CFC Stagnation?

[Beer n Skittles]

Agree with 40YB.
You support the team; you support the coach & players. It's the opposition you're supposed to hate.

By all means call the coach or a player on a bad decision, for example AJs infamous kick last week. But I'm pretty sick of reading that he's a dud & should never play another game. The club obviously thinks he's in a position to develop his decision making & skills or else they wouldn't persist with him. They work with him every day and are clearly in a better position to judge than us armchair critics.

As for replacing Ratten with Malthouse, how much thought has actually gone into this suggestion? Malthouses game plan allows all the time in the world for opposition teams to flood back, which means you need a good contested mark in the forward 50. Carlton only look damaging when the ball moves quick & the small forward are given a chance to crumb goals.
Maybe he'd experiment a bit, but it'd be a slow painful process & I'm not convinced in the slightest he'd come up with a radical plan that would sigle handedly win us a flag.
If the board decide to replace Ratten then I hope they go with the recent success formula: Pick a club with a gameplan that suits your list and poach their best assistant coach. John Blakey from Sydney for example

 

[Aphrodite]

Just noticed that Aph has closed the Ratts Mega thread (what took you so long is one question, WHY WHY is another, Who shot Liberty Valance is another........but I digress)

Taking a poll on how long it takes for someone else to start another thinly veiled invitation to examine his contract status.....my guess is about half time of the Hawks game in 7 days time. Am I cheeky enough to start an actual poll thread? Might get me carded and do my sanity the world of good........just sayin

It won't be long until this thread is locked if it keeps going the same way as the Ratten thread.

Same rubbish being posted on here.
All it is doing is derailing the thread and what was posted in the Ratten thread is spilling over to this one.

Stay on topic, NO PERSONAL ATTACKS or abuse and play nice otherwise I will be left with no other alternative but to start handing out infractions which I really do not want to do.

Play the ball and NOT the man.


It's not that hard to do !!!!!

 

[40yearBLUE]

Agree with 40YB.
You support the team; you support the coach & players. It's the opposition you're supposed to hate.

By all means call the coach or a player on a bad decision, for example AJs infamous kick last week. But I'm pretty sick of reading that he's a dud & should never play another game. The club obviously thinks he's in a position to develop his decision making & skills or else they wouldn't persist with him. They work with him every day and are clearly in a better position to judge than us armchair critics.

As for replacing Ratten with Malthouse, how much thought has actually gone into this suggestion? Malthouses game plan allows all the time in the world for opposition teams to flood back, which means you need a good contested mark in the forward 50. Carlton only look damaging when the ball moves quick & the small forward are given a chance to crumb goals.
Maybe he'd experiment a bit, but it'd be a slow painful process & I'm not convinced in the slightest he'd come up with a radical plan that would sigle handedly win us a flag.
If the board decide to replace Ratten then I hope they go with the recent success formula: Pick a club with a gameplan that suits your list and poach their best assistant coach. John Blakey from Sydney for example

Thanks for your support.

Even that miss kick from AJ was not the kind of mistake that was so terminal as to invoke the kind of responses we have had to it. So much so that even in our praise or support such mistakes become labelled mistakes. They are not mistakes. They are turnovers. Turnovers are not mistakes, they are the very premise our game is based on. Without turnovers there is no game. Imagine for a moment a game without turnovers, like basketball? The other side gets possession back after a score most of the time (cant quote a percentage because I am not really a fan of the game) is that the game we want? What Joseph attempted was to pass to Jamo to open up the path to goal through the middle or the other side at a time in the game (if I am not mistaken) that the clock was running out in the last and we needed to appy scoreboard pressure. It did not come off. OK thats life. Had it come off we may have swept it forward for the quick entry that our goals usually result from instead of kicking to a contested situation on the congested side of the ground, a tactic that had clearly failed us. So he rolled the dice. Pre game the coach implored the players to be brave. You will make mistakes but he would rather mistakes from a brave side than to not make as many and not be creative. So far from being a mistake AJ exhibited exactly the kind of play the coach had called for.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

Thanks for your support.

So he rolled the dice. Pre game the coach implored the players to be brave. You will make mistakes but he would rather mistakes from a brave side than to not make as many and not be creative. So far from being a mistake AJ exhibited exactly the kind of play the coach had called for.

