The all NEW Mick Malthouse thread

Juddy&theKruezers · **Joined:** Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:12 pm **Posts:** 4426

If the club truly believes Ratts will take the club to a flag then they need to have the balls to re-sign him for 3 years....having him just coach out the last year on his contract would be a very weak decision IMO....and if by seasons end they have doubts and can't commit to him long term then a change must be made....

camel · **Posted:** Sun Aug 19, 2012 2:25 pm

cimm1979 wrote:

camelboy wrote:

Kaptain Kouta wrote:

To be frank (sorry, Frank) I'd rather one of the Scott brothers than pretty much any of the coaches who might be around to put up their hand for the job.

I have a massive man crush on Chris. As a fan back on my couch, he would fill me with a lot of confidence. :razz:

Compare his criticism of the deliberate out of bounds at Perth recently, to the way Ratts so ineptly fired back at Tom Browne. With Scott you get a clear and concise message delivered in a composed and rational manner. With Ratts you get a fumbling ineptly delivered spray that wouldn't upset a toddler.

Quite possibly Camel and it might also impact on memberships but I hope it's given a lot less weight than other factors when the decision is made.

I agree.

aerodyte · **Joined:** Tue Sep 28, 2010 1:52 pm **Posts:** 194

Juddy&theKruezers wrote:

If the club truly believes Ratts will take the club to a flag then they need to have the balls to re-sign him for 3 years....having him just coach out the last year on his contract would be a very weak decision IMO....and if by seasons end they have doubts and can't commit to him long term then a change must be made....

Nah

Braithy · **Joined:** Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:42 pm **Posts:** 6895

John. There was no comparison to Leigh. I gave a list of the most flag winning coaches of the last few decades, and asked what was their record after their first 5 years as coach?

Matthews had one flag in 10 seasons with the Pies. He was also the assistant coach for 4 years before taking over as head coach.

Of those 'proclaimed' best coaches, Ratten has a higher winning percentage than MM, Choc and bomber at the same stages of their careers.

Just illustrating that very few of the best coaches our game has seen started out winning in their first 5 season.

That is mentioning Ratten in the same sentence as the best, which he is not. He might be one day, he might not. We'll never know if we drop him after a season where we suffered our worst injury list in decades and still got 13 wins.

Juddy&theKruezers · **Joined:** Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:12 pm **Posts:** 4426

aerodyte wrote:

Juddy&theKruezers wrote:

If the club truly believes Ratts will take the club to a flag then they need to have the balls to re-sign him for 3 years....having him just coach out the last year on his contract would be a very weak decision IMO....and if by seasons end they have doubts and can't commit to him long term then a change must be made....

Nah

Still reckon yeah....

Braithy · **Joined:** Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:42 pm **Posts:** 6895

camelboy wrote:

Braithy wrote:

My standards are low? I reckon your are unrealistically high. As a club from the front office down, we've failed to develop our kids -- ie have the required patience it takes to nurture them -- we've failed to recruit (under WH) to a gameplan and on field structure to play to.

Every time we've lost a game we've demoted the kids, played with their confidence, destabilised the coach and his assistants. It's no freaking wonder we're a headcase of club who finds winning elusive.

So who is picking the team if the kids are apparently being dropped against Ratten's wishes as your post implies?

There's no implication there? It was a criticism of our ridiculously large and over inflated board, who disagree here and there and then leak their shit into the media when they don't agree with the majority, which in turn destabilises our coach, assistants and players.

We've had a part time Ant's coach, a system in place where Ratten has no idea (left in the dark?) of what kids are ready to take the next step into the bigs.

We've been a dysfunctional club from the top down ... I'm not sure hanging Ratten on the hook for it all is wise or fair.

Hornet · **Joined:** Sat May 21, 2005 5:15 pm **Posts:** 7261

camelboy wrote:

Braithy wrote:

My standards are low? I reckon your are unrealistically high. As a club from the front office down, we've failed to develop our kids -- ie have the required patience it takes to nurture them -- we've failed to recruit (under WH) to a gameplan and on field structure to play to.

Every time we've lost a game we've demoted the kids, played with their confidence, destabilised the coach and his assistants. It's no freaking wonder we're a headcase of club who finds winning elusive.

So who is picking the team if the kids are apparently being dropped against Ratten's wishes as your post implies?

Yeah, that was a strange one...

