Why Malthouse should go

[South Melbourne Hellas]

hi everyone i'm new.... I know this might at first make people's blood boil but just read all my post before jumping to conclusion....



as long as he is at our club we'll never win the priemership.

Malthouse does not know how to structure a forward line and once again it's cost us.

one of the worst coaches.

maybe he should actually watch other footy games and watch what other coaches do.

Sydney when they played West Coast gave their 3 forwards plenty of space in the 50 to run into and and lead.. and guess what? their forward structure made the difference and their forwards won them the game...

on the other hand you have Malthouse who was doing the same thing in the first half of the season and we were 3rd on the ladder, and Rocca who was our target man was leading the goalkicking in the competition at one stage.... Rocca had plenty of room to lead into and on many occassions had plenty of room to be 1-on-1 with his opponent.... and he was kicking goals and as i said the leading goal kicker at one stage...
This tactic was working!

than Malthouse for whatever reason half way through the season changes this forward structure and decides to have a structure that crams the forward line therefore making it almost impossible for Rocca or any of the big forwards to take a mark. Collingwood slip down and down the ladder from than on...

Too blind to see that it's Malthouse's fault, commentators and footy writers start saying Collingwood's forwards are out of form. (gee i'd hate them to coach my club)

Look at Brisbane or Sydney or North Melbourne.... You know why Johnathan Brown, Barry Hall, and in 1999 Wayne Carey (80 goals that season) kick so many goals? because they had the 50 almost to themselves... they had plenty of room to lead into and plenty of room to be 1-on-1 with their opponent.
What's the good in having a cramed forward line, which means when ever Rocca goes for the mark or goes on the lead, when Tarrant and Didak will also go for the mark therefore bringing their defenders with them therefore creating a pack situation for Rocca.... of course Rocca isn't going to take marks that way!!

What's Malthouse tryin to do? flood his own forward line?

U could have Johnathan Brown or Barry Hall or Fevola play for Collingwood and like Rocca they'd go for many weeks goaless....
Because whenever they'd go on the lead you'd have other Collingwood forwards interfering and bringing their defenders with them making it pack situations...
And than you'd have clueless football analyists wondering why they're out of form.... rather than realising its the coach that's at fault!


It's quite simple... u have the half forwards standing outside 50 and leading from there...have Tarrant as Centre-Half forward leading, marking it, and kicking it in the 50 to a leading Rocca, or a Rocca that's 1-on-1, who bascially has the 50 to himself (with 2 foward pockets on each side starting very wide.)

I found it funny in the press conference after the bulldogs game when Malthouse said ''i couldn't see any of our forwards kicking 5 or 6 or 7 goals''

Well der! of course none a gonna kick that many goals when you've got about 4 fowards on many occasions jumping for the same ball making it a pack situation...
maybe Malthouse if you don't self flood your own forward line Rocca will kick more goals...
anyone notice the few times Rocca did have room and was 1-on-1 with Chris Grant, Rocca was too strong and actually marked it on almost every occasion??
our poor forward structure (thanks to Malthouse) cost us our season... we shoulda been in the top 3 by the end of round 22, but we lost games we shoulda won becoz our forward line couldn't fire thanks to Mick's tactics...

his comments show he has no salution to fixing (our forwad-line)what's being our main problem in the 2nd halkf of the season and cost us, and its obvious he'll continue with this structure next year...

Uz might say why revolve the forward line around Rocca alot?
well thats why you have superstar target full-forwards... to target them..
and if the opposition coach drops a man man, that always means their should be a Collingwood player free around the 50 who can get the ball and kick goals...

opening the forward line is A ,B ,C stuff yet coaches like Malthouse have to over complicate things and almost flood their own forward line.


he better go.... he ruined Collingwood's season and stuffed Rocca's as well.

 

[PieLebo87]

Very valid points.
Although you have to realise we have the best forward line in the AFL.
What do you do with the rest if you have 2 alone in the 50?
But still, quite valid points.

I'd go...

Buckley and Rocca alone in the 30-40metre zone, all to themselves.

Have Taz lead from the 50 with Neon or Didz, when resting from stints in the midfield.

