Mick Malthouse

[PP34]

Is it just me or does he seem to say some very confusing things before and after games each week, especially after losses?

All year he has been banging on about the process and in most losses he has resorted to blaming something that isn't the playing list.

He actually gave it to the players last night.

I know for a fact that he was shocked at how little depth the club has, he never rated our top 4 chances this year highly, and that he wants to cull plenty at season's end (internal source).

I don't know, I like his attitude towards the media, but he seems to give some very confusing messages. What was the goal this year? He never really said specifically. That has led to many opposition fans saying it was exactly the same as last year's. Does this "process" lead to a flag? I remember hearing him say in that documentary that it's not always about flags. Sorry Mick, but I don't think you're getting big bucks to take the team on a journey that leads to no flags.

I also feel as though he's a bit stubborn with his game plan. When it doesn't work, we still kick down the boundary and lose it a lot. When it works it's very good, when it doesn't it's ordinary. I'm just not sure if we can play that way so much. As much as I like Waite and Hendo, they're not Cloke as a lead up target on the wing or at half forward. Poor kicking has definitely cost us in some games this year, but at other times I feel as though Mick has been too focused on defensive football when we could easily go in for the kill.

Didn't he say his original game plan was changed quite a bit? Does anyone see the changes?

I rate Mick as a coach, but he seems a bit stubborn this year and I'm a bit confused with some of his team selections. As is someone else at the club. There is an individual still getting games despite doing nowhere near enough each week to warrant a spot in the side.

Thoughts?

 

[one_twelve112]

I like MM interviews. I actually think he is one of the only coaches who try to answer the questions put to him as thoroughly as possible. So many coaches answer questions with question, or deliver boring cliches over and over again

 

[HARKER]

I've always claimed that I don't know just how good a game-day coach Mick is but behind the scenes he's set up a lot of things we didn't have working for us previously.

The guys that "get it" will remain and the ones that don't will be politely asked to move on.
There's no secret of what Mick thought of our list and all the signals coming out in recent weeks have suggested as such.

We've just held on to some players too long and possibly missed out on players that can actually become something (See pick #54 Graham)

Let's not even get into a player development discussion.

 

[Simpleskills]

Seems to have his favorites, which only works if your favorites are actually good players. Been very disappointing not seeing Laidler get a game all year, and recently blokes like Graham not getting a run over blokes in a midfield that has been flogged more often than not. Can say it's part of his plan/transition period/wait until next year but I can't help but miss the exciting brand of footy we'd play a lot of the time under Ratten which I haven't really seen this year.

Not convinced he has taken the right approach at times this year but hope he proves me wrong next year...

 

[Stig O'Hara]

He has inherited a list which 2 years ago was speculated as Top 4, obviously it isn't, so I'm prepared to give him this year as a Work in Progress.

Being the new guy and all, he's given most a fair run, for sure he has identified deficiencies, come Trade Week/Month, he'll know what he needs to take this list further.

 

[BM123]

Said in a presser before the game that this was a developmental year.

 

[Simpleskills]

Said in a presser before the game that this was a developmental year.

My only problem with hearing him say this is that the only players to have any real positive development IMO are Hendo, Curnow, Cachia and Tuohy, plus a few of the younger blokes in the twos. A majority of our senior players seem to have gone backwards. Unless he's talking about developing the new game style, which shouldn't be taking this long to implement anyway.

 

[BM123]

My only problem with hearing him say this is that the only players to have any real positive development IMO are Hendo, Curnow, Cachia and Tuohy, plus a few of the younger blokes in the twos. A majority of our senior players seem to have gone backwards. Unless he's talking about developing the new game style, which shouldn't be taking this long to implement anyway.

Well our players are pretty *special*.

 

[Simpleskills]

Well our players are pretty *special*.

Developmental issues?

 

[Garth Vader]

You have to view things in light of other teams, who were behind us last year, improving a bit this year. In terms of what we were like last year, I would say our defensive pressure all round has improved. I always thought from the word go this year Mick was saying that he wanted to 'find out about players and see what they are like under pressure', and that their were plenty of hints that this year was about finding out which players would move the club forward using his playing style. To me the year has always had a slight 'developmental' feel to it, as has been shown by some of the young players he has brought in at times when he could have instead taken a more conservative approach to go for the win.

To be honest, I have really liked what I have seen so far. You get the feeling that people behind the scenes at the club have really taken to the guy, as has been indicated by various comments by players, Sticks, Mackay and others.

Also, glad he keeps his cards relatively close to his chest - one thing that used to give me the living shits about Ratts in pressers.

 

[Big_Luch]

we have had a lot more even performances, our best player has been down all year, we finally have a structure(everyone complained about this in previous years) and we have essentially had no real key forward until hendo went forward. This year is well and truly a development year and has not been all that bad. I am just concerned we dont look attractive to opposition players as a place where they can see success (ie. dale thomas). I am also concerned with what it will take to turn this team around to flag threat.

