Opinion Mick Malthouse

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

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.

I totally get that argument, and I think he earned his spot this week. Just playing devil's advocate. How many times did Graham earn a spot last year without getting a game, or getting the sub's vest, only to be dropped the following week? I'm not saying that you would bring one of those other players in, if they had a crap game in the VFL, just for the sake of bringing them in, but if they had a reasonable game, offer the same attributes, and you had to toss up between Army and one of the young guys, you should give the nod to the guy that needs the experience over a 28yo that only managed 8 games last year and is there for depth. Not saying it's an easy balance, but my preference would be for Buckley to take that role ahead of Army.

 

[Broadside]

I'd rather they select Army AND Buckley and drop a veteran who stunk it up last week.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

I'd rather they select Army AND Buckley and drop a veteran who stunk it up last week.

Carrots is very, very lucky .. He plays poorly against Essendon*, he gotta be dumped to Preston, or Mick and the MC lose credibility in their mantra of not playing passengers ..

Sadly, I do get the feeling Carrots will get that dreaded midseason tap on the shoulder.
Been a club champion and a stalwart, but sadly I feel father time and the increased pace of the game has caught up with him.

 

[Broadside]

Carrots is very, very lucky .. He plays poorly against Essendon*, he gotta be dumped to Preston, or Mick and the MC lose credibility in their mantra of not playing passengers ..

he was flying until some Bomber drove him into the ground and broke his collarbone (I think?)...never been the same since.

 

[IschenkoUBeauty]

Always love the photo of Carrazzo "wooing" in Stanton's face. Thought when I saw it, cop that ya c***.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Always love the photo of Carrazzo "wooing" in Stanton's face. Thought when I saw it, cop that ya c***.

Yaaaaaasssssss

 

[HBF]

I miss Jeffy.

 

[Navara79]

I miss Jeffy.

Melbourne missed him last week too...

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Melbourne missed him last week too...

Unfortunately we are going to have to put up with rubbish from opposition supporters every time Betts, Garlett or Waite kick a few goals. They will all conveniently forget to say anything every other week when they play rubbish.
Haven't heard anyone bag us for getting rid of Robbo yet.

 

[gab213]

Unfortunately we are going to have to put up with rubbish from opposition supporters every time Betts, Garlett or Waite kick a few goals. They will all conveniently forget to say anything every other week when they play rubbish.
Haven't heard anyone bag us for getting rid of Robbo yet.

I have also noticed how the media has been pumping these guys up ever since they left the club. When they were with us they were called ordinary players, now they are stars that we shouldn't have let go.

The same goes for our coaches, when Ratten was coaching us they put him under enormous scrutiny, as soon as he was gone we had done the wrong thing by him.


This is just another reason why i don't take much notice of what anyone in the media has to say about our club. They all have their own agendas.

 

[HBF]

Melbourne missed him last week too...

Jeffy at his best would be a god send for us right now.

 

[TeeJay Blue]

Spot on. Rebuilding is a long term process.
I am sick and tired of all the people on here whinging 'play Buckley', 'play Boekhorst', 'play Whiley', 'play Graham', etc.
We don't simply rush them in. They have to earn their spot based on fitness and form. Some have and some have not.

Who knows? Mick might not be playing favourites here. The coaching group probably thinks certain players are very fit and have performed well in the preseason. We need to stop making it out like we know more than what they do. They are doing the job here, not us.

What gives Buckley and Boekhorst more right to play over Bell, White, Tuohy or Curnow? The latter 4 have offered more, and still are.
Anybody who says that they are deadwood should not be a loyal supporter to the team.
We are not making a colourful decorative and pretty looking team on paper with young players, names and game styles that fit our structure.

Yes, lately I have been saying that Carrazzo should not play. I love Carrazzo and his passion for playing in the navy blue. But it is the same with anyone else around his age (Judd, Simpson, Armfield, Walker, Jamison, Rowe, Wood, etc.). Age can be an issue. You would think that these players would not be at the club any longer, so them being a part of the rebuild is unlikely. They need to think less about themselves and consider where the club is heading. With them out of the picture a rebuild can begin by blooding a younger playing group.

