The Yes Man wrote:
Nicholls just lost his wife. From the people I talk to there was no past player more dedicated and more in love with their partner than Nick was. This is a thing not really talked about normally but with Nick it is made a special mention. Nick was as good as a life partner to his wife as anyone to represent the club.
Now moral equivalence comes into question.
Yes. Nick ripped off a bank.
The only difference between Nick and a million other Carlton and VFL players is that he got caught.
In this instance the fact that he got caught is an indication that he actually was not very good at being dishonest.
Make no mistake. On the grading of good person bad person for VFL/AFL players Nick is firmly in the good person half.
Do not pretend otherwise.
Makes you look like a flower.... and a bad person.
Let's be straight about this, firstly, I didn't bring Nicholls into the debate.
Secondly, I am very sorry he lost his wife. He was one of my favourite all time players but Big Nick would be the first to admit he wasn't angel. But that was part of the package and as a package, he was one of the most admired and loved players of all time. We knew he had his issues and we didn't try to paint him as someone else.
Mind you, your attempt to make him a victim because he got caught is ridiculous.
As for Malthouse and I'll say this for the 100th time. Like Nicholls, Ratten, Pagan and all others before him, he has strengths and weaknesses. People see him as a great coach, I see him as an adequate coach. That's just my opinion.
Some posters seem to see him as a great role model and mentor to our young players. I think that's farcical. I've given examples of him lying to avoid taking responsibility for his actions. Let's be straight about it. Not one person has been able to dispute those facts. I'm not saying the bloke should be hung for those things but let's not come on here misrepresenting the bloke. It's no difference to someone coming on TC claiming Ratts was a coaching great. It's just not true. To me, if posters are coming on here depicting the bloke as something he's not, it tells me they're struggling for positives. Just my opinion.
GWS, I'm not saying we should be rebuilding the club based on morals but I do think all aspects of a persons character should be included in the analysis. If the club are happy with the appointment after assessing all the relevant aspects, fine.
As I've said 1 million times, I just want the bloke represented honestly. Some posters are trying to paint him as someone and something he's not. I disagree with those ascertions. I don't see the problem with that.