Hornet · **Joined:** Sat May 21, 2005 5:15 pm **Posts:** 7261

Those who are salivating due to recent victories over sub-standard opposition need to step back for a moment.

Under Ratten we've become the ultimate flat track bullies... plan A is brilliant when the opposition allow us to play it, see. Pois

but, we've come up short when put under the sword by finals bound teams. Our structures totally collapse and we have no answers... in all honesty, this is something that needs to be seen live to be fully appreciated as I believe the TV flatters our loses.

Ratten is learning, yes he is... but the players are getting older... patience ehh?

Braithy · **Joined:** Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:42 pm **Posts:** 6895

Did our structures collapse due to missing players who the club deems as irreplaceable, Waite, Murphy, Carrots, Henderson, laidler etc ??

Judd talked about Waite alone last night, as the one person that their whole structure relies on. Getting players behind the ball because he can take a contested mark, or at worst, create a contest for our smalls.

All I'm saying is, I'd love to see Ratten and our list, healthy, and see what they can do. I believe the players think they can win as constructed with Ratten as coach. Ultimately the board has to decide this outcome.

We all have the same thing in common, we want to win.

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 17942

Braithy wrote:

camelboy wrote:

Braithy wrote:

My standards are low? I reckon your are unrealistically high. As a club from the front office down, we've failed to develop our kids -- ie have the required patience it takes to nurture them -- we've failed to recruit (under WH) to a gameplan and on field structure to play to.

Every time we've lost a game we've demoted the kids, played with their confidence, destabilised the coach and his assistants. It's no freaking wonder we're a headcase of club who finds winning elusive.

So who is picking the team if the kids are apparently being dropped against Ratten's wishes as your post implies?

There's no implication there? It was a criticism of our ridiculously large and over inflated board, who disagree here and there and then leak their shit into the media when they don't agree with the majority, which in turn destabilises our coach, assistants and players.

We've had a part time Ant's coach, a system in place where Ratten has no idea (left in the dark?) of what kids are ready to take the next step into the bigs.

We've been a dysfunctional club from the top down ... I'm not sure hanging Ratten on the hook for it all is wise or fair.

Theres more red herrings in your past couple of posts than the total contribution of everyone on TC!
How do you justify Ratten having no idea of which kids are ready to take the next step? Surely if he's doing his job half properly, he'd know every person on our list completely. Strengths, weaknesses and idiosynchracies.

As for destabilising our coach, what have the board leaked which has had any effect?

With regard to demoting kids and playing with their confidence, surely the buck stops with the coach there?
Lastly, your comment that we've failed to develoop our kids. Once again, the buck stops there with the coach. It has nothing to do with the front office.

Now, I'm content to see Ratten stay at the club next year as a match coach but with supporters like you backing him, he may as well pack his bags now! :wink:

thehulk · **Joined:** Sun May 28, 2006 9:18 am **Posts:** 163

I have been a pro sack the coach but I have to say wrapt he grew some balls and told off the media .

cimm1979 · **Posted:** Sun Aug 19, 2012 3:20 pm

Braithy wrote:

JohnM wrote:

The club states via its president that it's aim is to win 2 premierships in (now) the next 3 years.

The coach is, by your admission, still learning on the job, after 5 years.

And you're still happy to sponsor his development.

I'd hazard a guess that every single, current AFL coach is developing, learning and fine tuning. Making mistakes getting some things right, some things wrong.

The important thing is Ratten is improving. Like has already been said, he has a greater winning percentage than alotta successful flag winning coaches had at the same point in their career.

JohnM wrote:

Oh. And what progression, exactly? Our coaching staff made an absolute hash of the middle of the season, very likely costing us a finals berth (you think injuries caused us to lose our shit to the point of getting flogged by port Adelaide?)

By your timeframe, Ratten will be as good as, say Clarkson, by about his 9th season.

Ah yes. The middle of the season. Missing Henderson, Laidler, Murphy, Waite, Carrazzo, Robinson, Warnock, Hampson, Kreuzer (for 1 game), and Judd. There's more too.

You tell me John. What AFL teams that can miss 6 or 7 of their best 10 for 4+ weeks, and still win games, make the 8?

Even yesterday, anyway you cut it, we were missing our 3 best defenders. Geelong without Scarlett fell to 9th place for back-to-back weeks and lost 3 from 4, and everyone said they were shot. Imagine if Geelong also lost Harry Taylor and Lonegran or Enright as well as Scarlett. And lost them for the season too. Screwed and out of the 8, is where I reckon they'd be based on the test sample of just missing Scarlett, but I'm happy to hear why you think they're different and Ratten is shot.