Carrazzo is not the only reason for our problems. Everybody else at the club is just as much to blame for our woes.

So STOP blaming one particular player after every loss. All I hear after Carlton lose a game is, get rid of Curnow and get rid of Ellard. They are not the culprits here. The team is. The team walks out on field, The team plays and if the team loses, the team should get scrutinised, AS A TEAM.
Murphy is at fault here as well, so is Bell, Gibbs, Simpson, Everitt, Henderson, Tuohy, Yarran, and so on.

I agree that some players don't look to be a part of our future. Some players don't look to be as damaging with the ball as others. Some players are playing more for themselves. But roasting one player because we generally see them as being no good after every game the team loses says more about us supporters than the players. We should be proud of every player on our list. Everyone looks better in navy blue. All they need to remember is that they are playing for the jumper as well and should give it their all.

Mick Malthouse is not the problem here. The club lacks leadership and communication on the field. Each and every player needs to step up. Even Judd, Murphy and Gibbs. Nobody should be immune. Also our player development is not very good. The players have potential, but they are not reaching it with the conditions they are in. There is an issue with the club's culture too.

 

[Navara79]

Jeffy at his best would be a god send for us right now.

No doubt! I would love him to still be at our club. Unfortunately he was only at his best every 4 weeks

 

[Azul]

They have to earn their spot based on fitness and form.

Unlike the senior players? The first 2 rounds' pathetic efforts after quarter time haven't seen anyone from the old guard demoted.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Spot on. Rebuilding is a long term process.
I am sick and tired of all the people on here whinging 'play Buckley', 'play Boekhorst', 'play Whiley', 'play Graham', etc.
We don't simply rush them in. They have to earn their spot based on fitness and form. Some have and some have not.

Who knows? Mick might not be playing favourites here. The coaching group probably thinks certain players are very fit and have performed well in the preseason. We need to stop making it out like we know more than what they do. They are doing the job here, not us.

What gives Buckley and Boekhorst more right to play over Bell, White, Tuohy or Curnow? The latter 4 have offered more, and still are.
Anybody who says that they are deadwood should not be a loyal supporter to the team.
We are not making a colourful decorative and pretty looking team on paper with young players, names and game styles that fit our structure.

Yes, lately I have been saying that Carrazzo should not play. I love Carrazzo and his passion for playing in the navy blue. But it is the same with anyone else around his age (Judd, Simpson, Armfield, Walker, Jamison, Rowe, Wood, etc.). Age can be an issue. You would think that these players would not be at the club any longer, so them being a part of the rebuild is unlikely. They need to think less about themselves and consider where the club is heading. With them out of the picture a rebuild can begin by blooding a younger playing group.

Carrazzo is not the only reason for our problems. Everybody else at the club is just as much to blame for our woes.

So STOP blaming one particular player after every loss. All I hear after Carlton lose a game is, get rid of Curnow and get rid of Ellard. They are not the culprits here. The team is. The team walks out on field, The team plays and if the team loses, the team should get scrutinised, AS A TEAM.
Murphy is at fault here as well, so is Bell, Gibbs, Simpson, Everitt, Henderson, Tuohy, Yarran, and so on.

I agree that some players don't look to be a part of our future. Some players don't look to be as damaging with the ball as others. Some players are playing more for themselves. But roasting one player because we generally see them as being no good after every game the team loses says more about us supporters than the players. We should be proud of every player on our list. Everyone looks better in navy blue. All they need to remember is that they are playing for the jumper as well and should give it their all.

Mick Malthouse is not the problem here. The club lacks leadership and communication on the field. Each and every player needs to step up. Even Judd, Murphy and Gibbs. Nobody should be immune. Also our player development is not very good. The players have potential, but they are not reaching it with the conditions they are in. There is an issue with the club's culture too.