Sorry champ, when you are under pressure near the boundary you get the ball over the line and start again. You sure as heck don't put the ball by foot into the corridor 20 yards backwards.

What he did wasn't brave, it was utterly stupid.

 

[40yearBLUE]

Sorry champ, when you are under pressure near the boundary you get the ball over the line and start again. You sure as heck don't put the ball by foot into the corridor 20 yards backwards.

What he did wasn't brave, it was utterly stupid.

What rubbish. Totally subjective comment. Totally subject to the outcome too. Had it come off, he would have been hailed a genius (well he wouldnt cos of his name). You throw conventional rule of percentage football out the window when you are a goal or 2 down with minutes to play. You play crazy brave or you die a safe death. I know what I would prefer from them, especially in light of the fact the coach called upon them to do just that. Be brave. One of the reasons I suspect AJ continues to get the call up despite his whipping boy status, exactly the same reason JR was getting games back in the day. Despite one eyed criticism from one eyed supporters from his own side!!!!!

Edit: players get split seconds to size up opportunities. AJ may have seen players free beyond Jamo, that if he could get it into Jamo's hands Jamo can get it moving down the open side, looks, thinks I will back Jamo to win the 1 on 1 in the air and executes. Split second, sometimes make a goal from nothing, and snatch a game from the safe jaws of tapping it to the boundary and reloading only to have 20 players surround the ball and cause numerous ball ups deep in their territory until the siren goes.

Doesnt sound quite so stupid when we open our minds to the possibilities instead of closing them only to convention and safety and our prejudices such as those displayed constantly here against players such as AJ.

 

[I bleed Blue]

So he rolled the dice. Pre game the coach implored the players to be brave. You will make mistakes but he would rather mistakes from a brave side than to not make as many and not be creative. So far from being a mistake AJ exhibited exactly the kind of play the coach had called for.

Have to agree with this 40. At the time I was angry as hell, but it was more so at us loosing the momentum in the context of the game. If it had come of we may of been able to move it down the corridor or switch to the other wing and have a shot on goal.

He took a risk, and thats exactly what Ratts asked of the players before the game. It didn't come off but thats life and thats footy.

 

[HARKER]

What name did you once go by 40yo? Until recently I was Five. You might have guessed I finally replaced my copy of The Coach and decided on a name change (with some kindness by our Fred)

Glad to know that Five, I mean The Coach.
Wracking my brains yesterday as to how I could have possibly missed someone who had posted just on 5K times here.

Bower - almost left last year and doesn't seem to be in future plans
Jake Edwards - gone
Hammer - confident he can be a good player
Grigg - gone, for whatever the reasons, and playing seniors.
Austin - playing seniors at the Dogs, didnt seem to get much of a chance at Carlton
Steven Brown - gone
Armfield - handy player
Robbo - good player
Marcus Davies - not sure yet

O.K. Let's see how Collingwood fares for the same time.

21. Stanley: Not doing much at GC now.
23. Cook: Gone
37. Anthony: No more needs to be said.
28. Dawes: Had a few moments but hardly setting the world alight.
44. Dick: Nothing to add.
31. McCarthy: Quit Collingwood as not required.
47. Thoolen: Didn't even see one game....GONE.
29. Beams: Has been good but was out of favour last year.
45. Blight: Didn't even see one game....GONE.
46. Rounds: To be ejected this year?

Hardly looks like a roaring success to me.

 

[HARKER]

Doesn't sound quite so stupid when we open our minds to the possibilities instead of closing them only to convention and safety and our prejudices such as those displayed constantly here against players such as AJ.

I have the feeling that AJ can create problems for himself.
I'm also not quite sure he's perceived as the best of team-mates at times (My observations only)

Generally speaking though, I can't deny him for effort.
If he is playing away from instructions, then it is the coaches and MC's fault for keeping him in the team.

 

[Beer n Skittles]

Thanks for your support.