And Lonie running up from the wing towards 50, everyone would know why.

As for Rusling and TClo, still young, help develop their defensive games and let them roam around and be leading options deep into the wings when rebounding from our defence (J Clement lol).

 

[WakeUpPies]

IMO Rusling and Taz leading from the square, rocca at CHF as link up(or he can go long torp), and buckley startng on the 50M, rotate Rocca with taz and rusling with didak/bucks and stuff, now i have confused mysel nvm

 

[South Melbourne Hellas]

Very valid points.
Although you have to realise we have the best forward line in the AFL.
What do you do with the rest if you have 2 alone in the 50?
But still, quite valid points.

I'd go...

Buckley and Rocca alone in the 30-40metre zone, all to themselves.

Have Taz lead from the 50 with Neon or Didz, when resting from stints in the midfield.

And Lonie running up from the wing towards 50, everyone would know why.

As for Rusling and TClo, still young, help develop their defensive games and let them roam around and be leading options deep into the wings when rebounding from our defence (J Clement lol).

cheers bro... yes we do have the best forward line... this is what i'd do...

Have the 50 to Rocca, with 2 small forwards on each side ready to crum (but have them WIDE of Rocca so they cannot interfer in the marking contest of Rocca and the full back.)
Preferably Neon Leon and sumone else small as forward pockets.

Have Tarrant as centre-half forward leading from outside 50 becoz he's quick... with maybe Didak and maybe Travis Cloke on each side as half forward flanks.. but have them outside 50...

The problem with having the half forward's around the 45 meter mark or just inside 50 is that if Rocca leads the half forwards are likely to run back and interfer in his lead....Like what Josh Fraser often interfered in Rocca's lead when Malthouse would try and stretch the opposition defense by having Fraser around the 45 meter mark.

as much as i HIGHELY rate Sean Rusling, and think he's and enivitable SUPERstar i'm not sure they'd be a place for him in the forward line at the moment, and i'd have him playing at Williamstown as a full-forward, or whatever our VFL side is. so that when Rocca retires in maybe 3 years, and Sean has an even bigger frame which means he'll have Rocca-like-strength and Sean will be ready to take his Rocca's place as full-forward when Rocca retires.


As for your suggesting about Buckey starting with Rocca in the 50, maybe that's a better idea than mine which is ''Rocca and 2 small forward pockets starting WIDE of Rocca.''
The only thing i'm worried about is Rocca and Buckley might start to interfer with each other leads and 1-on-1 contests like Rocca and Tarrant often do.

but if Rocca and Buckley play it well lyk I saw Barry Hall and Michael O'Lachlan did against West Coast where they didn't get in each other's way and bascially won the game for Sydney (unlike West Coast who has a cramed forward line and it cost them) than maybe your suggestion of having simply Rocca-Buckley, lyk Hall-O'Lachlan is maybe better than mine... good point.

 

[South Melbourne Hellas]

IMO Rusling and Taz leading from the square, rocca at CHF as link up(or he can go long torp), and buckley startng on the 50M, rotate Rocca with taz and rusling with didak/bucks and stuff, now i have confused mysel nvm

The reason why simply in my opinion Rocca should be full-forward rather than Tarrant is because Rocca is much stronger than Tarrant in one-on-one contest and Rocca almost always wins 1-on-1 contest.

And Tarrant is quicker on the lead therefore should be Centre-Half forward leading from outside the 50 and than kicking it in to Rocca.

 

[bobby_diggy]

Your comments are all well and good, but there is another team that is trying to beat us. Do you expect their coach to leave our F50 open so Rocca / Taz have as much space as they want?

No - the other coach (in doing their job) put players back to close up the space. The only way to beat this trap is to win the ball in the centre & get it forward quickly to your blokes on the lead.

 

[South Melbourne Hellas]

Your comments are all well and good, but there is another team that is trying to beat us. Do you expect their coach to leave our F50 open so Rocca / Taz have as much space as they want?

