Our MC has been very disappointing this year IMHO and I believe that they have played a role in our loses to Essendon* and Hawthorn. I cant ever remember being so confused by our selections. In particular leaving Scotland out early, leaving Hadley out last week, picking Bentley, playing T-Bird on monsters and persisting with Cloke and Wiggo at CHF. Also Setanta has showed more than Cloke in the last couple of weeks, so why did Cloke hold his spot ahead o him?

I know for a fact that some very senior officials at the club are a bit miffed by some of our selections.

Ive seen all the Bullants games and I could not believe Bentley got a game ahead of Hadley and Robinson who dominated the week prior for the Bullants. Hadley contributing in the guts against the Hawks may have made the difference.

I totally agree on the comments re Thornton, he is a very good player on a mid sized fwd, but he has never been able to play on the Gorillas...He has been monstered so many times by Hall, J Brown and Richo......BUT he has been excellent on N Brown, M. Williams etc, so why play him on Roughie and have Setanta and Jamo running around lost!

I also think they made a big mistake by dropping Houlihan this week against freo, he may not be the hardest player but he is one of our best users of the ball, gets lots of stats and very rarely makes mistakes and he tends to play well interstate on hot/dry grounds. I hope we dont miss his run.

I also dont understand why they dont try more options up fwd. Unfortunately we are never going to win a flag with Cloke and Wiggo as our marking options at CHF. Im glad we picked Yarran, but we should give Kruezer more time up fwd or Send J.Waite there especially if he isnt going to get a key defensive match up.

Anyway, hopefully they have good reasoning, they get it right soon...and we smash Freo this week!!!

Go Blues.

How did we rate the MC this week??

They haven't got the boys playing wide enough.

Who said the hotspot was 15 metres out straight in front?

Stuff that - HIT THE BOUNDARY!

_________________
They will know that they've been playing against the famous old dark blues

I am suggesting that none of our other tall defenders have the body strength to even try to stand toe to toe with the gorillas. That's why they don't try and why Thornton has to zone off and leave so much room for an opponent to kick to advantage.

_________________
Hey Rocky; there are too many rabbits ... in China.

River Rat

I think the real measure of the MC will be how they handle the next few weeks. A couple of close losses where most expected us to win and the pressure has started to build. Don't have a problem with giving the kids a run and do realise that our depth is still not where we would like it to be. Physically we are running out games well and I think our defensive and onball squads have been good not perect but IMO our forward game plan is questionable.

You are not always going to get perfect delivery to your forwards but normally the good teams play to a structure or pattern so everyone knows their role and positioning and they share the goals and kick a winning score. I am not sure if that is the case with our forward line. It's easier to say after the event that player A or B would have been better in this game but what we seem to be missing is a CHF and HFF taking contested marks up forward and then kicking goals and this has been evident for 7 games. You probably see more of the team that a lot of us so do we have anyone fit to play those roles?

I think the MC are massively knee jerk....

How many players have we played????

And players will fit in the structures if they exist...

And no matter what players you use (except the freaks like Judd Kreuzer Murph and Gibbs) will play good footy even if there are no structures.

The majority of players need functional structures and set ups.

Im expecting 2 or 3 in ... 2 or 3 out again....

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

You won't get any arguments on that with me. Our defenders do lack body strength and at times defensive nous. Many times they are deadmen walking in one on one contests even if not kicked to the advantage of their opponent. Lots of mental scarring there as well, especially from our more experienced guys due to past floggings. I just don't agree that Irish is that much stronger in a contest, thus Roughie able to hold him off with one arm, and tactically he is much worse. It's not totally Setanta's fault as I think he has been mismanaged to a certain extent

Sadly a young kid called Hurley could teach some of our experienced blokes about one on one tests of strength Which is a damning indictment on how our blokes have been taught to use their bodies and/or use the gym.

Roughie's mark on Santy was a highlight of last weekend's round when it comes to top marks. He paid Santy the compliment of trying to mark it one-handed while keeping the other one extended in a "Don't argue". Most defenders would be happy if they could get away with holding one of the forward's arms to ensure they can only go up one-handed. Santy achieved that without having to risk a free, and yet Roughie still took the mark. Make no mistake, that was brilliance on Roughie's part rather than a lack of physical presence on Santy's behalf. Depending on what rules are applied each week, it may well have been a free to Santy, though I loved it and wasn't upset it wasn't paid.

Having more than a few minutes of practice this year in defensive work might also help with form, too.

I agree it was a top mark and you are right the way they have been adjudicating marking contests and the raffle that it has become it could have been a free

Then again if what Roughie did was adjudged fair then you can argue that what Santy did after initial contact could have been paid as a free if the mark hadn't been taken.

In my view and although it was a very good mark, he was just more aware of where the ball was in relation to his opponent and beat Setanta in a test of strength. As he would have against our other defenders in the same situation. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree

I'm as sad as anyone that it doesn't seem to be working out with Setanta. I had great hopes for him and I especially loved his aggresion which I don't think we have enough of. I hope I'm wrong about him making it and he tears the rest of the season up, as Setanta standing tall can only help the club. I'd be very happy to eat humble pie if the Irishman proves my doubts wrong

I'm not one of those blokes who can't handle being wrong on an internet forum. As long as it benefits the club, just give me a cloth and I'll wipe that egg off my face and I'll even dance an Irish jig...pretty badly though

Interesting read RR. Helps to break things down however it is hard to know the reasoning s behind selection.

My issue with selection is that it seems to be reactive and has no method.

When Ratts was appointed I thought he would be typical of the new breed of coaches and go for youth and build a side.

Guys like Thompson, Clarkson, Bailey, Knights know that to have success and long term success you need to go to youth and build a list. It is essentially short term pain for long term gain.

It is the coaches such as Craig, Wallace, Malthouse, Eade that are great coaches but seem to feel the need to fill holes instead of building a side.

IMO Ratten seems to be following the latter and it is a worry.

We will not win a premiership this year so why aren't we getting games into our kids? History shows that players need to get 50 games under them before they become influential in a team structure.

The MC have a lot to answer for.

1. Not Including Hadley for the Hawthorn match. It was always going to be a tough match. To experiment with the inclusion of Bentley effectively cost us that game. The odds were that Hadley's in and under work was always going to be better option.

2. Dropping Houlihan for the Freemantle match was a big mistake. He had been playing ok ... in fact up to the Hawthorn match he had been in our best players from memory. we really needed someone who could use the ball on Saturday night .. I reckon he would have seriously influenced the outcome of this game.

MC ... Please consider.

_________________
I am as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!!!

We already have a Rating the MC thread, so continue discussion there please.

_________________
“It is a state of mind, a system of belief, a way of seeing the world, a deep faith that, because you are Carlton, you belong to something great.” - Mike Fitzpatrick articulating what Out of the Blue means.

Not sure if its true but it has been suggested he broke a team rule off field. Scotland also earlier in the year. Just a rumour.

MODS feel free to delete if I have broken a rule.

I have been catching up with other forums for the last hour or so (hope my boss hasn't noticed!) and the Hopps ommission may be related more to off-field issues than on-field. I have been very annoyed about last Saturdays loss but I am fuming about some of the social antics being displayed by senior players at the club.

Then again, the MC have also played a part in losses - 2 at the very least. Hawks with the Bentley selection and the game against the scum. The fact that the players are not showing any interest and desire during the game is another entirely different concern... i'm gonna cry i think...

_________________
C'mon Blueboys!