JohnM wrote:

Aside from a single anomaly in Bomber Thompson, tell me how many coaches were mediocre for 5 years and then suddenly became excellent at the job?

How many? And who?

You need to supply lots of examples, because that's the exact thing you're thinking will happen wi Ratten.

Lets look at the best coaches of the AFL of the last 3 decades. winning flags is the measurable yardstick we'll use.

Leigh Matthews
Bomber
Parkin
Malthouse
Sheedy
Choc Williams

What were their records after 5 years? How many of them took over a team which'd won 2 of the previous 3 spoons?

Ratten fairs well. He's no Matthew Knights, or Primus or Laidley.

Don't take it personally, because it's not meant to be personal, but I think the biggest shortcoming of you and Synners is patience. As a club we've come from the depths of hell, and to think in 5 years with an improving coach you guys would be throwing your toys out of the pram because we haven't won a flag ... it's indicative of your impatience. It's indicative of the club we are trying to remove ourselves from. The club where we bought all of our talent. A club that sacked the coach after 2 years of perceived failure.

CFC's biggest flaw has been its impatience. No surprises we haven't -- until SR -- embraced the concept of the AFL since the draft. A system where you have to be patient because you can no longer spend what you want and buy a flag.

Where I sit, we're on the way up. Injuries have derailed this season. Just like they did to the Hawks in 09 and the cats in 06. It's football. It happens. I can live with it, and I can live with Ratten serving out his current contract. Win or lose. It costs the club less, we can eat into our debt and ultimately be stronger for it.

JohnM wrote:

Low standards if you're happy with Ratten's performance over 5 years. Very low standards.

My standards are low? I reckon your are unrealistically high. As a club from the front office down, we've failed to develop our kids -- ie have the required patience it takes to nurture them -- we've failed to recruit (under WH) to a gameplan and on field structure to play to.

Every time we've lost a game we've demoted the kids, played with their confidence, destabilised the coach and his assistants. It's no freaking wonder we're a headcase of club who finds winning elusive.

Where is the guarantee that Malthouse is going to lead us to a flag? Where is there guarantee, where MM would even be able to do what Ratten has done this season? How can you be so sure?

... I think there's a case to be mounted where (possibly) 13 wins with the list we have had due to injury and chicken wings is every bit as good as finishing top 4 with a full list.

Good work Braithy.

:thumbsup:

club29 · **Posted:** Sun Aug 19, 2012 3:27 pm

We could bring in malthouse this year.

...or we could let Ratts see out his contract and then we will have Roos in the mix if Ratts is no good.

We have learnt some lessons this year that will lift us next year. I am sure we all agree on that.

I do like the idea of winning a flag with Ratts in charge. To me it would be worth 3 with a mongrel like Malthouse in charge.

aerodyte · **Joined:** Tue Sep 28, 2010 1:52 pm **Posts:** 194

Braithy wrote:

JohnM wrote:

The club states via its president that it's aim is to win 2 premierships in (now) the next 3 years.

The coach is, by your admission, still learning on the job, after 5 years.

And you're still happy to sponsor his development.

I'd hazard a guess that every single, current AFL coach is developing, learning and fine tuning. Making mistakes getting some things right, some things wrong.

The important thing is Ratten is improving. Like has already been said, he has a greater winning percentage than alotta successful flag winning coaches had at the same point in their career.

JohnM wrote:

Oh. And what progression, exactly? Our coaching staff made an absolute hash of the middle of the season, very likely costing us a finals berth (you think injuries caused us to lose our shit to the point of getting flogged by port Adelaide?)

By your timeframe, Ratten will be as good as, say Clarkson, by about his 9th season.

Ah yes. The middle of the season. Missing Henderson, Laidler, Murphy, Waite, Carrazzo, Robinson, Warnock, Hampson, Kreuzer (for 1 game), and Judd. There's more too.

You tell me John. What AFL teams that can miss 6 or 7 of their best 10 for 4+ weeks, and still win games, make the 8?

