Opinion Mick Malthouse

What is the next move on Mick?

  • Sack him immediately; replacement coach to see out the year.

    Votes: 192 48.9%

  • Let him coach out the year then show him the door.

    Votes: 70 17.8%

  • Sign him now to give coaches and players some direction.

    Votes: 81 20.6%

  • Not sure yet... still too angry to think clearly.

    Votes: 50 12.7%
  • Total voters
    393
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd be more disappointed in the coaching staff if we suddenly threw every first and second year player in the team at once.

Rebuilding doesn't mean throwing them to the wolves. It means long term change management. When the young players are ready, they will play.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Blue Pulse said:
Not too sure what the point of his article is, are we at round 12 already.

Most youngster have to do an apprenticeship and most of these kids have had niggles to hold them back. I want to see these kids in the side too but when their ready. I think his article is a tad premature.
Click to expand...
You could do a similar article on every club, only with a successful club it would be espousing how good they are at developing their players in the VFL so that they are more ready for the AFL. With us, why aren't we chucking them in at the deep end, or to the wolves?
 
Does Malthouse have an issue with Buckley?

He received a rising start nomination last year then got injured and hasn't been able to get a game since!
 
ShanDog said:
I'd be more disappointed in the coaching staff if we suddenly threw every first and second year player in the team at once.

Rebuilding doesn't mean throwing them to the wolves. It means long term change management. When the young players are ready, they will play.
Click to expand...

So playing all of our young kids at once is a bad move but trading all of our seniors at the end of the year is a good move? :p
Help me pls shan.
 
Big Sim said:
You could do a similar article on every club, only with a successful club it would be espousing how good they are at developing their players in the VFL so that they are more ready for the AFL. With us, why aren't we chucking them in at the deep end, or to the wolves?
Click to expand...

I think we want to expose as few as possible to the way we are playing at the moment, when we start to play some decent footy then we will have more confidence to throw the young fellas in.
In saying that I feel Buckley is an exception who lifts when playing at senior level as per Doc when it gets to the real stuff
 
Blue Pulse said:
I think we want to expose as few as possible to the way we are playing at the moment, when we start to play some decent footy then we will have more confidence to throw the young fellas in.
In saying that I feel Buckley is an exception who lifts when playing at senior level as per Doc when it gets to the real stuff
Click to expand...
I agree wholeheartedly. Lets see what Bucks does in the VFL this weekend. Hope he makes a real statement.
 
MEB_ said:
So playing all of our young kids at once is a bad move but trading all of our seniors at the end of the year is a good move? :p
Help me pls shan.
Click to expand...
Sure thing Mebby! This is what I have learned in the last couple of weeks:

1. The team lacks on-field leadership, but we need to play as many youngsters as possible
2. We have had enough of knee-jerk reactions but we should trade out every senior player for picks
3. We don't look like we have speed or fitness, but Armfield shouldn't be playing against Essendon
4. Boekhorst is clearly going to be a dud because he hasn't played by round 3, but Isaac Smith is a gun even though he didn't play until much later.

Hope that helps!
 
ShanDog said:
Sure thing Mebby! This is what I have learned in the last couple of weeks:

1. The team lacks on-field leadership, but we need to play as many youngsters as possible
2. We have had enough of knee-jerk reactions but we should trade out every senior player for picks
3. We don't look like we have speed or fitness, but Armfield shouldn't be playing against Essendon
4. Boekhorst is clearly going to be a dud because he hasn't played by round 3, but Isaac Smith is a gun even though he didn't play until much later.

Hope that helps!
Click to expand...

It doesn't help AT ALL.

What about my view?
5. We need stronger on field leadership, but if that's not going to come from our appointed leaders then we need to play the guys that are natural leaders to some degree. While we shouldn't trade out every senior player for picks, there should be a balance of keeping seniors to mentor the newbs as well as clearing out those who don't want to play for the club. We don't have speed or fitness, but is Armfield really the answer? Boekhorst needs time, and that's okay.
 
