Opinion Mick Malthouse

[Ellas Ellas]

Then you don't understand list balance using these two guys as example of players that should have been cut.
They could have been but there were others, and some even more talented, that were moved on for the sake of having a squad that works together.

My comments were in reference to Ratts being blamed for keeping players too long. These two are two great examples of players that Ratts should have also ditched but they are still here, only with Mick it's for list balance.

Wrong. Malthouse put his wishes/needs forward very early on in the piece. Wasn't happy with the list, Ratten cultured.

You assume a lot but in reality know no more than me. Your opinion is not absolute.

If you don't know why Thomas came into the year with on a poor fitness base, then you don't really follow the club.

It was a poor decision. If he was injured he shouldn't have come, simple as that. You don't pay that kind of money for players that are cooked. Already wasted 700k of the salary cap for one season, let's see how things go next season.

Malthouse has been given as much of his requests as possible. Let's judge him on what he achieves from here on in and not on the back of what he was handed over.

Which is what I've said all along. Judgment day has arrived. His list management will make him or break him. What is it with you guys anyway? This is all I said in the first place and I get attacked left right and centre for thinking such a thing, the very thing you guys think! Hilarious.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

Answer the question! The question, jerks......!

He's the coach of our club and he's out of contract and he hasn't really set the world on fire so far!

 

[HARKER]

My comments were in reference to Ratts being blamed for keeping players too long. These two are two great examples of players that Ratts should have also ditched but they are still here, only with Mick it's for list balance.

Not wanting to be rude but I see you don't get it.
We couldn't turn over 15 players and topped out with 12 executions. Ellard and White help out in ways not directly visible to the average follower.
White will get plenty of game time in 2015 whilst Ellard may just be happy to help tutor the kids through VFL games.........sum of the parts.

You assume a lot but in reality know no more than me. Your opinion is not absolute.

No-ones opinion is absolute but you have to ride with the percentages.
Yours seems to be based on gut-feel and that's just not enough. I know as fact what Malthouse thought coming into the club and have aired that long ago.
No hindsight or vibe involved. Just what had happened back then and the net results in turn-over have showed that up.

It was a poor decision. If he was injured he shouldn't have come, simple as that. You don't pay that kind of money for players that are cooked. Already wasted 700k of the salary cap for one season, let's see how things go next season.

You can go back 12 months in my posting to see why I understood why Thomas was taken on.
Go back to my training reports back then just to get a feel for things. Let's give Thomas next year at least, before we start wielding an axe. Fair enough?

Which is what I've said all along. Judgment day has arrived. His list management will make him or break him. What is it with you guys anyway? This is all I said in the first place and I get attacked left right and centre for thinking such a thing, the very thing you guys think! Hilarious.

Which guys are you asking an answer from? Malthouse has come in and had to build up from what was a pretty ordinary platform.
I'm not completely convinced yet either, but there is clear method behind the madness......whereas we just had madness previously and I don't blame Ratten alone, as he didn't appoint himself.......there were other heads involved and some of those heads are still there.

 

[Magruder]

Everyone see things differently but I still think a coach has way too many responsibilities.
Why should the chief coach have to be responsible for his coaches, his players, training regime, match-day tactics etc etc.

Collingwood had the right idea of trying to get Malthouse to be the director of coaching but he didn't want to play ball.
I still see this as being by far the better model where individuals milk the best of what they're capable of.

Why shouldn't let's say Laidley coach on game-day? He's still sharp and has 360 vision and knows his players implicitly.

Have to agree.

 

[The Flying Doormat]

Answer the question! The question, jerks......!

Some jerks just can't let go Thy.

 

[thylacine60]

He's the coach of our club and he's out of contract and he hasn't really set the world on fire so far!

Fair answer, dammit!!

 

[The Flying Doormat]

No it is not an agenda it's an opinion. FTR he never won anything at the dogs so I'm not sure how you call that a success. One premiership in the last 21 years. That's a fact of life mate. It seems to make you uneasy and go all defensive, it's an ugly stat for a so called supercoach that's for sure. When it's all said and done this is Mick's thread so obviously the talk will be about him, both positive and negative. I guess you need to deal with that fact a little better.



And after all that you agree with me. I guess you have an agenda too?

You just don't get it do you.

I don't agree with you. I am willing to give any coach, let alone one with MM's record, enough time to get results. You made up your mind a while ago. That's OK, it's your opinion. It's part of the quick fix mentality.

You gave up on the Pagan argument. You gave up on the WA State team argument. Now you're trolling thru his time with the Bulldogs. You do know what being defensive means don't you?

