kezza wrote:
redback wrote:
Why are we blaming everyone except for those in control of the situation?
Mick picked the side and made the moves.
Mick played players that are injured or aren't 95-100%.
Mick's game plan, Mick's motivation and Micks standards.
The last 5 years Ratten took the blame and rightly so, so why do we give Mick so much leeway when he is so much more experienced and we have sold the cow to recruit him for immediate success?
If we didn't have the players "and needed a rebuild" why not go for a promising and hungry young coach?
Mick is not doing his job, simple.
If the players aren't performing to the standard he requires, drop them and promote young players and mould them to his liking.
Send a message to the whole group. He had the chance after the NAB cup but blew it.
His selections are suspect and his game plan and authority isn't up to scratch.
He either needs to make a statement or we will just plod along for the rest of the year and still not get any match experience into the younger brigade.
Agree with most of what you said.
One point, this is Rattens list.
Agree Kezza but
Mick is apparently a more improved and more expensive version.
Mick came into the year with the majority of the list intact unlike Ratten for the majority last year.
Let’s not forget this list has been more than competitive for the last 3 years.
New coaches should exert the most influence over the existing playing group at the start of his appointment whether they are a middle of the range team or not.
Yes there have been positives in individuals but there have also been some contraction in others.
If the players don’t know their role it’s up to the coaching department to teach them or if they’re incapable of fulfilling their role to a satisfactory degree of enthusiasm they should be made to do so one way or another.