camelboy wrote:
For balance sake, Parkin also mentioned he didn't have much of a handle on modern day coaching. But he did also say that Ratts had the best understanding of the game of any of the players he coached.
Personally, I still think it's worth at least considering what Parko had to say.
Parkin also said the fundamental task of coaching has never ever changed, no matter what era you're talking about. And that is having the players buy into what you're preaching and have them playing hard for you. And Parkin said Ratten most definitely has that.
What gets a bit much here are the one-eyed people, who seem to think their way is the only way. Completely closed minded to any solution other than theirs. They also fail to acknowledge improvement or give credit where credit is due. Instead they blindly push their agenda of sacking ratten as the only viable outcome.
And then to go into flawed logic, of either sack ratten or extend him if you back him?!! It's pretty outrageous.
Ratten has improved this season and in the last month has a more focussed and dedicated team playing for him. People get better at things. This is not a new concept or a concept exclusive to Brett Ratten. It's a fact of life.
I remember Sheedy saying his first 10 years as a coach was merely his apprenticeship, and he didn't feel confident until after this time.
Based on his turnaround this season, Ratten deserves to finish out his contract, imo and I hope he's allowed to. If his improvement continues into next season and we're top four and comfortable by August 2013, extend him for another contract because he would have earned it. At the moment, he has not earned an extension, but merely the right to finish out his contract.
If the review finds Ratten needs to be replaced, then a process has to -- and we know it won't -- happen.
Eddie Maguire sacked Malthouse and said the game has passed him by, and he's too stubborn/ set in his ways to keep up. He's a 59-year old guy who wants to get back into coaching to prove Maguire wrong. How is that different from Pagan coaching for the money? The motivation is all wrong, imo.
Brining in Cloke and Malthouse has the potential to be Pagan, McKernan and Martin part deux ... I mean, there's enough evidence there to support MM won't be any more of an answer than Pagan.
At least when we bought Pagan in, there were no alternatives. Britain was going backwards and we needed something.
This time around, we have a coach that the players are playing for, which according to one of the best coaches football has seen is the fundamental building block needed to reach elite levels.
With Malthouse or any other coach, there is no guarantee we would even have that foundation to work on.
Login
Register
FAQ