Malifice said:
Spot on. Mixed messages from the club. Clearly we've been on a rebuild for the past few years. It's been sold as getting the lists age right or some crap.

One minute the clocks at 11. Next minute we don't have the talent. One minute we can't see who we are going to lose to. Next minute the list is rubbish and we can't see who were going to win against.

We're either good enough or were not. If we're not (which I don't think we are) and it's down to the list not being up to it (which I think it's not) then we need to fix the list.

That's not tanking. Just a frank admission to the supporters of where we are at, what the direction of the club is going to be for the next few years and a unified message and strategic plan for the next 2 years.

If that doesn't serve as a wake up call to some of the senior members of the list (shape up or well ship you out for kids) then nothing will.

We keep selling false hype and the supporters and players buy into it and start believing it only to be crushed when it's revealed for the crap it is.

Let's unify the message and direction of the club, get the supporters behind it, and put the players on notice all in one swoop.
Click to expand...
Let's not kid ourselves. Any time you turn over 20+ players in 2 years, you are in a rebuild. Whether it's a full rebuild, or a partial one. You don't need the club to officially state it to work that out.
The main list is capable of winning games against most sides and it's possible to do the kind of rebuild that we were going for, while still winning games, but for some reason the players aren't motivated.
I'm a bit sick of seeing people throw around Mick's comments about not losing a game, as if it was some foot in mouth moment, when it has been taken massively out of context. We are a team that, when playing to our full potential, can beat anyone in the comp (we've matched it with pretty much all the top teams for 3 quarters). When you look at each individual game and say "can we win that one?", "yeah, I reckon we can", doesn't mean that he expected us to go unbeaten. It just means that we have the potential to win every match up, not to mention trying to instill a bit of confidence in the players.
Are we in a rebuild? Of course we are. We have been from the moment Mick cut 12 or so players. Doesn't mean it has to be balls and all. The rebuild was hurt by the losses of Betts and Waite to free agency and Garlett and Robinson for being d*cks. If we still had all of those players, playing to their potential, we could be rejuvenating the list while pushing for a spot in the 8.
A rebuild doesn't mean that you have to get rid of everyone on the list that holds value for the sake of a few draft picks. Maybe one or two, but you need to keep a good balance of age, experience and skill. Our biggest issue at the moment seems to be all between the ears.
Sorry Malifice, that rant wasn't directly aimed at you. Just venting and you happened to paraphrase Mick's comments about not losing.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

MEB_ said:
It doesn't help AT ALL.

What about my view?
5. We need stronger on field leadership, but if that's not going to come from our appointed leaders then we need to play the guys that are natural leaders to some degree. While we shouldn't trade out every senior player for picks, there should be a balance of keeping seniors to mentor the newbs as well as clearing out those who don't want to play for the club. We don't have speed or fitness, but is Armfield really the answer? Boekhorst needs time, and that's okay.
Click to expand...
This. You can't throw the baby out with the bath water. Look at all the good teams. They have a good balance of age and experience. Half a dozen or so players around the 100 game mark, same again around 150. 4 or so around 200, and the a couple around 250+. You can't throw out all your 180+ gamers just because they might still hold some value and won't be part of the next flag.
 
MEB_ said:
...as opposed to?
Click to expand...
Playing well. Everything has gone pear shaped in the rounds 1 and 2. We are one win away from stability. No problems when you're winning. We lost the first 4 games last season including a horrible belting from Essendon. It was bleak last year at this stage. Port fade out. Richmond first half. Esendon.... The team improved except for shockers against the Swans and Hawks. I'm expecting another small step forward this year although it doesn't appear that way at the moment. All through last MM was promising marginal changes to the list. Well it didn't happen. I'm guessing but I think he's probably lost, traded and delisted a couple of dozen players. A dozen the first season wasn't unexpected but, given his indications during last season, another dozen was totally unexpected. Suddenly it's reported Carlton's in a rebuild. Footy is a simple game but not at the AFL level. When you introduce so many new players this is what happens. Be patient like the Ox.
 