No - the other coach (in doing their job) put players back to close up the space. The only way to beat this trap is to win the ball in the centre & get it forward quickly to your blokes on the lead.

yeah of course, an opposition coach might drop a man or 2 back, but if they do that means they'll obviously be 1 or 2 Collingwood players left free. have the 2 Magpie players around the 50 and soon as those 1 or 2 free players get the ball, they can have a ping on goal.
If i remember correctly we tried the same thing by having Jason Cloke as an extra man in defense back in 2002 to try combat that, but opposition coaches obviously saw that by having Cloke as a free man in defense it would mean one of their own players was free, and hence started to counter it, hence why we don't have Jason Cloke as an extra man in defense anymore.

sure u have to get the ball in quikely, but if your going to get it inquickely but every time when you get it in quickely Rocca, Tarrant, and Didak will all jump for the same ball and/or interfer in each other leads which so often did happen we'll never take marks up forward.


Remember, opening up the forward-line works with Johnathan Brown and Brisbane and Barry Hall and Sydney, therefore it should work with us too.

and as i said if the opposition coach wants to drop a man back that means one of our own players will be free and can lurk just outside the 50 and than have a ping at goals when he gets the ball

 

[WakeUpPies]

The reason why simply in my opinion Rocca should be full-forward rather than Tarrant is because Rocca is much stronger than Tarrant in one-on-one contest and Rocca almost always wins 1-on-1 contest.

And Tarrant is quicker on the lead therefore should be Centre-Half forward leading from outside the 50 and than kicking it in to Rocca.

your right, but i would break my carlton friend's arm in happiness if taz can kick 70+ in a season

 

[South Melbourne Hellas]

your right, but i would break my carlton friend's arm in happiness if taz can kick 70+ in a season

lol

 

[UpTheGuts]

Not a sign of a dissenting voice in support of Mick.... Interesting

 

[WakeUpPies]

yea WHo actually WANTS mick to stay

tumbleweed

 

[Coin_Toss]

IMO Rusling and Taz leading from the square, rocca at CHF as link up(or he can go long torp), and buckley startng on the 50M

The rest is gibberish. Keep it plain and simple.

HF Didak(front and centre at contests) Rocca T.Cloke(linkman)
FF Buckley(stay-at-home) Tarrant Davis

Tarrant is the best full forward at the Club. He could make 30m leads: with Didak crumbing at his feet (front and centre), in the meantime, Buckley provides the long option at goal: with Davis crumbing at his feet. Big Anth to use the corridor and create space. Travis will be the wide linkman into attack.

 

[WakeUpPies]

The rest is gibberish. Keep it plain and simple.

HF Didak(front and centre at contests) Rocca T.Cloke(linkman)
FF Buckley(stay-at-home) Tarrant Davis

Tarrant is the best full forward at the Club. He could make 30m leads: with Didak crumbing at his feet (front and centre), in the meantime, Buckley provides the long option at goal: with Davis crumbing at his feet. Big Anth to use the corridor and create space. Travis will be the wide linkman into attack.

yea thats what i meant

 

[Nesian]

Yeah some good points here and agree with majority of it. I also think Rocca rather then Tarrant should be at FF. Tarrant can roam around at CHF HFF WING and link it up, we know he isnt a great kick at goal and for some reason as we have seen this year he seems to kick alot better when outside the 50(maybe its the pressure or expectation thats off his shoulders who knows)

Answer the the MM question: Like Egan he makes the complicated things look easy and the easy things look complicated. Been fustrated watching games in the 2nd half of the season and so simple things like our forward line just not functioning. I guess it doesnt help either when your midfield isnt winning the ball or isnt kicing it up the corridor direct. We use the wings way 2 much. I dont think it was all totally micks fault but he has to take some of the blame instead of finding excuses

 

[bobby_diggy]

yeah of course, an opposition coach might drop a man or 2 back, but if they do that means they'll obviously be 1 or 2 Collingwood players left free. have the 2 Magpie players around the 50 and soon as those 1 or 2 free players get the ball, they can have a ping on goal.

