Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread Part 2

[RedFury]

Two things can both be true. Maybe Malthouse was poor AND the board & football department were poor.

Yep I always found this amusing.

Trying to pin our issues on one problem is like seeing a burning city in the distance and expecting only 1 house to be on fire.

Didn't this recent review find like 20 areas of improvement?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

And whom would that be ?

Could be a domino effect.

Get Cook on board as CEO and Clarkson is suitably impressed enough to change his mind.

Maybe it is Cook and Scott together? Maybe an assistant at a finals club? Maybe Beveridge if they lose tomorrow after a poor last month? I know fans are turning on him.

The point is 5 clubs are still alive so setting a longer process time may be a tactic to talk to someone still in it.

 

[AceAndy]

Could be a domino effect.

Get Cook on board as CEO and Clarkson is suitably impressed enough to change his mind.

Maybe it is Cook and Scott together? Maybe an assistant at a finals club? Maybe Beveridge if they lose tomorrow after a poor last month? I know fans are turning on him.

The point is 5 clubs are still alive so setting a longer process time may be a tactic to talk to someone still in it.

I guess it could be. Are any of the remaining in coaches out of contract for 2022 ?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Two things can both be true. Maybe Malthouse was poor AND the board & football department were poor.

Agreed. I was no fan of Rogers, Hughes, Icke and McKay was forced to be a jack of all trades. The board did Ratten dirty as well.

None of that leaves Mick blameless in his coaching, his inability to devise a game plan to play to our strengths while slowly adding or subtracting bits, or his ability to form relationships with players. It also does not take away from the fact that Mick asked for certain players and types and got them, and none of it suggested he was looking to rebuild.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I guess it could be. Are any of the remaining in coaches out of contract for 2022 ?

Not sure, not that it matters these days if the club are happy to let them go. End of an era with Cook leaving the Cats and with them looking to need a rebuild, they may decide to back Scarlett in.

 

[AceAndy]

Not sure, not that it matters these days if the club are happy to let them go. End of an era with Cook leaving the Cats and with them looking to need a rebuild, they may decide to back Scarlett in.

I must admit with Clarkson and Lyon out of the race there doesnt seem to be a next best option , could be any of about half a dozen.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I must admit with Clarkson and Lyon out of the race there doesnt seem to be a next best option , could be any of about half a dozen.

I'm kind of excited by the unknown to be honest. Feels like a regeneration of sorts.

New assistants to come as well. I must say I have not been excited about any of our assistants aside from Power for a while now.

 

[BlueTongue]

I'm kind of excited by the unknown to be honest. Feels like a regeneration of sorts.

New assistants to come as well. I must say I have not been excited about any of our assistants aside from Power for a while now.

I admire your optimism, and I would share the sentiment if we had an aging or very young list, but just when we have our list in the best position to make finals in the last 20 years, we couldn’t be in a worse scenario. Excited is not really how I feel. More like cursed. Just as we get things to turn the right direction, another major ****up.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I admire your optimism, and I would share the sentiment if we had an aging or very young list, but just when we have our list in the best position to make finals in the last 20 years, we couldn’t be in a worse scenario. Excited is not really how I feel. More like cursed. Just as we get things to turn the right direction, another major fu**up.

That's why I'm excited. Our list is primed despite the naysayers. We have a heap of players below their best who could easily find it again with a fresh start. It doesn't have to take time.

The players at the start of our rebuild will be 24 next year and that's prime age territory.

 

[azlou]

He was proven. Things don't change, you don't go from a great coach to the worst like that. Club had and continued to have serious issues.

Malthouse boarded Carlton like so many boarded the Titanic. We were the titanic, looked fancy but built with flaws and destined to sink.

Blaming Malthouse is like denying the severity of Covid. People want it to be true so bad they believe it because it's far less depressing than the truth.

We have to back Sayers, I'm feeling good about him, but we will see.



Team had finished 9th 2 years in a row. Best 22 was about that quality. It had a lot of holes, it couldn't fill them because of an out of hand salary cap because it had no list manager. That is on the board and footy department.

The board had the idea we were at the finishing touches stage, we were so far from that, we were decaying and going backwards. The boards unwillingness to step away from this idea and listen to someone who actually knows their sh*t was a massive issue. This is a board not backing the coach.