Even yesterday, anyway you cut it, we were missing our 3 best defenders. Geelong without Scarlett fell to 9th place for back-to-back weeks and lost 3 from 4, and everyone said they were shot. Imagine if Geelong also lost Harry Taylor and Lonegran or Enright as well as Scarlett. And lost them for the season too. Screwed and out of the 8, is where I reckon they'd be based on the test sample of just missing Scarlett, but I'm happy to hear why you think they're different and Ratten is shot.

JohnM wrote:

Aside from a single anomaly in Bomber Thompson, tell me how many coaches were mediocre for 5 years and then suddenly became excellent at the job?

How many? And who?

You need to supply lots of examples, because that's the exact thing you're thinking will happen wi Ratten.

Lets look at the best coaches of the AFL of the last 3 decades. winning flags is the measurable yardstick we'll use.

Leigh Matthews
Bomber
Parkin
Malthouse
Sheedy
Choc Williams

What were their records after 5 years? How many of them took over a team which'd won 2 of the previous 3 spoons?

Ratten fairs well. He's no Matthew Knights, or Primus or Laidley.

Don't take it personally, because it's not meant to be personal, but I think the biggest shortcoming of you and Synners is patience. As a club we've come from the depths of hell, and to think in 5 years with an improving coach you guys would be throwing your toys out of the pram because we haven't won a flag ... it's indicative of your impatience. It's indicative of the club we are trying to remove ourselves from. The club where we bought all of our talent. A club that sacked the coach after 2 years of perceived failure.

CFC's biggest flaw has been its impatience. No surprises we haven't -- until SR -- embraced the concept of the AFL since the draft. A system where you have to be patient because you can no longer spend what you want and buy a flag.

Where I sit, we're on the way up. Injuries have derailed this season. Just like they did to the Hawks in 09 and the cats in 06. It's football. It happens. I can live with it, and I can live with Ratten serving out his current contract. Win or lose. It costs the club less, we can eat into our debt and ultimately be stronger for it.

JohnM wrote:

Low standards if you're happy with Ratten's performance over 5 years. Very low standards.

My standards are low? I reckon your are unrealistically high. As a club from the front office down, we've failed to develop our kids -- ie have the required patience it takes to nurture them -- we've failed to recruit (under WH) to a gameplan and on field structure to play to.

Every time we've lost a game we've demoted the kids, played with their confidence, destabilised the coach and his assistants. It's no freaking wonder we're a headcase of club who finds winning elusive.

Where is the guarantee that Malthouse is going to lead us to a flag? Where is there guarantee, where MM would even be able to do what Ratten has done this season? How can you be so sure?

... I think there's a case to be mounted where (possibly) 13 wins with the list we have had due to injury and chicken wings is every bit as good as finishing top 4 with a full list.

Very good post, except for the bit I've highlighted which contradicts your argument a little bit if you don't add some serious qualifiers and evidence to back it up.

padre · **Joined:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 7:56 pm **Posts:** 934

Didn't MM coach the dogs for an extended period without success?

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10465

padre wrote:

Didn't MM coach the dogs for an extended period without success?

That's where it all started, yes.

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10465

Listened to Wallsy this morning and he mentioned to a CFC director that we have a better coach now then we did at the start of the year, or something similar. The Carlton director had no idea what he was saying - which sets some alarms bells off to me - but the point is that Ratten has gone through some tough times and has adjusted, learned & grown again which Wallsy says not only benefits him as a coach but also CFC for 2013.

The other interesting point discussed was Port Adelaide coaching & Ratten - the boys seem to think they should jump at him if we where silly enough to let him go. There words not mine.

aerodyte · **Joined:** Tue Sep 28, 2010 1:52 pm **Posts:** 194

Didn't MM get replaced by Buckely because in 2009 an impatient board and faction of supporters didn't believe he would ever deliver a premiership?

Juddy&theKruezers · **Joined:** Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:12 pm **Posts:** 4426

aerodyte wrote:

Didn't MM get replaced by Buckely because in 2009 an impatient board and faction of supporters didn't believe he would ever deliver a premiership?

They put in a succession plan and then got rid of him after he won a flag.... :grin:

kingkerna · **Posted:** Sun Aug 19, 2012 6:29 pm

Juddy&theKruezers wrote:

aerodyte wrote:

Didn't MM get replaced by Buckely because in 2009 an impatient board and faction of supporters didn't believe he would ever deliver a premiership?

They put in a succession plan and then got rid of him after he won a flag.... :grin:

I don't think we were aware of that.

The all NEW Mick Malthouse thread

Who is online