We have been doing that. The two recent examples that come to mind are Lonies goal against Adelaide & Johnsons goal against Footscray - in both instances we were tied down & they got the ball about 60m out & kicked a long goal. I am sure it has happened many more times over the season. So we are already doing what you suggest.

sure u have to get the ball in quikely, but if your going to get it inquickely but every time when you get it in quickely Rocca, Tarrant, and Didak will all jump for the same ball and/or interfer in each other leads which so often did happen we'll never take marks up forward.

Well that is where the player smarts / coaching comes into play - if all of our forwards are contesting for the same ball then the coaches are not doing a very good job, or the players are completely stupid. When I say get the ball in quickly I mean to a player on the lead, so ideally (presuming the ball comes in from a centre clearance) one of the big forwards will be on a lead, giving them some space. They should fly & there should be the crumbers down to get the scraps.

Also, you are not always going to win the ball out of the centre, and other times you are going to be bringing the ball back from our defensive end. In these situiations it is impossible to get the ball in quickly as it has to travel the length of the ground, so even if we do manage to get Rocca / Tarrant one out the opposition has enough time to get a few players running back to spoil, then they have the numbers and can run the ball forward continuing the trend.

Remember, opening up the forward-line works with Johnathan Brown and Brisbane and Barry Hall and Sydney, therefore it should work with us too.

Brown is an amazing player - many times better than Rocca & Tarrant (or any other forward we may have on the list) Hall is a quality player as well.

Quite often Sydney will have many players (both theirs and the opposition) in their F50 when trying to pick out a player. They had an open forward line against West Coast but I put that down to errors from the WCE coaching staff.

The difference between Sydney & us is their midfield is of a much higher quality. It really surprises me when I read threads about our forward structure being wrong - the forwards receive too much credit when things are going well & too much criticism when it is the opposite. The constant in all of this is the midfield, if the midfield wins the ball and can get it in quickly than the forwards look good as the ball hits them on the lead.

This is why our defence looks to struggle often as we are losing out in the midfield and the opposition is getting the ball down there too quickly for Clement & co. to be able to do anything about it.

As far as Malthouse is concerned, I would like to see him see out his contract. Our recruitment has been better these last 2 seasons, so heres hoping to another good batch coming through this season to consolidate what we already have.

 

[South Melbourne Hellas]

We have been doing that. The two recent examples that come to mind are Lonies goal against Adelaide & Johnsons goal against Footscray - in both instances we were tied down & they got the ball about 60m out & kicked a long goal. I am sure it has happened many more times over the season. So we are already doing what you suggest.

yes, we do have Lonie often as the free man, but we still have to many forwards in the 50

Brown is an amazing player - many times better than Rocca & Tarrant (or any other forward we may have on the list) Hall is a quality player as well.

Although better than Rocca, i don't think by much, simply in my opinion.
Brown is abit quicker, just as strong as Rocca, but not as long kick.
Remember just like Wayne Carey in 1998 or 99 was moved to full forward and had the 50 almost to himself, this is often the same case with Johnathan Brown... therefore ofcourse he's always gonan take marks and kick goals...
same with Rocca.. whenever Rocca has actually been able to be one-on-one with his opponent (without another Magpie forward interefering in the constest) almost everytime Rocca wins...
yet if Rocca was given as much space as Carey was in 1999 and Brown at the moment, Rocca would be taking almost as many marks and kicking as many goals.

Remember when we played Adelaide at Football Park this year?
Malthouse gave the whole 50 to Sean Russling... and Sean kicked about 3 goals in the 1st quarter... than Rocca replaces him as full-forward and Malthouse put other forwards in the 50 near Rocca... instead of leaving the 50 to Rocca, like he did with Sean... and guess what... Rocca doesn't kick a goal... this shows that often a forward can only do as well as a coach can coach.
and if i remember when Rocca was forward, our mid-field were getting it in the 50 about as often as when Sean was full-forward in the 1st quarter of that game.

Quite often Sydney will have many players (both theirs and the opposition) in their F50 when trying to pick out a player. They had an open forward line against West Coast but I put that down to errors from the WCE coaching staff.

Well Sydney only had Hall and O'Lachlan in the 50. if West Coast put and extra man back, that woulda meant a Sydney player woulda been free.