I believe Malthouse because on here ITK posters were reporting the same thing. Malthouse wanting to rebuild, conflicts with the board. Thought nothing of it at the time but now here we are.

Wait, what? Malthouse getting rid of players? He was coach, not list manager. But the board never implemented one... and we couldn't afford to keep our players because of... well not Malthouse. And no, the board maintained he was there to win, not rebuild. He wasn't allowed to rebuild and lose, SOS and Bolton were, until they weren't.

Our players didn't respond well because we had a weak leadership group who didn't back the coach and push the team. Because of how they were developed. Ratten didn't develop discipline or leadership. We had a soft, inconsistent and conditional team who were used to having equal authority over the coach and playing "fun" football. That's why we were known as one way runners, if the players didn't want to do something then they didn't and the leaders did nothing about it.

He took the job because we had talent and if we could add to it, sure, we'd go forwards but... he couldn't fx the leadership and cultural issues because the players were too far gone and he couldn't build the list because the recruiting, development and leadership was rubbish and the salary cap was blown out. We needed kids coming through and mature players coming in but had none of that.

Ratten's game plan was fine, Malthouse's game plan was fine, playing group was mediocre and leadership didn't exist and support either coach.

Have a look at how teams winning flags played then and now, we didn't play like that, we didn't play like Malthouse's Collingwood. Because it's hard footy, driven by hard leaders and we didn't and still don't have that. Ratten's game plan failed, Malthouse's game plan failed. Players were the reason. Forget the game plan, was never the problem.

How does Malthouse go from being able to rebuild teams, develop players, play in grand finals and win flags and come to us a few years after two straight grand final appearances, one being a premiership and all of a sudden he's a terrible coach. How do we have 6 coaches in 20 years who are all fail. Fair dinkum!!!

In my opinion Mick was always a crap coach one of those big talking blow hards that often walk through big business on undeserved reputation
Don’t think he would have made it through any legitimate selection process
I’m happy we are going through a selection process because these transparent frauds will be found out
Carltons foibles at the the time are undeniable in hiring an incompetent insecure loser like Mick
Should have had an assessment from our psychologist narcissist of the highest order with zero flexibility of thought
A solidified concrete thinker who blames others for his own inadequates
He was a disaster for our club and feel sorry for any player who He coached There wouldn’t be a Carlton player that had a good word for him
He reminds me of Scotty from marketing all style no substance

 

[Gointocarlton]

In my opinion Mick was always a crap coach one of those big talking blow hards that often walk through big business on undeserved reputation
Don’t think he would have made it through any legitimate selection process
I’m happy we are going through a selection process because these transparent frauds will be found out
Carltons foibles at the the time are undeniable in hiring an incompetent insecure loser like Mick
Should have had an assessment from our psychologist narcissist of the highest order with zero flexibility of thought
A solidified concrete thinker who blames others for his own inadequates
He was a disaster for our club and feel sorry for any player who He coached There wouldn’t be a Carlton player that had a good word for him
He reminds me of Scotty from marketing all style no substance

Dennis Armfield says hi, just saying.

"Armfield labelled Mick Malthouse as the coach that had the most influence on him during his career.
"I think Mick's black and whiteness really worked well with me. He'd tell me when you were no good and he'd tell you when you were good, and you knew where you stood exactly and I think that's something that I really thrived on," he stated bluntly.

Carlton cult hero Dennis Armfield opens up on his life and football career

"If I'm honest, every game that I played meant the world to me."

www.zerohanger.com

 

[CJMB]

Dennis Armfield says hi, just saying.

"Armfield labelled Mick Malthouse as the coach that had the most influence on him during his career.
"I think Mick's black and whiteness really worked well with me. He'd tell me when you were no good and he'd tell you when you were good, and you knew where you stood exactly and I think that's something that I really thrived on," he stated bluntly.

Carlton cult hero Dennis Armfield opens up on his life and football career

"If I'm honest, every game that I played meant the world to me."

www.zerohanger.com

Just because he had an impact on Amrfield didn’t mean he had a similar impact on any other players or was a good coach…

 

[Gointocarlton]

Just because he had an impact on Amrfield didn’t mean he had a similar impact on any other players or was a good coach…

100%, was merely making the point there were players that liked him and players that didn't like with any coach.