Even that miss kick from AJ was not the kind of mistake that was so terminal as to invoke the kind of responses we have had to it. So much so that even in our praise or support such mistakes become labelled mistakes. They are not mistakes. They are turnovers. Turnovers are not mistakes, they are the very premise our game is based on. Without turnovers there is no game. Imagine for a moment a game without turnovers, like basketball? The other side gets possession back after a score most of the time (cant quote a percentage because I am not really a fan of the game) is that the game we want? What Joseph attempted was to pass to Jamo to open up the path to goal through the middle or the other side at a time in the game (if I am not mistaken) that the clock was running out in the last and we needed to appy scoreboard pressure. It did not come off. OK thats life. Had it come off we may have swept it forward for the quick entry that our goals usually result from instead of kicking to a contested situation on the congested side of the ground, a tactic that had clearly failed us. So he rolled the dice. Pre game the coach implored the players to be brave. You will make mistakes but he would rather mistakes from a brave side than to not make as many and not be creative. So far from being a mistake AJ exhibited exactly the kind of play the coach had called for.

Wasn't as bad as it was made out to be at all, I don't think he should have attempted it however.
Can't remember, was Jamo calling for it at the time? He's the man in charge down back so if he was the turnover goal was more his mistake than AJs.

 

[Blue Flame]

It won't be long until this thread is locked if it keeps going the same way as the Ratten thread.

Same rubbish being posted on here.
All it is doing is derailing the thread and what was posted in the Ratten thread is spilling over to this one.

Stay on topic, NO PERSONAL ATTACKS or abuse and play nice otherwise I will be left with no other alternative but to start handing out infractions which I really do not want to do.

Play the ball and NOT the man.


It's not that hard to do !!!!!

Gotta like a woman in control.
I'm not sure, but with injuries like we have had, added to the obvious unearthing of good young players like we have had, stagnating probably isn't the full story. More a combination of n factors causing us to slide.

 

[Sector 7G]

Sorry champ, when you are under pressure near the boundary you get the ball over the line and start again. You sure as heck don't put the ball by foot into the corridor 20 yards backwards.

What he did wasn't brave, it was utterly stupid.

I have to agree with 40yb on this one. The message Ratt gave 2 weeks ago was that we needed to play bold football and take chances. As he points out if Jamo takes the mark and keeps his feet he runs past the over committed WC player and creates a strong forward 50 entry. The alternative was to kick down the line with his left foot off 2 steps , most probably in the direction of NicNat who gave our big men a bath around the ground in both marking and in the ruck. Sure Joseph could have kicked it better to Jamo, but the idea was right and lack of spread and uncontested marks were part of the reason we were down at half time.

I will be interested to see if this weeks message from Ratts "I want you to play bold football but if you stuff up and your a fringe player you will get dropped".

 

[Blue Flame]

I don't think Joseph being dropped would mean that, he didn't have a spectacular day. Having said that, however, that particular incident was not as stupid as he is being made out to be. If he was Rioli, people would be saying it was someone else's fault because he is just awesome.

 

[JustaBattler]

What rubbish. Totally subjective comment. Totally subject to the outcome too. Had it come off, he would have been hailed a genius (well he wouldnt cos of his name). You throw conventional rule of percentage football out the window when you are a goal or 2 down with minutes to play. You play crazy brave or you die a safe death. I know what I would prefer from them, especially in light of the fact the coach called upon them to do just that. Be brave. One of the reasons I suspect AJ continues to get the call up despite his whipping boy status, exactly the same reason JR was getting games back in the day. Despite one eyed criticism from one eyed supporters from his own side!!!!!

Edit: players get split seconds to size up opportunities. AJ may have seen players free beyond Jamo, that if he could get it into Jamo's hands Jamo can get it moving down the open side, looks, thinks I will back Jamo to win the 1 on 1 in the air and executes. Split second, sometimes make a goal from nothing, and snatch a game from the safe jaws of tapping it to the boundary and reloading only to have 20 players surround the ball and cause numerous ball ups deep in their territory until the siren goes.

Doesnt sound quite so stupid when we open our minds to the possibilities instead of closing them only to convention and safety and our prejudices such as those displayed constantly here against players such as AJ.