I think you'll find most people who want the young blokes in would like to see them come in at the expense of the Armfield- and Carazzo-type players. I certainly don't want Boekhorst being given a game ahead of Everitt, or Buckley ahead of Simpson. I haven't seen anyone calling for Bell or White to be dropped - in fact they seem to be the players most of us are happy with on an effort-based evaluation.

Most of us just want to see a competitive unit - you're making it sound like everyone is screaming for the NB team to be elevated for the rest of the season. Way off the mark buddy.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Spot on. Rebuilding is a long term process.
I am sick and tired of all the people on here whinging 'play Buckley', 'play Boekhorst', 'play Whiley', 'play Graham', etc.
We don't simply rush them in. They have to earn their spot based on fitness and form. Some have and some have not.

So the senior players keep their spots regardless of form? The younger guys have no opportunity to prove themselves?

Who knows? Mick might not be playing favourites here. The coaching group probably thinks certain players are very fit and have performed well in the preseason. We need to stop making it out like we know more than what they do. They are doing the job here, not us.

Should we just never question anything then? By that logic should you then stop calling for Carrazzo to be dropped?

What gives Buckley and Boekhorst more right to play over Bell, White, Tuohy or Curnow? The latter 4 have offered more, and still are.
Anybody who says that they are deadwood should not be a loyal supporter to the team.
We are not making a colourful decorative and pretty looking team on paper with young players, names and game styles that fit our structure.

The point is that we should be making a team on paper that has names and game styles that fit our structure! It is ludicrously frustrating to watch them play a game that they're not suited to or they don't enjoy playing...therefore we get spanked.

Yes, lately I have been saying that Carrazzo should not play. I love Carrazzo and his passion for playing in the navy blue. But it is the same with anyone else around his age (Judd, Simpson, Armfield, Walker, Jamison, Rowe, Wood, etc.). Age can be an issue. You would think that these players would not be at the club any longer, so them being a part of the rebuild is unlikely. They need to think less about themselves and consider where the club is heading. With them out of the picture a rebuild can begin by blooding a younger playing group.

Carrazzo is not the only reason for our problems. Everybody else at the club is just as much to blame for our woes.

So STOP blaming one particular player after every loss. All I hear after Carlton lose a game is, get rid of Curnow and get rid of Ellard. They are not the culprits here. The team is. The team walks out on field, The team plays and if the team loses, the team should get scrutinised, AS A TEAM.
Murphy is at fault here as well, so is Bell, Gibbs, Simpson, Everitt, Henderson, Tuohy, Yarran, and so on.

Pretty sure most people have been scrutinising the team as a whole. We've seen every name up for discussion from Murphy all the way to Tuohy and everyone (except Judd and Docherty) in between. People have a right to vent or discuss each player and the game. The reason the names such as Ellard, Curnow and Carrazzo get thrown up after a loss is because no one believes that they're part of our next premiership team...so if we're rebuilding, why play them?

I agree that some players don't look to be a part of our future. Some players don't look to be as damaging with the ball as others. Some players are playing more for themselves. But roasting one player because we generally see them as being no good after every game the team loses says more about us supporters than the players. We should be proud of every player on our list. Everyone looks better in navy blue. All they need to remember is that they are playing for the jumper as well and should give it their all.

Mick Malthouse is not the problem here. The club lacks leadership and communication on the field. Each and every player needs to step up. Even Judd, Murphy and Gibbs. Nobody should be immune. Also our player development is not very good. The players have potential, but they are not reaching it with the conditions they are in. There is an issue with the club's culture too.

If there's problems with leadership, communication and culture, then the coach should be held accountable just as much as the players, no? After all, nobody should be immune.

 

[Azul]

Most of us just want to see a competitive unit - you're making it sound like everyone is screaming for the NB team to be elevated for the rest of the season. Way off the mark buddy.

This. It's not the case that selectively blooding the kids is mutually exclusive to onfield success. In fact the opposite is true - the complacency of the older players has proven disastrous in the first 2 weeks. If there's no fear of being dropped, what incentive is there - pride in the jumper ain't enough, it seems.