 

[Gethelred]

Blaming Malthouse is like denying the severity of Covid. People want it to be true so bad they believe it because it's far less depressing than the truth.

I would like a twenty item list of ways blaming Mick Malthouse is like denying the severity of covid, because it genuinely sounds like you're reaching for a turn of phrase because you think it makes your argument more convincing.

 

[JustaBattler]

Isn't Lyon just an example of the Malthouse decision you wish we didn't make? Half the board is against him. Malthouse was appointed without a process and so would Lyon have been.

I wouldn't worry about the timeframes here. We may be waiting for someone who is still in the finals and we have a List Manager in place anyway so all that preparation work is being done. I think we will have a coach by trade period.

I don't think there is a Board in AFL who understand what a good coach is. The whole go through a process is about choosing a very public face of the Carlton brand who will be responsible for on field performance results. In order to perform on field- the coach has to navigate a multi disciplinary range of resources at the Club and be able to work well with them.

This takes experience and competence and a personality type that can handle both win and loss.

Carlton has gone with coaches wearing training wheels twice now - and not been satisfied with either's on field performances.

Bolton was recognised as being too much about development.
Teague has been criticised for being too much about the now - without delivering on the now.

Carlton needs a coach of proven gravitas who can also work in what is a less than unified environment perhaps burdened by sub par appointments in key areas - all moving around the place with one eye on politics and the other on self protection.

It is a big ask of a new coach - any new coach. A Clarkson or Lyon at least ticks the box of been there done that - providers of some sort of important stability around which other things can be sorted.

The Board isn't capable of doing any of that . Their 'opinion' are meaningless and largely symbolic- and right now shambolic.

the review should never have been called a football department review - it should have been called an organisational check up - football department being one part. So much noise about the review - to what end? All fingers pointing to Teague and Loyd - but there was no need to make the finger pointing and speculations public - none. A good organisation is always being reviewed internally as part of the governance cycle - which is all banbout measuring peformance against KPI's.

Sayers didn't need to go about what he wanted to go about- in the manner which he did - that was a rookie error.

 

[myblueroan]

I would like a twenty item list of ways blaming Mick Malthouse is like denying the severity of covid, because it genuinely sounds like you're reaching for a turn of phrase because you think it makes your argument more convincing.

I would like threads Malty Free but lately that ain't happening. Sigh.

 

[Gethelred]

I would like threads Salt Free but lately that ain't happening. Sigh.

Me too...

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I don't think there is a Board in AFL who understand what a good coach is. The whole go through a process is about choosing a very public face of the Carlton brand who will be responsible for on field performance results. In order to perform on field- the coach has to navigate a multi disciplinary range of resources at the Club and be able to work well with them.

This takes experience and competence and a personality type that can handle both win and loss.

Carlton has gone with coaches wearing training wheels twice now - and not been satisfied with either's on field performances.

Bolton was recognised as being too much about development.
Teague has been criticised for being too much about the now - without delivering on the now.

Carlton needs a coach of proven gravitas who can also work in what is a less than unified environment perhaps burdened by sub par appointments in key areas - all moving around the place with one eye on politics and the other on self protection.

It is a big ask of a new coach - any new coach. A Clarkson or Lyon at least ticks the box of been there done that - providers of some sort of important stability around which other things can be sorted.

The Board isn't capable of doing any of that . Their 'opinion' are meaningless and largely symbolic- and right now shambolic.

the review should never have been called a football department review - it should have been called an organisational check up - football department being one part. So much noise about the review - to what end? All fingers pointing to Teague and Loyd - but there was no need to make the finger pointing and speculations public - none. A good organisation is always being reviewed internally as part of the governance cycle - which is all banbout measuring peformance against KPI's.

Sayers didn't need to go about what he wanted to go about- in the manner which he did - that was a rookie error.

At the time Sayers was applauded for trying to get answers to all of our frustrations. Fingers are going to point at Teague when the review identifies him and he is sacked. That's unavoidable.

The shambolic board has changed by 50% and we have a hands on Football Director who will speak up. We have gone the experienced coach route too and failed remember. The answer isn't to navigate all of these areas, the answer is to make it easier to work with all of these areas coming in, and the review has identified ways to make that happen.

