Mick - who sits next to Brett Ratten? There's your answer as to who has Ratts' ear and vice-versa. Ratten was happy to have Riley come on board - but it wasn't Ratts asking....Craig Bradley was...now as much as I love Braddles - I'd probably prefer a proven match day tactician to be the one sitting next to Ratts.

Riley has control of the midfield. Happy with the midfield? Aside from Judd and Simmo - me neither. But if Ratts got the arse tomorrow - it'd be Riley stepping in...not exactly my first choice. We'll see what the review shakes out of the tree. I'd be somewhat disappointed if Sticks and Teague were still there and a gameday maestro to work with Ratten is a must in my book. Not adverse to Laidley - on the proviso that he could work with Ratten and they were on the same page. If the coaches and the players could all get on the same page - the traffic on this forum will go south in a hurry and be full of rather than

Forget about coaches and tactics ...

THis team is untalented and has no heart. Start blaming the coach when you get a team of players that can actually kick the ball.

_________________
I am as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!!!

yep step aside

Sticks

Lappin

Teague

appoint a match day tactician

and Ratts to coach on the sidelines and interact with the players

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

Doc, you've mentioned that the wheels are in motion to potentially recruit an experienced player to assist with our leadership issues.

IMHO, our coaching situation is just as critical.

Do you know if the powers that be recognise this and is there anything being done about it (ie 'match day tactician' for Ratts, assuming he stays on of course)?

_________________
We are on our way back...

No. Whether we win the flag or finish 10th, there'll be an end of season review. Lots of water to go under the bridge before then though.

Yeah, we've got to lose to Essendon* again first.

I blamed Thorton for sniping his teamates and creating disharmony.
I'm currently in the market for new theory if you've got one.

It's not a popular view on this site, but the truth is that Dick wasn't the most honorable person going around. Big Jack the same and whilst his methods worked in the 80's and 90's you saw where it all ended.

Anyway ... not really the right forum for this one.

I still think alot of our problems stem from the fact that we lack mature men on our playing list.
-
Who are our 28-32 year old revered players ?

Who played on Saturday that was from say the 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 drafts. We are hoping that our 21 to 23 year olds are going to get us out of this bad patch.

We don't have a great playing list. Don't fool yourself people. A list made up of so many players with poor skills and lack of footy smarts is not a good list.

One thing that really stands out to me about Carlton over the last 15 years is that we are not good at evaluating talent. Giving up early draft picks for injury riddled players or just o.k. players and then selecting just o.k. players with other early picks is going to leave any list short of talent.

We lack method in the way we make up our list. For example in just three years we have given up picks 1, 17 and 24 all on ruckmen. This lacks balance.

For the above reasons I cannot just point the finger at Ratten only. Too simple to do that.

On Saturday our team average was less than a year and twenty games difference. @#$%&! all.

_________________
--------------------------------------------------------"The only one that could ever love me..."

Sure - we are off the boil (understatement!!). We have some great quality players who are not at their peak ... but name a player who has played at their absolute peak for every game of their career - there simply isn't one - not one!!!!. Doesn't mean they are not quality (eg Murph) and wont carry this club over the coming years. We may have made some recruiting errors - but its not an exact science and sometimes they work and sometimes they don't (I am ot defending anyone - just suggesting there is a reality we need to temper some of these postings with. However - there is one thing that I find in-excusable - and that is a failure to try something different. Saturday v Collingwood - we were getting smashed - so what did we try differently (almost) nothing. eg-\:-
- Cloke destroyed Bower - eventually we put him forward for 10 mns (at least thats something) ... but then we realise he has no idea unless he is running in a straight line out of the backline - so what do we do - we return him to Cloke so that Cloke can start his party again.
- Eddie is getting out-hustled by OBrein - so we leave Eddie down their all day - why not throw him in the mid-field
- Kick-outs - Coll zoned us so well we had no-where to go time and time again - so where is the alternate strategy - none
- Henderson was way out of depth and looked like he didn't want to be there yes I know hes young etc etc - but thats no excuse for the coaches to leave him there wallowing - move him ... anywhere!!

What really concerns me is that we have forward coaches, back coaches etc - they (Montgomery?) must have been sitting there watching Cloke destroy Bower (indeed - watching Bower start from behind Cloke on every occasion waitig for a mi-kick) - yet they dont tell him to change his approach - or they dont realise whats happenung and make a move. Lappin must have seen Henderson sub-conciously form a view that it was all too hard and then cease any hard leads (pointing is not a hard lead) - yet did zero. He must have seen Eddie outbustled - but nothing. This is inexcusable - instead - we left the set up pretty well as we started until the 18 minute mark of the last Q - when we threw Hammo to fulll forward and a couple of other experiments (and indeed got a few goals from it!!)

This did my head in competely - and I am afraid for the first time - lost me with Ratten (and co). I have no had this view until now - but .....

It may be that Rats has lost the playing group. When we were going well early in the year - we were intense, and the tackling reflected that (not sure if chicken or egg comes first) - this week - and for the last 6 we have lost the intensity and the tackling has been soft. to me its the holy grail of coaching - to be able to instill intensity. Look at what has happened to StKilda in its mini slump - lost intensity and hard running. Geelong when we beat them mid season. Carlton have lost it - and I am not sure Ratts can find it in them again - hopefully it will re-appear next week and we will all relax - but even if it does - the failure to respond in the Coaches Box when things arent going well astounds and disappoints me (and I am sure many other Carlton faithful)

We have alot of Bloggers who seem to take the wrong path when things are not so good (bit of a Richmond syndrome) - and I may be in errror here also - but it would be interesting to hear any other thoughts on this line of thinking

So after 3 years in the job, Ratten is still tactically inept, poor media performer, obviously cannot motivate the playing group, and we should address that by appointing more qualified asst. coaches The only aspect he seems to be good at is running innovative training drills. That is an qualification for capable asst. coach not head coach.