Anyhow, player by player; these 3 are primed, ready and waiting:

• Whiley - might be battling for a spot in the team with Cripps but he's exactly the tall big bodied inside midfielder to succeed Judd and Carrazzo at the stoppages.
• Buckley - we have a number of options to play the small defender role, so it's a toss up. But it releases Tuohy and Yarran further up the ground and Docherty into the middle.
• Graham - I really thought he'd take over from Brock McLean this year. Not overly blessed with pace but finds his own footy over 4 quarters.

Boekhorst, Byrne and Smith mightn't be ready for 2 hours of intensity but I'm a firm believer in making proactive use of the substitute to advance a youngster. Even if rotten luck has seen Thomas and White out of action early on. A quarter of AFL in front of 80,000 is worth more than a game of suburban footy in front of 800, surely.

 

[TeeJay Blue]

Unlike the senior players? The first 2 rounds' pathetic efforts after quarter time haven't seen anyone from the old guard demoted.

I get where you are coming from. But it is the same all around. If we were playing the team based on that assumption, we would be dropping so many players left, right and centre every single week. That is a bit far-fetched. Certain players are ahead of others in terms of form and effort.

I think you'll find most people who want the young blokes in would like to see them come in at the expense of the Armfield- and Carazzo-type players. I certainly don't want Boekhorst being given a game ahead of Everitt, or Buckley ahead of Simpson. I haven't seen anyone calling for Bell or White to be dropped - in fact they seem to be the players most of us are happy with on an effort-based evaluation.

Most of us just want to see a competitive unit - you're making it sound like everyone is screaming for the NB team to be elevated for the rest of the season. Way off the mark buddy.

THIS!! This is it. That is all I am hearing from many, and I am saying MANY, not ALL.

So the senior players keep their spots regardless of form? The younger guys have no opportunity to prove themselves?
Should we just never question anything then? By that logic should you then stop calling for Carrazzo to be dropped?
The point is that we should be making a team on paper that has names and game styles that fit our structure! It is ludicrously frustrating to watch them play a game that they're not suited to or they don't enjoy playing...therefore we get spanked.
Pretty sure most people have been scrutinising the team as a whole. We've seen every name up for discussion from Murphy all the way to Tuohy and everyone (except Judd and Docherty) in between. People have a right to vent or discuss each player and the game. The reason the names such as Ellard, Curnow and Carrazzo get thrown up after a loss is because no one believes that they're part of our next premiership team...so if we're rebuilding, why play them?
If there's problems with leadership, communication and culture, then the coach should be held accountable just as much as the players, no? After all, nobody should be immune.

Wow! Very analytical you are. But you misunderstand me. I am not saying supporters don't have the right to complain.
But blaming the same one or two players for every single game Carlton lose is completely inappropriate.

I am speaking for the short term here. Carrazzo and Curnow are not the worst performers every week. If they don't look to be in a premiership team according to anyone, fine with that. I see it too. But it should not mean that they don't play ever again starting from this week. I think Carrazzo should not play, but if they think otherwise, good on them. Every player has potential. Carrazzo might still have something in the tank. He CAN prove me wrong.
But age is an issue. Players around the age of 30 need to understand where the club is at and where it needs to get to. A Rebuild with veterans at the club does not look healthy.

NO... rebuilding does not simply mean drop out the whole team and play all the youngsters in round 3. These players are to come in gradually during the course of the year. This is what Mick Malthouse is saying as well, not just me. It is common sense that VFL is different from the AFL.
Trigg mainly meant focusing on the drafts, making good trades and focusing on the proper development of the players, not drop everyone in the third week and start a fresh 22.

EVERYBODY is at fault at the club. I am taking the pressure of Mick, because most make it out that he is the ONLY one at fault here. I have counted hundreds of sack Malthouse messages all around the internet. Sacking he coach will only make a small difference.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

I get where you are coming from. But it is the same all around. If we were playing the team based on that assumption, we would be dropping so many players left, right and centre every single week. That is a bit far-fetched. Certain players are ahead of others in terms of form and effort.



