This changes the channel.

Regards Cazzesman

!@#$%& quick boat. Although of course Hawthorn took a bit longer than 2 years to get it right. And is St Kilda in Ross L year 3? But hey, for us 2 years is ground zero.

There is a fundamental flaw in an argument that says 'this year we cannot take into account the measures we use every other year because it does not suit our purpose to do so'.

In every other year win/loss is held as an indicator of how a team went. In every other year playing finals is seen as an indicator of how a team went. In every other year percentage is seen as an indicator of how a team went.

but not this year. We'll scrap them this year cos this year we cannot have improved because it ruins the idea that Ratts is ruining our chances.

Is Ratts doing well. I worry I admit it. I worry a lot; and some times at Games, well lets just say coaches need those security guards don't they.

The truth is though I am not sure if it is all Ratts fault, if this is transitional moving from the years/drills/style under Pagan to the new style and next year we will see another step forward (that's if we can take the normal indicators as okay next year of course) or whether we will hover/struggle to make the eight next year and Ratts will come under increasing/strident pressure.

I want to see Carlton dominate games but I must say I really didn't think that would happen this year, this year I hoped we would make the eight. Could we have done better? Yes. Should we have? - not so sure on that.

How easy is it to change coaches? How many coaches can change a crap perennial (worst 7 years ever) bottom of the rung side into a premiership contender in 2 years?

My guess it will take 5 years - not 2 years and wham everything is fixed, but 5 years with a lot of ups and downs. At this point I cannot be certain the ups and downs are Ratts fault or evidence of growth or a mixture (as I suspect) of both - but using normal, every other year indicators, it would seem we have developed as a team.

1 thing I am certain of - the method of Ratts appointment in no way indicates if he can/cannot coach. The method is to try and maximize getting the best/strongest/etc coach, but not using the best method does not mean the best/etc coach cannot (or has not) be found.

Danny don't get me wrong...I realise how difficult it is to change coaches and in most cases when you do it almost means you are back to square one. I refused to criticise Ratts the year before last because he came in as caretaker and the goal was to lose (lets be honest). - you mean in his first 6 weeks you refused! God Help us, how wonderful of you.

Last year again I refused to criticise but at about 4 or 5 rounds in this year I began to become concerned, not whether we won or lost as such but more I was focusing on what we were doing wrong last year and I could see we were doing these same things wrong again. - would this be after the Essendon*/Sydney games? Then we bounced back against the Bulldogs/ See, up and down/up and down. In games, between games - and if you read every single coach who has talked about young sides - or do you deny we are a young side, they will talk about the inconsistency of such sides. And so we have a young coach also, and we are coming from a long, long way back - or after 1 year and 10 weeks (6 of which we were deliberately losing) do we discount the 7 years before? - inconsistency, I'm guessing, will be the first hurdle.

Furthermore I still till now can't fathom what Ratts has in his mind when we go into a match. It's not clear what he wants the players to be doing out there. The only thing that's clear (other than our deficiencies from last year) is that Ratts loves to negate. Other than this what is our style/s of play? I really have no clue. Should I have a clue after 2 season? I reckon Yes...some may so No....fair enough but I disagree. Do we wait 5 seasons? - no but we do not expect a 5 year seasoned side after 2 years. You cannot expect to see the whole plan - can we then see parts of the plan? Yes. Defence has system - kickouts are not great but they are not as disastrous as some make out. Midfield, rucks - yes, except for sometimes like last week. We get the ball and we move it into the forward line well. St Kilda, Both Brissie games, Bullies, game, Hawthorn game, all are examples of what Ratts wants, fast movement, clearances, good spread of goalkickers. Does it happen every week? No. Is it better than last year - almost every game yes - only Adelaide, Sydney, 2nd Bombers game and last week were as bad as last year.

IMO No...and not because I don't know that we are developing but because Ratts was appointed in a dubious manner and doesn't come with high credentials...so the risk is to great to persist with someone of this low calibre past his use by date. Sure he may come good...but it all comes down to probability. - as I stated the dubious manner means jack shit, its a red herring. It has nothing to do with what is happening out there on the ground so stop bringing it up - that complaint is about Sticks & co, not about how we are coached.

Our consistency may be due to a lack of experience in some players...ok fine but this does not mean most players....and why do we lack cohesion? - who says we do. even on friday night the defense was every cohesive, even the horrible manner of defending space and not attacking the ball carrier was consistent across the team. Very cohesive unit even in most of their losses, otherwise we'd see a lot more blowouts. 2 this year? Bombers and Collingwood. 1 by more than 10 goals - far more cohesive than past years, particularly under Pagan..

Why do we lack system for the majority of most games??? - I would suggest that we are starting poorly - particularly after the break, but we must have systems or we would not work back into games. Even on Friday we worked ourselves back into the contest through our system but lost the plot because of our execution of skills and because we did not run hard (particularly midfielders).

These are the questions that concern me greatly after 2 seasons with Ratts at the helm. - concerns are fine and I have some of my own but I also question my expectations. Am I being realistic. For example I do not want Cloke to play again, yet the kid is only 24 and we are trying to play him as a CHF - how many times has he played that role? What, then, should I expect of a player who is young and learning a new position? If the club had the same expectations as me, how often would we be forced to turn an entire list over?

