

[The Flying Doormat]

Your board is weak.

First they were going to review Mick's position after the season, then at the bye. Finally they sacked him two weeks from the bye.

It looks like the board caved to media and public pressure. Rather than stick to their initial timeline, they gave in to everyone else's timeline.

This is why I am glad that we had Frank Costa as a president. In 2006, there was pressure by the media and the members (including me) to sack Mark Thompson.

Instead of caving in, Costa backed in the coach, got people around Bomber to help him, and then he went onto coach us to two flags. If our board was weak, we would have got rid of a potential premiership coach.

Who knows, Mick could have turned things around second half of season. But you will never know, because people couldn't wait that long. Impatience and weakness has caused a three-time premiership coach to go out the door.

Hey GTOA,

STFU.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Pretty clear he did so because he and everyone else in the universe knew the decision was made and letting the circus roll on another 2 weeks in the face of certain thrashings would be no good for anyone. If he had even the slightest inkling they would back him to finish the season it would of been a whole other conversation.

There is no easy way to sack a coach like Malthouse. It was clear we could not extend his contract, and we were desperately hoping he could at least change things up a bit, play some of the young players in a meaningful way, maybe make us competitive at least. That is why we held off, because we were generally hoping to see out the season. We had to change our parameters because of the harm being done to the players confidence, our attendances and our financial interests. Then because those performances were mounting up, Mick increasingly started pointing the blame everywhere. He sacked himself, we just reacted to each new event with increasing disappointment until it was untenable.

 

[chunkylover53]

Your board is weak.

First they were going to review Mick's position after the season, then at the bye. Finally they sacked him two weeks from the bye.

It looks like the board caved to media and public pressure. Rather than stick to their initial timeline, they gave in to everyone else's timeline.

This is why I am glad that we had Frank Costa as a president. In 2006, there was pressure by the media and the members (including me) to sack Mark Thompson.

Instead of caving in, Costa backed in the coach, got people around Bomber to help him, and then he went onto coach us to two flags. If our board was weak, we would have got rid of a potential premiership coach.

Who knows, Mick could have turned things around second half of season. But you will never know, because people couldn't wait that long. Impatience and weakness has caused a three-time premiership coach to go out the door.

Erm, did you actually watch a Carlton game? Geelong in 2006 and Carlton 2015 are 2 very different situations.

Sorry but you, and everyone else saying it was a weak decision really have no clue.

 

[chunkylover53]

Geez Mick isn't saying much I don't agree with on 360...

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Not really saying much at all.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

By geez he backs his players.

Very strong on Murphy & Gibbs.

 

[lachie charm]

By geez he backs his players.

Very strong on Murphy & Gibbs.

You'd think they were our only players the way he's blabbering on.

 

[chunkylover53]

Not really saying much at all.

Nothing ground breaking but his comments on the club announcing a rebuild is spot on.

Not sure if he protects the players too much or goes about it the right way.

 

[BazzaBlue]

Good interview IMO - I think he is speaking relatively honestly.

So far in a nut shell:

- Thought he would be sacked several times over last few months and even at end of last year. Sack me or sign me.
- Thought the process behind going public with rebuild was done the wrong way around. Put players on the outer rather than framing it as a positive to them.
- Didn't intentionally put Trigg in the shit. Was trying to get across that there wasn't anything the club could do to keep Betts (make what you will of that).
- Thought players needed to be protected more. Obviously cares a lot about the players he coaches. Will be watching the game on Friday for that reason.