 

[pinot]

This year has been a roller coaster but top eight is still where it should be.

 

[mikeythemoocow]

Will be intresting at years end to see what happens with our list

 

[The Real Deal]

Look, I believe from 2008 to now the list has never been top 4 material. A good list should at least be capable of making a pre-lim final. We've made finals, but at the end of the day have only won 1 in that time. There's a clear trend. If we were to somehow make it this year we'd be lucky to win 1 game. If we had kept Ratten, I still think we'd be barking up the wrong tree. The mere fact Malthouse has said the list needs a big cull is exactly what I want to hear. I want to see a coach and recruiters pull a rabbit out of the hat- when Mick was at the pies he brought in Leigh Brown who wasn't a great player but was what they needed. We need to recruit now with a bit of flair, plus also start nailing our draft picks, get it right, and with the talent already there we could shoot up the ladder quite quickly. Look at WCE a couple of years ago. Lots of work to do in the off season but not an insurmountable task.

 

[Aphrodite]

Is it just me or does he seem to say some very confusing things before and after games each week, especially after losses?

All year he has been banging on about the process and in most losses he has resorted to blaming something that isn't the playing list.

He actually gave it to the players last night.

I know for a fact that he was shocked at how little depth the club has, he never rated our top 4 chances this year highly, and that he wants to cull plenty at season's end (internal source).

I don't know, I like his attitude towards the media, but he seems to give some very confusing messages. What was the goal this year? He never really said specifically. That has led to many opposition fans saying it was exactly the same as last year's. Does this "process" lead to a flag? I remember hearing him say in that documentary that it's not always about flags. Sorry Mick, but I don't think you're getting big bucks to take the team on a journey that leads to no flags.

I also feel as though he's a bit stubborn with his game plan. When it doesn't work, we still kick down the boundary and lose it a lot. When it works it's very good, when it doesn't it's ordinary. I'm just not sure if we can play that way so much. As much as I like Waite and Hendo, they're not Cloke as a lead up target on the wing or at half forward. Poor kicking has definitely cost us in some games this year, but at other times I feel as though Mick has been too focused on defensive football when we could easily go in for the kill.

Didn't he say his original game plan was changed quite a bit? Does anyone see the changes?

I rate Mick as a coach, but he seems a bit stubborn this year and I'm a bit confused with some of his team selections. As is someone else at the club. There is an individual still getting games despite doing nowhere near enough each week to warrant a spot in the side.

Thoughts?

Who would that be?

 

[PP34]

Who would that be?

Yarran.

 

[Stamos]

Yarran.

Not every week though. Was absolutely terrible last night no doubt.
Was really good against Norf.

 

[rampar]

Under ratts you wouldn't know which team would come out, would it be 'super switched on' blues or 'cant be ****ed' blues. You don't get that BS under MM. They come out switched on everytime. MM's a massive improvement.

 

[JamisonRun40]

On MM, I didn't think we would make the eight, due to a new game plan and new coach. I'm not that worried atm, but if we don't improve next year say at least top six, then it is a fail. Really looking forward to pre-season and getting the likes of Bootsy and Watto in better shape. The back six need a full pre-season to work together and really get to know each other. I like the fact that MM is grumpy most of the time. I am sure most of the playing group are happy he is there. It is like anything in life, it takes time to adapt to new changes. I look at Simpson and the way he has persevered with the game plan, all at sea at the beginning now he is thriving. Just wish he was captain.

 

[AB_Blue]

6/10 IMO
I sat there after the Richmond game and for the first and almost only time I wasn't mad walking out of the G.
I said to myself be patient, mick has plenty to do, wipe off this yr as development.

We've seen patches of brilliance, individuals performing better than I would have imagined possible we have also seen the Barry Crockers we have put out and certain individuals, either having trouble adjusting to the game plan, struggling with injury or the new sliding rule.

Mick would have made calls on the list from day 1 pre Season training. He's challenged our internal hierarchy and thought process and improved our performances at our Home ground.

Unfortunately our cattle either isn't up to/can't adjust to his game plan, that's fine but he's got 2 years to change that or find blokes who can

 

[PP34]

Not every week though. Was absolutely terrible last night no doubt.
Was really good against Norf.

He's been poor for weeks. Was okay against North.

Under ratts you wouldn't know which team would come out, would it be 'super switched on' blues or 'cant be ******' blues. You don't get that BS under MM. They come out switched on everytime. MM's a massive improvement.

We've had some performances like that this season.