You have to look at why you are bringing a player like Armfield in. I'm not adverse to him getting a game if he's earned it, but also don't think he is in the best side anymore, if that makes sense, and when looking at the selected side in terms of a rebuild, is he the best choice? Are you bringing him in for leg speed? Defensive pressure in the forward line? Who else offers similar skills, that is young and could do with the experience? Buckley? Boekhorst? Tutt? Johnson maybe? If so, one of those players should get the nod.
 
Robbo's my hero said:
Coach would have the final call. If the coach didn't then we'd play like a rabble.
Click to expand...
You would think that but looking at the make up of the committees in the past the coach is not the 'chairman' of the committee.
Who I would expect casts the decider.
 
Robbo's my hero said:
Playing well. Everything has gone pear shaped in the rounds 1 and 2. We are one win away from stability. No problems when you're winning. We lost the first 4 games last season including a horrible belting from Essendon. It was bleak last year at this stage. Port fade out. Richmond first half. Esendon.... The team improved except for shockers against the Swans and Hawks. I'm expecting another small step forward this year although it doesn't appear that way at the moment. All through last MM was promising marginal changes to the list. Well it didn't happen. I'm guessing but I think he's probably lost, traded and delisted a couple of dozen players. A dozen the first season wasn't unexpected but, given his indications during last season, another dozen was totally unexpected. Suddenly it's reported Carlton's in a rebuild. Footy is a simple game but not at the AFL level. When you introduce so many new players this is what happens. Be patient like the Ox.
Click to expand...

I meant how is playing like a rabble different to what's happening now.
 
Yazza Dabba Doo said:
Sorry Malifice, that rant wasn't directly aimed at you. Just venting and you happened to paraphrase Mick's comments about not losing.
Click to expand...

I get the context of the comments, but considering we are in a rebuild, the message wasn't in synch with the reality. Thats my gripe.

One minute we get comments about being at 11 on the premiership window and were drafting in a mature age FA in Daisy and selling false hope, the next minute were cutting half the list and we don't have the talent required.

All I ask for is a united cohesive plan, message and actions. A direction we can all unify and get behind.

I'm actually happy with Triggs recent message. It identifies exactly what I think needed identification, and paves a clear direction for the club going forward.
 
Yazza Dabba Doo said:
You have to look at why you are bringing a player like Armfield in. I'm not adverse to him getting a game if he's earned it, but also don't think he is in the best side anymore, if that makes sense, and when looking at the selected side in terms of a rebuild, is he the best choice? Are you bringing him in for leg speed? Defensive pressure in the forward line? Who else offers similar skills, that is young and could do with the experience? Buckley? Boekhorst? Tutt? Johnson maybe? If so, one of those players should get the nod.
Click to expand...

If he has earned it then why should he not be in the side. If he has earned it then he is definitely in our best 22.

Even in terms of a rebuild you still want to win games so you need to have in-form players there with your inexperienced players.
Please explain why giving a young kid a game over someone who is in-form is a better option? Developing a winning culture is also valuable in a rebuild phase.
 
when people say, "we need to play to our bloody strengths!" I have no idea what they even are?


We're no longer fast, don't have goal kickers, our skills by both foot and hand are below AFL standard........


we have a great looking jumper!
 
BluStreak said:
You would think that but looking at the make up of the committees in the past the coach is not the 'chairman' of the committee.
Who I would expect casts the decider.
Click to expand...
They had a chairman in the past like Wes Lofts and Sticks. I'm not sure about now. If they do he's pretty low key. The Senior Coach is responsible for team selection. Like a Minister he listens to advice but I can't imagine the others can force the coach to make decisions he's not comfortable with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top