The way you and others 'paint' is puzzling to say the least. IF Icke and Swann were so pro-Laidley then perhaps they would have pushed it further...? Ratten has a fair bit of say in who his assistants are, but let's get one thing straight - that 'say' is only up to a point. The club had already appointed Richardson to the position that the Footy Dept honchos interviewed both he and Laidley for. If you're trying to say that a) there was a tacticians job available or b) that it was a choice between Barker and Laidley - you're wrong.

Never before has one head coaches assistants been so fiercely debated. Why? A couple of years ago there weren't many of you who gave a toss who our assistants were. Some of the people who criticize Brett Ratten are so far removed from the club, they would be closer in the separation stakes to Kevin Bacon than they are to the football club they allegedly support. Being a forum member of this fledgling outfit entitles you to no link whatsoever to the Carlton Football Club. Some ought to be reminded of that fact a little more often.

josh.......what specifically makes you believe that Laidley is a good strategist?

I can't remember which team, but he was credited for taking apart a gameplan when no other side could. Might have been the '08 Hawks.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Thats about the only part of his coaching accumen that he did really well. His player relationship & communication skills were considered to be average at best.

Part of the reason his coaching tenure didn't working out with the kangaroos was the fact that the players found him difficult
to deal with on a personal level.

You cant deny he did wonders with the poor facilities/resources and average at best lists he has had at his disposal with North & The Power.

I think he would have been a valuable asset on matchday.

Personally I dont really care who coaches or plays for the Carlton Football Club all that i'm really interested in is winning premierships and thats something that we havent managed to do for 15 F%*#ken years!!!!

a bit like when Wallace took apart the bombers in 2000

made a name for himself after one game

Laidley appears to be rubbish to me his CV would make the worst reading

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Yep. Round 13 2008. With the exception of Richmond later on, the Hawks only other losses for the season were against the rest of the top 4.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

I think I remember them saying it on Channel Ten one night. Must be true

I think I remember them saying it Channel Ten one night. Must be true

I thought the perception stemmed from the fact that he had an absolutely rubbish list that everyone was expecting would bottom out in spectactular fashion, and he managed to keep it vaguely competitive for a reasonable period. Thereby creating a perception that if he only had some actual cattle to work with he could achieve great things. Sort of like a poor man's Roos.

He also eroded the development and turnover of that list.

Definitely more than a one-game wonder, but I believe his tactics vs. the Hawthorn zone were well ahead of the curve.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Like Knights destroying the Saints gameplan.

In an interview a few years back Nathan Buckley commented that Laidley was a brilliant tactician at Collingwood.

I have no idea why Ratten chose Barker ahead of Laidley (if that was really the shortlist) but some of the claims I have read here are absurd. Seriously how the hell can people know what Ratten is thinking.

I am hoping that Barker brings with him some serious IP.

FWIW I have often hired people with less experience but because they demonstrated an enthusiasm for the role and willingness to learn and put in the hard yards. I have not been disappointed yet with this approach yet. I have hired experienced people before and been horrfied at how bad they perform. Experience is not everything.

_________________
The glass is neither half full nor half empty. Rather the glass is twice as big than required.

QFT. To further Cicc's point, you have to have balance. You can't have 4 chiefs. IMHO, the panel now has a good blend of experience and youthful insight and energy. Ratten may have thought that Laidley would upset that balance.

_________________
I send an SOS to the world

I don't know anything about John Barker, but there are lots of assistants around so I presume we have chosen a good one. Its interesting to wonder what our strategy is this time. Last time our strategy was to appoint an incredibly inexperienced coach and to have his Melb mate Riley as his right hand man (and he may be a good coach) and surround him with coaches with no experience. Did we think about this and decide that minimal experience was what we were after? If so did we get it wrong? Or did we just appoint guys who were handy? Teague has been successful and is moving up and Lappo and Monty have got other jobs. Although it is likely they are much more employable after three years experience. We've given them work experience now other clubs get the benefit. It is strange to lose all but one of your assistants. You need turnover but you also need continuity. We went for four of five assistants straight out of the game with no experience, to three new assistants out of the game as players for 10- 20 years - not necessarily a bad thing but where is the balance.

Anyway I hope Josh is wrong about these appointments being foisted on Ratts. I don't reckon Ratts is the man to take us further, but while he is coach he must have his own team, he must be in charge and not have appointments dictated to him. If the admin and committee are appointing people over his head then he shouldn't be coach, if he is coach he needs to make the appointments.

Agree gerry, but I'd be surprised and alarmed if that were the case.
Reports suggest the new assistants all received initial calls from Ratts so he's been involved in the selection process to some degree you'd think.

So what's going on?
Did we get Choco yet?

Will it be announced Next Friday??

Barks is one of the best blokes you will ever meet. Just a quality human being... The Hawthorn ladies will be shattered.

Barks was to Hawthorn what WIGGINS is to Carlton.

I've got no idea if he can coach, but you can't have too many of his type in your organisation.

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.

You're not sure if he can coach but he's a good bloke? Have our standards dropped that far?

All I'm saying is that the well drilled teams tended to tear us to shreds in 2010. We finished 11-12 and hardly beat a team near us on the ladder. I personally feel it was an absolute necessity to get a tactical analyst like Laidley to help us combat the defensive press that we have so badly struggled with over the past few years. I feel the upside of a guy who took an incredibly shabby list to consecutive finals (and a PF) appearance must know what he's doing. Instead, I feel we played it a little bit safe with a "won't rock the boat' type in Barker. Given we could have had Laidley instead of Barker, I feel it is a missed opportunity.
I might be wrong, I might be right. Time will tell. I respect everyone elses opinion on the matter, but that is mine.

On the flipside to that Josh Kaplan, Barker comes from the saints and the hawks. Both teams have been successfull employing the defensive press in a couple of different forms. His knowledge may help get our team defense in order.
As far as i know none of Laidleys teams have been known for the defensive press and really all we know is he managed to coach a team through the Hawks zone back in 2008.

Comes down to what Ratts wants. He wants a team of coaches that can help the team win games and chose Barker as part of that team.

The position was for a forward line coach though, not a senior assistant or a director so it's more Barker's speciality than Laidley's.