 

[Coona Blues]

Had mixed feelings when Malthouse named. We needed more discipline and more structure, but always thought he came up short with the Magpies. His predictable game plan was his biggest weakness. He is a dinosaur and the game is moving so quickly. He came from arguably the biggest footy department, decimated our assistants at significant cost, and is running on a virtual skeleton coaching staff.
We have seen some baffling selections through the season, with some players persisted with ad nauseum, while others are starved of opportunity. I eagerly awaited a lift in the output and consistency of some of our flashy crowd favourites........still waiting. I eagerly awaited seeing the boys gel as a team, and get some real tribal commitment to each other, the jumper and the club.......still waiting.
I marvel at a bloke like Bell, who comes across as ultra coachable, ultra competitive and offering something few others offer to our undersized and undermanned midfield. I marvel at Brock McLean who silenced the critics in 2012 as our best 2-way mid. Brock could be relied upon to cover the ground and bob up in defence to give our backs a chop out. Now played predominantly forward of centre along with the "Amigos"....don't get me started on them. Walker, Simpson and Gibbs have given good service in defence, but we have robbed Peter to pay Paul.
Hammer has been cruelled by the match committee,being forced to play as no. 1 forward in Waite's absence, with the obvious "foil" in Walker stuck in the back half. Hampson even had the ignomy of being treated as the 3rd of a doomed "experiment" of 3 rucks. All it seems forget he was asked to step in to the breach a week after an appendix operation as well. We all know he is not ever going to be a gun key forward, but a hell of a good 2nd or especially 3rd. Certainly a quality ruck to work in 60/40 tandem with Kreuze.
Mitch Robinson has composure and disposal issues,but hell gives 100% and toils manfully in a midfield that arguably has less rotations than any other in the competition. That brings us to playing multiple taggers, Mick came over from the 'pies with a history of not tagging. We are stuck with the boundary game plan, but vary from Malthouse tenets. We have a shortage in the midfield, McLean, Gibbs, Simpson and Walker being used elsewhere, so many questions come from this tactic. Juddy has had a significant decline, and Murphy can't handle a legitimate tag. Then why do we refuse to blood the highly promising Menzel and Graham? Taggers Cachia, Curnow and Carrazzo are not without offensive skills either, yet having hard defensive roles diminish what they can add to our attackif not spending their days chasing tail. The management and our supporters baulk at the prospect of paying one of our best performers of the last 5 years an inflated wage, yet we have a tacit acceptance that a Malthouse favourite who has managed less than a handfull of games for the season is a must have panacea for our midfield issues.
Mick and co. are trumpeting wholesale changes to our list. It is highly motivating telling a group of players that they are not good enough and many will be gone come season's end. Those on the cusp will be out to survive, or drop their bundles. It is hard to bring yourself to run off your man, play a team first game etc, etc, when you feel your neck is in a noose and a slip up could signal the end of your career.
We need some list changes, some hard decisions and some judicious recruiting. I am blowed if I can see the merit of double figure changes to the list in one season. There will not be enough available talent to substantiate such drastic measures.
Questionable motivational tools, positional queries, questionable selections, young talent held back....hmmm
ARE WE TANKING? Preparing for a miraculous Malthouse turnaround?

 

[RedFury]

Under Ratten we played with flair, were very attack oriented and could look smooth and very skillful at times. We were also soft, flashy and inconsistent - with the difference between our best and our worst being massive. If I had to pick a current player to represent all those traits I'd say Chris Yarran.

Under Malthouse we aim to be consistent, hard at the ball, contested and defense oriented, with the ability to attack when appropriate. I won't tell you which current team members I think this best represents, but think beards.

Going from one style to the other will take not just time but personnel changes. You can't assume the same bunch of guys recruited for Ratten's game plan are all going to fit into MM's.

People say we recruited MM to put the finishing pieces to the puzzle, but clearly MM took a look at the list and didn't see it that way. I doubt Ratten's game style could have won us a flag either. I think a narrow loss in 2nd round of finals was about it's limit to be honest. I have faith that MM will improve us dramatically but obviously a key component of that is giving him at least 1 off-season to make some of the changes he thinks necessary. Some guys, although they might look like a million bucks on the training track with their mad athleticism and skills, just cannot match it in a game of contested footy.

It will be one of the most interesting off-seasons for us in a long time.

 

[jimsta10]

Mick comes across as the type to wears size 14 steel cap shoes. I'm predicting some players will be walking sideways this week..

 

[Kensa Carter]

I think 2013 is spent. Even if we make finals (with administrative help?), I don't see us making an impact. So much depends on the off-season.

If we end up sticking to the M.O. and aggressively recruit on and off-field personnel (Draft picks, Daisy Thomas, Charlie Dixon, David Buttifiant, Cameron Ling etc) to suit the gameplan, we'll be on our preferred path.

The alternative has us with zero change to personnel- unable to move/trade in our targets, unable to offload our chaff, and rely on another year of development to attack the season with unknown results.

The question the board needs to ask itself is: how do we sell hope to any potential recruit?