You keep throwing that selective stat around in an attempt to give your opinion more credit than its worth.
Why not use 3 premierships in 23 years? How about 6 grand final appearances in 23 years? Doesn't suit your agenda perhaps?

Seriously move on. Let's see where we're at in six months then have a more informed discussion on MM's results and future.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

^^

I didn't give up on any argument I stand by ALL my comments. We can keep on going if you like, but you seem to have descended into insult territory and I'm not interested in that TBH. Rational conversation only if you can't handle the topic don't open the thread 'Mr Defensive'.

You responded to my post buddy, you don't like it, you move on, and stop quoting me.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

Not wanting to be rude but I see you don't get it.
We couldn't turn over 15 players and topped out with 12 executions. Ellard and White help out in ways not directly visible to the average follower.
White will get plenty of game time in 2015 whilst Ellard may just be happy to help tutor the kids through VFL games.........sum of the parts.

And the similar players under Ratts' tenure were list cloggers that Ratts was holding on to but under Mick they aren't that. I don't think you get what I'm saying at all. There's an element of hypocrisy going on here, a none too subtle one.

No-ones opinion is absolute but you have to ride with the percentages.
Yours seems to be based on gut-feel and that's just not enough. I know as fact what Malthouse thought coming into the club and have aired that long ago.
No hindsight or vibe involved. Just what had happened back then and the net results in turn-over have showed that up.

An assumption is an assumption.

You can go back 12 months in my posting to see why I understood why Thomas was taken on.
Go back to my training reports back then just to get a feel for things. Let's give Thomas next year at least, before we start wielding an axe. Fair enough?

Once again you pulled my comment out it's context. It was in response to the comment Mick has successfully recruited the right people to the club. Here you have a bloke that is considered to be a son by Mick and Swann, no other club is interested in him (including his own) and next thing you know he's at our club, crooked ankle and all and people want to tell me he doesn't need to play well to justify the decision because it's all about leadership and culture? Can you imagine of Ratten had done the same thing? Got a player over on massive coin that hadn't played for two years and that underperformed?? He would've been hung drawn and quartered we'd still be hearing about how Ratts ruined Carlton 10 years on. 700k buys you more than leadership and culture it buys you a game breaker, something he will not be able to do. Yeah I'll give him this year but if he fails dismally again no doubt you will be the first to say what a utensil up it was?

Which guys are you asking an answer from? Malthouse has come in and had to build up from what was a pretty ordinary platform.
I'm not completely convinced yet either, but there is clear method behind the madness......whereas we just had madness previously and I don't blame Ratten alone, as he didn't appoint himself.......there were other heads involved and some of those heads are still there.

It concerns me that we are now into the third year and people are still using Ratten as an excuse for Mick's shortcomings.

 

[HARKER]

And the similar players under Ratts' tenure were list cloggers that Ratts was holding on to but under Mick they aren't that. I don't think you get what I'm saying at all. There's an element of hypocrisy going on here, a none too subtle one.

O.K. then. Spell it out once and for all. What are you saying?

An assumption is an assumption.

Fact is not assumption. You may be assuming it to be but it's not

Once again you pulled my comment out it's context. It was in response to the comment Mick has successfully recruited the right people to the club. Here you have a bloke that is considered to be a son by Mick and Swann, no other club is interested in him (including his own) and next thing you know he's at our club, crooked ankle and all and people want to tell me he doesn't need to play well to justify the decision because it's all about leadership and culture? Can you imagine of Ratten had done the same thing? Got a player over on massive coin that hadn't played for two years and that underperformed?? He would've been hung drawn and quartered we'd still be hearing about how Ratts ruined Carlton 10 years on. 700k buys you more than leadership and culture it buys you a game breaker, something he will not be able to do. Yeah I'll give him this year but if he fails dismally again no doubt you will be the first to say what a utensil up it was?

1. Thomas wanted to come to Carlton in the same way Frawley chose Hawthorn...Franklin chose Sydney etc.........so this makes you wrong. Right?
2. Ratten may have well wanted Thomas also but maybe wouldn't have known exactly why he needed him.

It concerns me that we are now into the third year and people are still using Ratten as an excuse for Mick's shortcomings.

You didn't answer or respond to my post here, so feel free to stay concerned. Not my problem

 

[Magruder]

I have to agree with HARKER.

List management is completly different under this regime. Mukti-year contracts are no longer handed out on the basis of backing ordinary players in. People may regard White and Ellard as list cloggers but both are role players whether that's in the seniors or in the magoos.