I know you wanted Lyon because he would instill some mongrel into these blokes, but let's not hang on to that too long after the fact, because it does no constructive good.

 

[Jeremias]

In my opinion Mick was always a crap coach one of those big talking blow hards that often walk through big business on undeserved reputation

He's a 3 x premiership coach. Let's not simply brush that aside as though it's not an incredible achievement.

Mick's tenure at the club was a disaster, but to suggest he was always a crap coach is just wrong.

 

[azlou]

He's a 3 x premiership coach. Let's not simply brush that aside as though it's not an incredible achievement.

Mick's tenure at the club was a disaster, but to suggest he was always a crap coach is just wrong.

In my opinion WestCoast had an incredible list Malthouse might have been competent then but not great
At Collingwood I believe his assistants did the hard yards
All his premierships do is make me believe we don’t need a genius super coach just a competent one who is flexible a good relationship builder who’s able to take input from some very good assistants
Some average coaches have won premierships some great coaches haven’t
Might have gone a bit hard last night maybe he was an average coach

 

[JustaBattler]

At the time Sayers was applauded for trying to get answers to all of our frustrations. Fingers are going to point at Teague when the review identifies him and he is sacked. That's unavoidable.

The shambolic board has changed by 50% and we have a hands on Football Director who will speak up. We have gone the experienced coach route too and failed remember. The answer isn't to navigate all of these areas, the answer is to make it easier to work with all of these areas coming in, and the review has identified ways to make that happen.

I know you wanted Lyon because he would instill some mongrel into these blokes, but let's not hang on to that too long after the fact, because it does no constructive good.

My observations shouldn't be conflated with Lyon or not- yes he was my preferred option - but he is no longer an option - I have moved on. I think that the public declaration of a football department review - sans a bird in the hand, especially, has placed the Board and Sayers in a far more difficult situation than they needed to be in.

Simple as that.

 

[DangerousD]

As for needing a rebuild after he left, well of course. Our good players had turned to sh*t under him and left and we had bugger all currency left.

I think most people would think a rebuild was needed, due to us being horrendous at the draft for the previous 10 years

 

[gbatman]

In my opinion Mick was always a crap coach one of those big talking blow hards that often walk through big business on undeserved reputation
Don’t think he would have made it through any legitimate selection process
I’m happy we are going through a selection process because these transparent frauds will be found out
Carltons foibles at the the time are undeniable in hiring an incompetent insecure loser like Mick
Should have had an assessment from our psychologist narcissist of the highest order with zero flexibility of thought
A solidified concrete thinker who blames others for his own inadequates
He was a disaster for our club and feel sorry for any player who He coached There wouldn’t be a Carlton player that had a good word for him
He reminds me of Scotty from marketing all style no substance

His record speaks otherwise. For a crap coach he won and played in a lot of grand finals.

I would like a twenty item list of ways blaming Mick Malthouse is like denying the severity of covid, because it genuinely sounds like you're reaching for a turn of phrase because you think it makes your argument more convincing.

Covid deniers are the way they are because they want what they believe to be true so bad they genuinely believe their own garbage. Same as people blaming Malthouse, they want it to be true so badly they ignore the mountain of evidence that all points to board incompetence. If you want something to be true so badly you will believe it. In this case it's far scarier and depressing to believe the truth, that it wasn't the coach, it's our very core and that may not have changed. Same same but different.

If it makes you feel more comfortable to believe he stuffed Carlton up then fine. Doesn't make that assessment right.

Makes no sense that people are elite at what they do until they come to Carlton.

We finished 9th once before Malthouse came and we had a poor season injury wise. We finished 9th the second time under Malthouse. So what you are saying is that Malthouse agreed to come to get us into the top 4, then changed his mind after a year.

Little bit of an each way bet by Mick, don't you think?

Yes exactly, list was a 5th-10th placed quality list. If it were possible to build upon that list it could have gone higher. It was impossible to build that list to go further because you need a strong leadership group and that was absent and it caused a culture where players could not be pushed. This was on the previous coaching group and how the club supported and staffed the footy department.

Our recruiting, development were rubbish so players weren't going to come internally. Our salary cap was exploding so they weren't going to come externally.