I underline the inflammatory language for posterity. Below are the facts: Because you know something 'champ'? the situation was analysed on TV for everyone to see. Let me repeat what the situation was and how it played out and how it should have been played:

AJ is one out about 10-15 meters from sideline fumbling the ball and off balance.( no problem /no harm no foul)
As he looks up there are two players in the corridor and Jamison ( doing the right thing running to support - but behind )
The issue AJ has is the fact that Darling is running hard at an angle cutting off a kick directly to corridor by Joseph - because he is slow in getting balanced ( this happens no foul no blame)
Joseph now 'feels' he can't make a direct disposal to the free unmarked players - so he looks to Jamison - exactly in the danger zone - the kick goes to Jamison who has arms chopped ball spilled - goal. INCORRECT PLAY

Correct Play: Joseph runs towards boundary and with any skill actually removes Darling threat wrong footing him as Darling is running falt out to close gap as previousy stated.
This sets up the proper crossing kick forwards and center to advanatge as well as having the benefit of forward momentum turning Darling around - just natural smart moevment to advantage - well drilled schoolboy stuff actually.

ALSO it sets up two further things:

1. Joseph can draw a tackle and dispose towards boundary ( a defenders best friend) OR
2. He now has allowed Jamison the time to achieve what Jamison was doing - running to support.

Joseph actually made exactly the most dangerous and least advantageous call he could. This stuff happens under pressure.

Where you are wrong (again) "Champ" is to insist that your view is the only view - a view prejudiced by an aversion to any percieved antipathy towards any player who has ever been criticsed correctly or incorrectly. This bias is in effect baggage - that many posters simply don't carry - get over it.

Whist you ASK for logic and rationale and considered debate - you EVIDENCE continually I might add - shut down agression.

Some people know and understand the game and Carlton pretty well - some not as well. A good forum is a nice place to come and be amongst fellow supporters - not a place to be lectured at - and certainly not a place to be lectured at by a person - who in this case for example is plainly wrong and continues to insist his way or the highway.

Hopefully AJ learns from this. He had plenty of opportunity to dispose to advantage - he just 'felt' the pressure. A good defender always has time or makes time by correct movement. Gibbs does this type of stuff routinely and perfectly.

 

[dumb]

First your first point, perhaps my recent defence of Ratts has bereft of any rationale, it would be because I have and other have said it all before, to no avail. No one on here is listening. They have their whipping boys and no amount of rational argument will change that, and Ratts has been in the sights for some time, there was a minor reprieve for the first 3 rounds, then unlike real fans that rally to a wounded friend, bam they found their in to stick their knives in again. As to your actual arguments, well made its true, but they ignore an important point. There are variables in the human condition (a lofty claim but what does that mean, well it means that psychology is such a poorly understood thing that we cannot yet call it a science, so if we dont understand how and what motivates each of us how then can we say, this coach is to blame for the variables of performance?) variables in the vaguaries of luck that a bouncing ball creates. For example people (me among them) now claim the Esssendon game as a watershed, that we were "found out" and that it is the blueprint for others to follow. In my more lucid moments I understand this to be the emotional claptrap of an emotionally invested fan, but the rational understanding returns that any game can go a number of ways all dependant on luck. Carrots injury, just bad luck, had a profound effect on the rest of the game, and as a result the season.

You claim we should discuss the attributes that Ratts possesses in our defence against the hordes of unwashed that would have him sacked, but how, how is that discussion possible. You cannot do a comparison because you have no data with which to compare or contrast. You have no control subject. For example people say Roos would be better or Malthouse would be, but on what basis. In order for that comparison to be made you have to know exactly what they would do differently and you cannot do that by understanding what they did with the last team they coached. That was an entirely different group made up of different strengths and weaknesses in a different time and place. Totally pointless. We tried (and many others have too) importing a tried and tested coach, how did the Pagan years work out? And Collingwood did the same, they didnt work out exactly, so what did they do? They waited. They didnt sack him, they waited. Because perhaps they understood that Malthouse had the right ideas, just needed time to get the list right and for the players they had to fulfil. And they did. Once. Thats good enough. Onces is a fantastic achievement. But its not the be all and end all that ought motivate other clubs to get him at all cost. Then you contrast a first year coach with a ready made list like Scott at the Cats. If the rationale behind the get Malthouse camp were to be believed, Scott should never have been able to snag a cup in his first year. Perhaps, just perhaps, the influence a coach has is much much less than they would have you believe. (As possibly the greatest modern day coaches have pointed out, both Matthews and Blight have both said that the coach is nowhere near as important to present outcomes as others make out).