Ellard arguably could have been cut but you have to shoot him to stop the effort, I've never seen him drop his head or give less than his all. White is a better player than given credit. Brings more than Laidler, (yes that old argument).

Many think we are 4 years plus away, I respect that view but think we are closer. A lot of our turn-around should be credited to the work done in the last 2 off-seasons and the next 2 IMO.

 

[HARKER]

List management is completly different under this regime. Mukti-year contracts are no longer handed out on the basis of backing ordinary players in. People may regard White and Ellard as list cloggers but both are role players whether that's in the seniors or in the magoos.

Ellard arguably could have been cut but you have to shoot him to stop the effort, I've never seen him drop his head or give less than his all. White is a better player than given credit. Brings more than Laidler, (yes that old argument).

Many think we are 4 years plus away, I respect that view but think we are closer. A lot of our turn-around should be credited to the work done in the last 2 off-seasons and the next 2 IMO.

The biggest difference to me is that there are clear objectives and objectives that serve the greater good of the club.

We could have held onto Waite.......We could have given Robinson another chance......We could have possibly enticed Jeff to stay for more money....We could have recruited Cooney, Higgins etc. etc.

We met just about every objective going into the trade and draft period so from that point of view, we've done very well.
Will the results be good enough to take us up the ladder? No idea but there is a clear culture shift that we've set in place.....trick will be to keep it in place.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

O.K. then. Spell it out once and for all. What are you saying?

What are you saying? I never brought Ratten into this conversation, but it seems when people are trying to justify Malthouse's performance, they put down Ratts, yet when Mick does the same thing, they put it across as a positive. Quite funny really.

Fact is not assumption. You may be assuming it to be but it's not

We've been here before. Just like Hendo was playing with this mysterious injury and needed a post season op (which never happened). You saying 'I know for sure' holds no cred whatsoever in my eyes.

1. Thomas wanted to come to Carlton in the same way Frawley chose Hawthorn...Franklin chose Sydney etc.........so this makes you wrong. Right?
2. Ratten may have well wanted Thomas also but maybe wouldn't have known exactly why he needed him.

You didn't respond to the main part of my post here. And I'm not surprised.

You didn't answer or respond to my post here, so feel free to stay concerned. Not my problem

Yes I did. Wherever your argument is weak you pay out on Ratts so as to try and strengthen the credibility of your opinion. It concerns me that you're still reverting to this three years down the track. Why does it concern me? Because even someone like you is running out of excuses. Lacks substance. Hard to take to take you seriously. Feel free to keep this theme going. Constant comments like 'you don't understand' and 'you don't follow Carlton' are attempts to try and discredit me, but if your argument is so strong, why the need? Your condescending smilies are unnecessary. Play the post and not the poster.

 

[JustaBattler]

If Ellard and White are Carlton's biggest list 'problems' - Malthouse has done very well.

As for Ratten - i'm still trying to explain the rationale behind his paying huge overs for McLean and Warnock - and that is just for starters. Ratten was on a crash through or crash course- who knows how much of his 'short termism' was forced onto him by a Board hungry for success and who knows how much was a by product of an obviously dysfunctional Club and who knows how much responsibility he should carry or not? - I don't know - I just have conjecture based on partial information and observation - like everyone else.

What I do see is some semblance of sanity and order being restored at Carlton - and I give Malthouse part credit as well as a whole lot of other people with lower profiles.

I suspect people unwilling to give Malthouse a fair go or people who are dubious are just re-acting to many years of epic fail from what used to be the strongest Club in football. The facts are that Carlton has been run badly as far as on and off field performance gores since before Elliot was kicked out - that is many years of catch-up the Club is working through.

 

[Magruder]

That catch-up may not happen, but we are giving ourselves a shot now.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

If Ellard and White are Carlton's biggest list 'problems' - Malthouse has done very well

Considering they were initially Ratten's problem, I beg to differ.

As for Ratten - i'm still trying to explain the rationale behind his paying huge overs for McLean and Warnock

And I'm still trying to understand the rationale behind paying huge over for a 27 year old that had not played for two years with injury, on possibly the second highest pay packet at the club. But then I look at his relationship with the CEO and coach......

What I do see is some semblance of sanity and order being restored at Carlton - and I give Malthouse part credit as well as a whole lot of other people with lower profiles.

Which part, the media conferences or the time he lost at Ling before we went in for the half time break, and then conceded 10 goals straight to the Swans. Are we drafting for now or the future? Are we being patient or looking for the quick fix? Why does our Pres feel the need to pull him aside and talk to him about his attitude? Why is Andy McKay saying things that Mick refutes the very next day?