I've never liked the approach of finding excuses for everything...it promotes complacency....I prefer that if something has had enough time (what is enough time? 2 years or 5 years? Get this wrong by acting too fast and you will forever have a new coach) to produce results (like reaching the 8? Oh no we can't use that as a result this year) and it hasn't...then cut your losses, move on and try something else.

do you even read what I said?

Show me where I have said we are on the right track - show me.

no, my opinion is that how can we know if we are on the right track (or not) if all the indicators we would use must (this year) be discounted?

age - discounted
experience - discounted
where we have come from in the past 7 years - discounted
Injuries - discounted (except injuries to other teams, we count those ones in the negative).
Position on the ladder - discounted
Forward entries - discounted
Percentage - discounted
wins - discounted
Play finals - discounted
etc.

Yet the only indicator we seem to use (How he was appointed) is an indicator about a different process - how to find a coach, not, can he coach.

Hey TC - it's Ratts here.

I'm very upset about this thread (I've been reading up on TC for years),
and think that some of your criticism is unwarrented.

I will however take down your idea of having a Plan B, sounds
like a great idea, they never taught us that at coach school!

If we don't make the finals this year, put up a poll on TC asking
If I should go and if you all think I should, I'll walk.

I promise.

Oh yeah and if 'synbad' could contact me through the football
Department, I may have a position for him. His ideas are
Revolutionary!!

Regards,

Ratts.

P.S we kicked an Essendon* scout out from our closed session a few weeks ago, I think he may post on TC - he said his name was Melvin or Melville or something.

do you even read what I said?

Show me where I have said we are on the right track - show me.

So from your perspective...what do we do? We wait and see another year, two, three and then re-assess. What should Ratts's performance be based on in your opinion? 11wins? Or should it be more performance/development based? By performance I mean the 'HOW' we play. - well I'd have thought make finals this year was more important than the 'how we play' argument because making the finals is a real indicator, you make the finals or you don't. The 'how' is subjective. Now I know those who are agin Ratts ( ) prefer the 'how' argument because it cannot easily be shot down. If we play finals this year then good job (not a great job) but well done. Next year we need to make it to the second week if we can but truthfully, and this is where it all gets hard, we may not, yet have improved (the 'how - ).

And the how he was appointed is not what his ability as a coach is being based on...if you think it is then no probem...but it's not. - so why is it always mentioned?

Just as a side issue forgetting about his appointment for a minute and assume it was above board...what do you think about his contract extension? Was it a little premature? Or the professional thing to do given that nothing visible had been achieved as yet? I know the common argument here is that his initial contract wasn't long enough..yeah but maybe it wasn't long enough for a reason...because there were doubters....so why extend it so quickly?

Mind you, I still worry about Ratts but, for me, nothing that has happened so far this year has made my opinion of Ratts the slightest bit clearer, not for or against.

- wished it hadn't occured, it did, so what. Truthfully , what the !@#$%& would I or the Synbads or the Melveys or the Cazzes really know about any of this - sure we can speak the speak ( ) but all of our info is based on gossip. None of us were at any of those meetings etc so none of us really know. There is a reason why second hand info doesn't carry as much weight as first hand. Any good communications teacher can show you how interpretations enter swiftly into any 'factual' retelling of an event.

The point to all is that its very difficult to judge a lot of these things without looking at what has gone before - yet we are constantly told the circumstances are different this time - its not true of course, its just that we are all nervous - understandably so, we have been shite for far too long and none of us want to go back there - but none of us are in team meetings, train every day, sit with the lads around the whiteboard etc. None of us know all the niggles, or the facts about certain games.

And we never consider the other team or other factors - take friday night. If Fev had kicked that 1st goal, if Yarran had not hit the post - in fact if just 3 of the six posters had been goals, the game would have been very different. Who is to say the lads just dropped their bundles feeling it wasn't 'their night' it happens to all teams but as supporters we want a reason for this and at the moment the flavour is Ratts is at fault. None of us know this no matter how strident because it is too early to tell. We are a young developing side improving - has the improvement been rapid or unexpected - no - but that does not belittle the development, nor does it mean something is wrong, in fact it could mean the opposite, it could mean we are doing the little things that in 3 years time might be the difference between a flag or just playing finals (the Ross Lyon effect if in fact they win the flag).

If all of this is too nebulous - you're right it is. But I am a supporter, I really know nothing about what happens inside, despite what people say, gossip means jack shit all the time. While it may be true where there is smoke there is fire, it is equally true that sometimes its not smoke, rather it is mist clouding judgement.

The mist clears, the sun shines and we think 'how the !@#$%& did we get there' because development is not a gradual constant slope up to the top. it comes in lurches and staggers and steps and rolls and runs and stutters and jumps and then the top is reached.

Mind you, I still worry about Ratts but, for me, nothing that has happened so far this year has made my opinion of Ratts the slightest bit clearer, not for or against.

Thats cos nothing has happened and everything is the same ol same ol..... - no that's because like all supporters I want to win the flag every year no matter how many times I tell myself to be patient.

If there waas progress... we would be encouraged... - I am encouraged and at the same time shitting myself we will not make the finals.
But there hasnt... and were not,...