This is why instead of building a list it decayed. Nothing to do with Mick Malthouse.

We were decaying and had nowhere to go but down from a good decade of mismanagement.

With good recruitment, development, cap space and leadership yes, we could have gone ahead. We had none of that.

I do enjoy the editing of history.

How many times do we have to go over the players Mick lost? Do we have to discuss how Yarran, Robinson, Betts, Garlett, Henderson, Waite, Setanta all left due to Mick? Do we have to go through his along the boundary game that did not suit our list or his captain picks in Liam Jones, Jason Tutt, and Daisy Thomas (what happens when Mick played list manager)?

Do we have to discuss how he didn't show up to the club due to his book tour to early preseason? How he had us hire David Buttifant, who set our match fitness back 5 years? Do we have to discuss how his trading away of an entire forward line ruined our scoring until 2019?

Did we have other problems? Absolutely. But while we made our own bed, Malthouse made SOS's hardline cut and slash necessary. In another world, we'd have retained players, rebuilt without leaking players, revamped development and list management without needing to do so whilst rebuilding the entire ******* list.

Malthouse is the reason for 2017 and 2018. If you want to defend him further, might I suggest you do so without actively rewriting history?

We lost players because of salary cap issues, poor development and no leadership. We ruined the players long before Malthouse arrived.

I've said it here before, we will lose players this time around if we get a good coach. You go from a second rate coach, poor leadership and poorly developed players to a coach who is top quality and hence demands effort, toughness, discipline etc the players won't like that. Ratten gave the players too much authority and didn't develop leaders. That's why he failed, that's why Malthouse "lost" the players. They were already lost.

Malthouse never had these issues at other clubs. So why all of a sudden did he have them at Carlton? Says a hell of a lot about our club, the players and our leadership.

Malthouse had nothing to do with the need for a full rebuild. Damage was already done. Mismanagement, a terrible list and a poor culture or lack of culture due to lack of leadership developed during the Ratten era. That was what held us back.

Yarran was living a toxic lifestyle and had to go, ended up at Richmond, played no games then ended up in jail. Robinson lacked discipline in all areas, badly needed leaders to guide him but we didn't have that. Poor development and culture at Carlton stuffed Robinson, turned it around at a better club. Betts was about money, Crows offered him good coin, our salary cap was exploding and we couldn't get near it. Garlett went to Melbourne and did nothing. Henderson had attitude problems, needed to be at a club with strong leadership and has been a fringe player at one, Waite same, not developed well as a young blokes. Setanta went to GWS where he struggled until he retired soon after.

Again, how was he so successful at one club and so unsuccessful at another. It's the club, it's that obvious. And history keeps repeating itself.

Brittain, Pagan, Ratten, Malthouse, Bolton, Teague... a long list of names who have failed, not because they are duds but because the club has always failed to give the football department what it needs to succeed. A club which has lacked quality leaders since the 90s and failed to develop leadership in its players. Rubbish recruiting team. Gone without high performance staff. Gone without list managers. Picked the worst assistant coaches. Put rookie coaches in without a senior assistant. Mismanaged player salaries and contracts. Boards who refuse to take coaches advice. Board members who interfere with the football department.

The list of f**kups coming from our board over the last 20 years is a horror story. Yet we keep rolling on blaming the coach all the time.

A new coach, a new president. Let's hope things start to change and quick because both have a lot of work to do.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I'm not going to quote that and edit out the bits I'm not responding to, but there is a hell of a lot of speculation, guessing and hypothesising going on there. A lot of words to effectively say 'I have a different opinion and believe different versions of events to you'.

Not too much in the way of facts.

 

[My Hat]

Malthouse never had these issues at other clubs. So why all of a sudden did he have them at Carlton? Says a hell of a lot about our club, the players and our leadership.

Malthouse also never prioritised a book tour ahead of his new coaching job at other clubs. So why all of a sudden did he do it at Carlton?

Seems like your argument boils down to two points: (1) Malthouse was good at other clubs, therefore he was also good for us, and (2) the board / football department were rubbish, therefore nothing was Malthouse's fault.

Both of which can easily be countered with (1) people change, the game changes, past performance does not guarantee future results, and (2) just because other parts of the club were rubbish doesn't mean Malthouse wasn't also rubbish.