The time to appoint more qualified asst / senior coach was last year, that boat has well sailed. Even then, I wonder why would a talented, experienced asst. or ex head coach want to work with a struggling, out of depth head coach ??? Last year Ratten was reluctant for Laidely to join the coaching set up, and bar Riley with whom he has strong relationship, everyone else on the coaching panel is inexperienced, so you have to wonder if Ratten would be open to the idea.

Time to move on, start looking at new options.

_________________
Scott, things aren't as happy as they used to be down here at the unemployment office. Joblessness is no longer just for Philosophy majors - useful people are starting to feel the pinch.

my point is I would rather change the president than have him in charge of changing the coach.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

You shouldn't believe everything you read on here.

The coach is in charge. If he is failing or not up to it you don't appoint a minder, you appoint a new coach. Does anyone think Malthouse or Lyon, or Clarkson, or even Hardwick would put up with a coaching director or similar. They tried it at Port and that worked well, they did it at hawthorn with Schwab and Parkin and it ended in tears. The coach is the central person. he is either up to it or not. You don't appoint a minder to help an inexperienced coach. Just don't appoint the coach if he has insufficient experience. It's not the Royal Family, you don't appoint a Coach Regent to help out when the Coach is not up to it.

You appoint the coach (very carefully), give him all the support he asks for in terms of resources etc, let him appoint his team and if he is not up to it, you change, simple as that.

you're right, in fact why have assistants

why not just the coach 22 blokes and nothing else....

or

choose 1 of 2 paths

sack the coach, find another, let that bloke have 3 years

or

accept the present coach needs help

work out his strengths and weaknesses

and then address them

and then (according to some) sack the coach

I keep stressing though

if we sack the coach

who is in charge of appointing the new coach????

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

I was happy to hear Ratts press conference as it sums up everything us couch experts have said for 2 months.

What I won't like is if he gives the players he referred to in the press conference yet another chance for redemption. He may not have named them but dropping them is the action to backup words. If Ratts doesn't use action, he may as well be including himself in his commentary.

Danny you seem to have progressively changed your tune from "all coaches need time" to "judge Ratten at the end of the year" to "Ratts needs support around him." The excuse for your shift in attitude is a meek "whats the point of replacing the coach when the people appointing him are the same."
The problem is not only the people appointing Ratten, but Ratten himself. I look forward to your next moment of enlightenment acknowledging exactly this fact.

Look Josh, everyone is confused atm (not saying you are DB, but I take JK's point).

I'm a Blue Skies man and really believed in the list. I still do to some degree, but it's obvious some players don't have the mettle to play this game week in week out, and yes I've heard about the age of the group, but I only have to have a look at The Tigers and Demons and even the Bumbers on the weekend to believe it's all between the ears.

Is it a lack of commitment in the jumper?
Is it the coach?
Is it the development coaches?
Is it the President?
Is it all of the above?

Everyone has a finger pointing at them righ now.

The effort over the last 6 weeks is intolerable imo, with too many words and not enough action.
The pressure is on everyone, and I hope at the end of the seaon a few 'good' players are found out and traded, and that we have huge changes offfield...yep including the coach...it's all gone too sour to do nothing about it...unless we make the finals and win a final.
If we just make the finals, then lets not forget it was courtesy of other teams below us who didn't take their chance, not because of our wonderful 2nd half of the season (when the wheels fell off).

No doubt imo that there's a need for change.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

I have been supporting Ratts and was always of the view that by the end of this year, we would know either way.
Par for the year, in my book, was win a final.

Unfortunately, even if that occurs, it may not be enough - very different if we scrape into the finals with 10 or 11 wins Vs properly earning a spot with 13-14 wins. And we could still turn it on in a final to beat, say, the swans or fremantle (as we should have done a few weeks ago).... which I would classify as a soft par.

Now, for Ratts, its about how we play from here. He has 4-5wks to demonstrate his worth. The jury is pretty close to in, in my opinion now. I really liked what he said at the press conference except that it is not you & me he has to communicate with. Either, he has the right strategies and messages but is failing to communicate them or his strategies & messages are wrong.
When I hear him speak, I feel he is ok. But none of it seems to translate into action on the field.

It looks like 3 phenomena are happening on the field:
1) Our players look like they're trying to think too much about where to run, how to position themselves etc, rather than KNOWING what to do and doing it at the same time as going in like a freigh train etc... This leads me to believe Ratts has made it too complicated for them.

2) We play dumb. I can fully see us going in like madmen this week but the ball spilling free to the bombers while 3 of us are in a 'feeding frenzy'. I remember it most clearly against Fremantle - they would do the smart tap ons, shephards, positioning body & kicks to advantage, holding us up etc.. and we would play good old 'predictable' football.

3) The above 2 factors are leading us to appear disinterested, lacking in intensity, flatfooted.

Whilst I have been (and still am) critical of the players b/c they should be able to bring intensity no matter what else is lacking (see Melbourne this year or watch stars like Judd, Selwood, Hayes who never leave their intensity at home...) I am coming around to the conclusion that the coach must bear responsibility.

What to do about it? Not sure if the answer lies in keeping Ratts but helping him & the coaching team improve or if the answer is to get rid of Ratts.
Not sure who, out there, is better than Ratts?

This is where an honest and professional review must occur.

(I am a bit concerned if the club thinks the answer lies with bringing in a ready made star eg Pavlich... I reckon the problem pervades the club and whoever is brought in will simply take on the prevailing culture rather than single-handedly turn everything around!)