I could go on but those more inclined to the one liner deserve better wouldnt you say?

i think i can simplify those 2 paragraphs down somewhat. you don't think people should discuss ratten, and you don't like it when others do, and you feel like you can't get through to them. therefore it shouldn't happen.
and it's their fault, despite resorting to dictionary definitions of support to make a point.
just back out of the conversations if they trouble you.

people want concrete things to talk about. tactics, players, positional things, statistics. use something other than the bottomless pit of semantics and you might find you get somewhere. i'm not surprised you find it hard to find people to talk to about football at a football forum when your modus operandi involves very little of the stuff.
who cares if it's conjecture? i can see a whole world waiting for you to engage in outside the carlton supporter forum if only you'd strike up the courage (and yes, it is fear rather than 'everyone else is too stupid') to venture outside.

in closing (and i will take my leave of the discussion and thread here)... ratten is a perfectly normal subject to discuss when wondering about any possible football club stagnation. no i don't think he should be sacked, but see how the year pans out.

 

[40yearBLUE]

Glad to know that Five, I mean The Coach.
Wracking my brains yesterday as to how I could have possibly missed someone who had posted just on 5K times here.

Wacking my brains myself. (and yeah I too wondered why I couldnt remember the name).

O.K. Let's see how Collingwood fares for the same time.

21. Stanley: Not doing much at GC now.
23. Cook: Gone
37. Anthony: No more needs to be said.
28. Dawes: Had a few moments but hardly setting the world alight.
44. Dick: Nothing to add.
31. McCarthy: Quit Collingwood as not required.
47. Thoolen: Didn't even see one game....GONE.
29. Beams: Has been good but was out of favour last year.
45. Blight: Didn't even see one game....GONE.
46. Rounds: To be ejected this year?

Hardly looks like a roaring success to me.

Now wait just one moment. You mean this is the results of the recruiting at Collingwood for the second and third round picks orchestrated in the time the head coach was the bloke that many here would prefer was our head man?

No?

Surely every one of their picks shat pure gold and pissed beer. Malthouse would not have tollerated such mediocrity. Would have developed them into round 1 picks. What am I missing here?

 

[HARKER]

Now wait just one moment. You mean this is the results of the recruiting at Collingwood for the second and third round picks orchestrated in the time the head coach was the bloke that many here would prefer was our head man?
No?
Surely every one of their picks shat pure gold and pissed beer. Malthouse would not have tollerated such mediocrity. Would have developed them into round 1 picks. What am I missing here?

You're not missing anything.
When things go awry then anything and everything is at fault.

Now they're talking up Collingwood's depth as being extraordinary. I feel sick.

 

[mikeythemoocow]

O.K. Let's see how Collingwood fares for the same time.

21. Stanley: Not doing much at GC now.
23. Cook: Gone
37. Anthony: No more needs to be said.
28. Dawes: Had a few moments but hardly setting the world alight.
44. Dick: Nothing to add.
31. McCarthy: Quit Collingwood as not required.
47. Thoolen: Didn't even see one game....GONE.
29. Beams: Has been good but was out of favour last year.
45. Blight: Didn't even see one game....GONE.
46. Rounds: To be ejected this year?

Hardly looks like a roaring success to me.

Yeah, fair point. Some teams have done very well also

Adelaide - Vince, Tippet, Ottens, McKernan and Sloan

Geelong - West, Gamble, T. Hunt, Motlop, Vardy, Duncan and Christensen

West Coast - McKinley, MacKenzie, Schofield, Selwood, Shuey and Swift

Look you cannot look back and say we should have taken this player here and that player instead, but you can look back and say, we could have done better so lets look at what can be improved to get better results in the future. Maybe we have just been unlucky, but there is no harm in wanting to be the best in the competition in all facets and without accepting short falling and moving to improve them that cannot happen.

 

[HARKER]

Look you cannot look back and say we should have taken this player here and that player instead, but you can look back and say, we could have done better so lets look at what can be improved to get better results in the future. Maybe we have just been unlucky, but there is no harm in wanting to be the best in the competition in all facets and without accepting short falling and moving to improve them that cannot happen.