I suspect people unwilling to give Malthouse a fair go or people who are dubious are just re-acting to many years of epic fail from what used to be the strongest Club in football. The facts are that Carlton has been run badly as far as on and off field performance gores since before Elliot was kicked out - that is many years of catch-up the Club is working through.

Actually I was right behind Malthouse from the start, I don't like what I've seen or heard during his time at our club, that's what I form my opinion from. Before he came to Carlton I viewed him as a star of the competition.

 

[thylacine60]

Actually I was right behind Malthouse from the start, I don't like what I've seen or heard during his time at our club, that's what I form my opinion from. Before he came to Carlton I viewed him as a star of the competition.

One premiership in the last 21 years. That's a fact of life mate. It seems to make you uneasy and go all defensive, it's an ugly stat for a so called supercoach that's for sure.

Seems to sit a bit uneasily with these thoughts, EE.

 

[The Flying Doormat]

^^

I didn't give up on any argument I stand by ALL my comments. We can keep on going if you like, but you seem to have descended into insult territory and I'm not interested in that TBH. Rational conversation only if you can't handle the topic don't open the thread 'Mr Defensive'.

You responded to my post buddy, you don't like it, you move on, and stop quoting me.

OK, go play in the corner by yourself.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

Actually I was right behind Malthouse from the start, I don't like what I've seen or heard during his time at our club, that's what I form my opinion from. Before he came to Carlton I viewed him as a star of the competition.


Seems to sit a bit uneasily with these thoughts, EE.

Yup, before he came to Carlton, I viewed him as a star of the competition. It's what he's done at our time at the club that I've formed my opinion on. I was totally wrong and happy to admit it as i have in the above post.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

OK, go play in the corner by yourself.

Well you're not exactly playing nicely. I already am in the corner by myself lol.

 

[thylacine60]

Yup, before he came to Carlton, I viewed him as a star of the competition. It's what he's done at our time at the club that I've formed my opinion on. I was totally wrong and happy to admit it as i have in the above post.

This doesn't sound like you considered him a star at all:

One premiership in the last 21 years. That's a fact of life mate. It seems to make you uneasy and go all defensive, it's an ugly stat for a so called supercoach that's for sure.

 

[HARKER]

What are you saying? I never brought Ratten into this conversation, but it seems when people are trying to justify Malthouse's performance, they put down Ratts, yet when Mick does the same thing, they put it across as a positive. Quite funny really.

My question was: "What are you saying"? to your remark tell me I didn't know what you were saying.
Quit the semantics and make your point.................if indeed you have one. What are you saying?

We've been here before. Just like Hendo was playing with this mysterious injury and needed a post season op (which never happened). You saying 'I know for sure' holds no cred whatsoever in my eyes.

No problem. Why should you believe me?

You didn't respond to the main part of my post here. And I'm not surprised.

Oh man, what is this? Posting ping pong?
Which part didn't I answer for you? I'll help you and put it in BOLD.

Yes I did. Wherever your argument is weak you pay out on Ratts so as to try and strengthen the credibility of your opinion. It concerns me that you're still reverting to this three years down the track. Why does it concern me? Because even someone like you is running out of excuses. Lacks substance. Hard to take to take you seriously. Feel free to keep this theme going. Constant comments like 'you don't understand' and 'you don't follow Carlton' are attempts to try and discredit me, but if your argument is so strong, why the need? Your condescending smilies are unnecessary. Play the post and not the poster.

No! You did not.
I understand your game.............I just don't like it.

 

[Beer n Skittles]

Don't know why Ratten cops the blame for list management during his tenure as coach. Even if he was in charge of list management, well, he shouldn't have been.

 

[HARKER]

Don't know why Ratten cops the blame for list management during his tenure as coach. Even if he was in charge of list management, well, he shouldn't have been.

Now that's making sense because Ratten didn't hire himself and some that did are still there. Fortunately Kernahan isn't, though.

The club has adopted the idea of building from the bottom up and unfortunately we had to.

 

[Ellas Ellas]

This doesn't sound like you considered him a star at all:

One premiership in the last 21 years. That's a fact of life mate. It seems to make you uneasy and go all defensive, it's an ugly stat for a so called supercoach that's for sure.

Yes I admit I was not aware of that stat, but I certainly rated him. I don't think anyone was unhappy with his appointment once Ratts was gone were they? When you combine that stat with the first hand experience I've had with him, it does make for an ugly stat.