THIS!! This is it. That is all I am hearing from many, and I am saying MANY, not ALL.



Wow! Very analytical you are. But you misunderstand me. I am not saying supporters don't have the right to complain.
But blaming the same one or two players for every single game Carlton lose is completely inappropriate.

I am speaking for the short term here. Carrazzo and Curnow are not the worst performers every week. If they don't look to be in a premiership team according to anyone, fine with that. I see it too. But it should not mean that they don't play ever again starting from this week. I think Carrazzo should not play, but if they think otherwise, good on them. Every player has potential. Carrazzo might still have something in the tank. He CAN prove me wrong.
But age is an issue. Players around the age of 30 need to understand where the club is at and where it needs to get to. A Rebuild with veterans at the club does not look healthy.

NO... rebuilding does not simply mean drop out the whole team and play all the youngsters in round 3. These players are to come in gradually during the course of the year. This is what Mick Malthouse is saying as well, not just me. It is common sense that VFL is different from the AFL.
Trigg mainly meant focusing on the drafts, making good trades and focusing on the proper development of the players, not drop everyone in the third week and start a fresh 22.

EVERYBODY is at fault at the club. I am taking the pressure of Mick, because most make it out that he is the ONLY one at fault here. I have counted hundreds of sack Malthouse messages all around the internet.

I have said from the beginning that rebuilding doesn't mean dropping every senior player, but you want to keep the good ones. What are our youngsters going to learn from Armfield and Ellard that they haven't already learnt from playing alongside them in the VFL?

 

[TeeJay Blue]

I have said from the beginning that rebuilding doesn't mean dropping every senior player, but you want to keep the good ones. What are our youngsters going to learn from Armfield and Ellard that they haven't already learnt from playing alongside them in the VFL?

I like Buckley, Graham and Whiley. And I wish to see them get a few games this year. And they will. Smith and Cripps have played. Byrne is playing.
But at no stages are youngsters ahead of the more experienced players.
Armfield and Ellard, I can agree don't look like they are going to be at the club for any longer. But why should they be shoved to the side now? They put in effort as well.
Carlton's rebuild is more focused with the off-season. We have drafted poorly and got the disadvantage from the trades we have made.
It has nothing to do with who is playing in the team. Every player should put in effort.
Armfield was named in the team because of his form. Nominated best on ground should reward you. Should be with Graham as well. But I suppose for him to get a game, he needs to compete with a Murphy or Gibbs. Armfield is coming in for adding speed, with Tutt omitted.

All the players' fates at the club are decided at the end of the year, not during the year.

 

[thylacine60]

For *'s sake, what is it, National Exploded Quotation Day?

 

[TeeJay Blue]

Oh, so that is why you don't do it much. You must make up for it with 3 word posts.

 

[thylacine60]

That's not true.

 

[TeeJay Blue]

See what you did there.

Oh dear, don't want to get off track.

(clears throat) Mick Malthouse.

 

[Windhover]

EVERYBODY is at fault at the club. I am taking the pressure of Mick, because most make it out that he is the ONLY one at fault here. I have counted hundreds of sack Malthouse messages all around the internet. Sacking he coach will only make a small difference.

Patently absurd. How, for example, could Clem Smith be at fault. As pick 60 in last year's draft for him to play most of the first 2 games at all is a fantastic effort.

It is not a case of saying MM is the ONLY one at fault. It is a case of saying, when a team has performed very poorly for the 2.5 years under the coach that, hey, MM is a PART of the problem. Unless and until he is gone no one can know whether certain players, recruiters, boot-studders etc have maybe not performed in a way that has helped us achieve on-field success or whether it is because of MM either not training the person properly or not using the person properly.

After all MM is well and truly entitled to bask in the glory of his 3 flags although, no doubt, others were also helpful. Same only different when it goes the other way.