I don't think that we've been unlucky as player selection is a very important factor in the fortunes of any club.
Our selections on balance, have been sound and as good as any other team from where I sit.

So what has gone wrong?
Injuries and then some more injuries haven't done us any favours this year, but hopefully by next year if Henderson goes down that we have Watson ready to step up.
When Waite has his crook back again, we'll have Mitchell and Rowe putting their hand up.
When Laidler loses a knee-cap that Bootsma will be ready to take over without losing beat.
When Carrazzo pops a shoulder that Curnow will be better for the experience and be able to take over.
When Jamison runs into some more bad luck that McCarthy may be able to at least compete with his opponent, etc etc.

 

[40yearBLUE]

OK I took another look at the AJ so called mistake. (Stupid mistake by some).

I had mistakenly thought this occurred deep into the last quarter, in fact it was early in the last and resulted in the first goal of the quarter to WC and the lead back to them.

If you look at this screen shot it is plain to see that WC had every player behind the ball. And most of them on the same side that AJ was on. Jamo is defending goal side of the play and in fact the ball was kicked behind him to his advantage. Had he protected the ball a little more effectively with his body he should have been able to mark it, having said that he did fairly well. He didnt mark because the WC player Schofield chopped his arms, in most situations a free would have been paid to him. WC at WC is not most situations.

If you also look you can see one of our players free (no one within 10 meters or so) in the centre circle and another player in front of Jamo but he has an opponent tight. As others have pointed out, Schofield is running full pace to make the contest. Had it fallen our way, Shofield's inertia would have carried him a few paces past Jamo. Had Jamo marked and landed on his feet he would have been clear to play on and find the free player in the middle or run at least 10 maybe more meters before finding another option.

It did not come off. We all know that now. But before it all unfolded it was a risky but acceptable option to play. AJ's delivery was not poor. The option was only risky and called so after it took place and did not come off, had it come off, the riskyness of the play would not have been in question. Hindsight is a wonderful pet, even for commentators.

As to the situation in the game. I initially thought this passage was late inn the last. It was early in the last, we had all the previous momentum, having kicked 5 of the previous 6 goals and snatching the lead just before 3/4 time. Had we kicked the first goal of the last quarter and stretched our lead to 10 points the mindset of the Eagles may well have tipped from attack to defence, they may have become the hunted instead of hunting us.

That said, losing the lead reinvigorated them so the risk of the move comes back into play to a degree. Certainly not to the degree of it being a stupid move, but certainly the risk penalty was more critical. But as I have said, the reward was also high, 10 points up and continued momentum and the doubts that would have put into the opposition was high reward.

Overall I dont feel the play was stupid. The only time I feel safety is a better option is when the game is safely in our keeping. Even then it is still a risky option. Sydney tried it last week when 40 odd points up at 3/4 time and almost gifted Essendon a win from nowhere. Had they continued to attack in the manner that got them that far in front they may well have won by 10 goals. Same here, we were bold in the 3rd quarter and it got us the lead from 4 goals down. We continued to play that way and it cost us the lead. I see no harm in that option.

 

[40yearBLUE]

Yeah, fair point. Some teams have done very well also

Adelaide - Vince, Tippet, Ottens, McKernan and Sloan

Geelong - West, Gamble, T. Hunt, Motlop, Vardy, Duncan and Christensen

West Coast - McKinley, MacKenzie, Schofield, Selwood, Shuey and Swift

Look you cannot look back and say we should have taken this player here and that player instead, but you can look back and say, we could have done better so lets look at what can be improved to get better results in the future. Maybe we have just been unlucky, but there is no harm in wanting to be the best in the competition in all facets and without accepting short falling and moving to improve them that cannot happen.

So do we need to chase Sanderson when he comes out of contract, no he just got there......oh Neil Craig, did we miss our chance when we let him slip to Melb instead of not renewing Ratts last year and getting Craig?

Or did we miss when we didnt realise that Thompson was gonna turn traitor and give up with a year to go on his contract and go home? Should we have seen that coming?

Or perhaps we erred all those years ago when we had Woosha as an assistant and we didnt give him the top gig all those years ago?

Just sayin.

 

[40yearBLUE]

You're not missing anything.
When things go awry then anything and everything is Ratts fault.

Now they're talking up Collingwood's depth as being extraordinary. I feel sick.

EFA

 

[mikeythemoocow]

So do we need to chase Sanderson when he comes out of contract, no he just got there......oh Neil Craig, did we miss our chance when we let him slip to Melb instead of not renewing Ratts last year and getting Craig?

Or did we miss when we didnt realise that Thompson was gonna turn traitor and give up with a year to go on his contract and go home? Should we have seen that coming?

Or perhaps we erred all those years ago when we had Woosha as an assistant and we didnt give him the top gig all those years ago?

Just sayin.

Just sayin?
So the Carlton Football Club is doing everything right, has the best people in every position and best processes for everything they do?
If nothing can be improved then we can just sit back, and wait for the flags to roll in then?

If they are not looking at areas where other clubs are better then us and trying to learn/improve in these areas we will never win a flag.

I never mentioned Thompson, Sanderson, Craig or even Ratten. You are a sensasionalizing what I have said, and acting like a troll.

 

[40yearBLUE]

Just sayin?
So the Carlton Football Club is doing everything right, has the best people in every position and best processes for everything they do?
If nothing can be improved then we can just sit back, and wait for the flags to roll in then?

If they are not looking at areas where other clubs are better then us and trying to learn/improve in these areas we will never win a flag.

I never mentioned Thompson, Sanderson, Craig or even Ratten. You are a sensasionalizing what I have said, and acting like a troll.

Yes exactly. Now you're getting it. That is exactly what we do, it is exactly what the last 2 premiers did. Has also been done by the premier before that but their slide down then back up again came after their last flag, but they too understand the principles as witnessed by the retention of the coach that took them from top to bottom and back instead of sacking him and everyone else around the place the moment they slid.

Everything else in this stupid thread is a total waste of bytes and has done nothing but contribute to global warming.

 

[mikeythemoocow]

They too understand the principles as witnessed by the retention of the coach that took them from top to bottom and back instead of sacking him and everyone else around the place the moment they slid.

This isnt a thread about if we should sack Ratten or not, its a thread about if the CFC has stagnated. The CFC itself has seen that changes must be made in recruitment, shown by the demotion of Wayne Hughes and making Shane Rodgers national recruitment manager. This shows that improvment is needed. Is the coach of the reserves doing enough to develope players? Is the development coach the best man for the job, if not, could we poach a Michael Turner for that role for example. I dont think we should rush out and offer Turner crazy money but questions like this should be asked constantly.

Its all very well to put people into positions but results must justify perservering with them. Just because Ratten is a head coach, doesnt mean that given infinate time he will deliver a flag. Everything should be reviewed in the right time frame and improvement in all areas strived for. If you arnt pushing ahead, you are being left behind. If we dont make finals Rattens position will be reviewed, but it should be reviewed regardless. Even if we win the flag. Review doesnt mean getting the sack, it means looked at with a critical eye as to where improvment can come from.

 

[BROWN20]

What rubbish. Totally subjective comment. Totally subject to the outcome too. Had it come off, he would have been hailed a genius (well he wouldnt cos of his name). You throw conventional rule of percentage football out the window when you are a goal or 2 down with minutes to play. You play crazy brave or you die a safe death. I know what I would prefer from them, especially in light of the fact the coach called upon them to do just that. Be brave. One of the reasons I suspect AJ continues to get the call up despite his whipping boy status, exactly the same reason JR was getting games back in the day. Despite one eyed criticism from one eyed supporters from his own side!!!!!

Edit: players get split seconds to size up opportunities. AJ may have seen players free beyond Jamo, that if he could get it into Jamo's hands Jamo can get it moving down the open side, looks, thinks I will back Jamo to win the 1 on 1 in the air and executes. Split second, sometimes make a goal from nothing, and snatch a game from the safe jaws of tapping it to the boundary and reloading only to have 20 players surround the ball and cause numerous ball ups deep in their territory until the siren goes.

Doesnt sound quite so stupid when we open our minds to the possibilities instead of closing them only to convention and safety and our prejudices such as those displayed constantly here against players such as AJ.

40 yo l have read alot of your posts over the last few days and it is becoming very tiresome to your constant put-down comments directed at almost every poster on this forum, time to chill out and have some respect for other posters