Is Mick Malthouse too soft?

Banksy · Joined: 20 Apr 2003

Does anyone on this board think Mick has gone a bit soft?
I get the feeling from his after match press comments that he is too easy on the players....i know behind close doors he must be alot harder on the players but as a supporter sometimes i want to see more emotion from Mick along the lines that perfomances like today will not be accepted and players will get dropped no matter who they are.
I feel Mick needs to send out a message to the faithful that losses like today hurt deep and as a club we will not tolerate insipid crap like we saw against the hawks.
In other words Mick to be ruthless and to amke tough calls on certain players.
I also want him to throw the challenge to his players in font of the cameras so we can see it that it's hurting.

zoia · Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2003 10:05 pm

look i dont think thats a question i would ask here in fear of being banned, i rekon his doing his job i rekon none of us couldd do better so i say lets shut up, soon as we win people dont talk about this kind of stuff. What will happen if the dogs beat us ppl will say sack mm, common ppl dont start on mick

Cam · Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2003 10:06 pm

My opinion.

Should not have played Buckley.
Should not have altered Tarrants gameplan that has been so successful.
Should have had Lonie at half back (which is usual).
Should have had Presti at full back (which is usual).

Why did he mess around with what was working without even giving it a chance to fail?

Positives: Fraser, Holland, O'Bree. I just wish we could get everyone on the same page on the same day.

Cam · Posted: Sun Jun 15, 2003 10:08 pm

Mick just seems to have off days, i love him and reckon he will win us a flag or two before its all over.

Joe · Joined: 01 Jun 2003

Hard to say.
It is not for me to judge.
I think we as a team have not recovered fully from last years Grand Final.
I think we are mentally scared and it may take a bit of time getting the hunger back.
I dont think Mick can be blamed at all.
It is too easy to blame the coach when there are twenty odd blokes that run out and are fully accountable.
Being tough and ruthless is great but it wont work for every player.Some may play better some may play worse because of it.
The press releases are crap,I have seen Mick get upset this year.
They are all an act.
Time will tell how good this current group of players are.

Banksy · Joined: 20 Apr 2003

magpie_1983 why would such a question get me banned from this board?
I think Mick is a great coach but sometimes i just wished he would make it known to us supporters that we're all hurting by asking the question of commitment to his players so we can all see it.
And i know Mick showed his emotions in last years Grand Final lost.
But as a supporter i'm after the uncompromising ruthess stuff from Mick.

M@®© · 1972 Joined: 13 Apr 2003 Location: Victoria - Rowville

He aint soft !!!! We were out played by a team who was more desperate for the ball and if Collingwood keep this kind of form up the bottom sie who has won 1 game in 12 rounds will give us a run.

http://collingwood.rules.it/

cat · Joined: 17 Feb 2003 Location: Ballarat, Vic, Australia

I don't think MM is soft, the players normally respond well to his attidtude but i agree with Cam he did not coach well today. Lonie At full back and did not move was a worry and so was cloak in the forward line and Tarrant not moving from the goal square. Why wasnt changes made?

Banksy · Joined: 20 Apr 2003

Why wasn't changes made?.........that's what i been asking myself all bloody night.
Mick basically played players in positions to minimise Hawthorn's run out of they're backline.
I can't understand why play to negate an opposition's strength at the cost of negating your on strengths?...Mick and his match committee need to address their thinking on that one.
We're better than Hawthorn....not the other way around.

angel · Joined: 28 Dec 2002 Location: vic

Mick is great at engendering respect among the player group but struggles in the tactics department.

Nat · Joined: 14 Jun 2003

Exactly, MM really misses his trusty lieutenant Laidley. He is not renowned for tactical nous. Daniher has been great with Taz but MM has struggled on match days with tactics not being his forte.

Madeleine · Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Location: St.Kilda

Yes I think Dean has been pretty good with the Roos.

Licuria biggest fan · Joined: 19 May 2003 Location: Western Suburbs

You cannot blame the coach there are 22 players out there and they should be the ones that need a hard look at themselves. A few players need to go back to the seconds to get some confidence up again.

Blanch · Joined: 01 Jul 2002 Location: Back in Perth!

I reall do doubt we'll ever know what MM says behind closed doors. The media is a manipulation tool for MM and I, for one, agree that it should be treated like one.

We would love to know that all the people inside the club, ie players and coaches, are hurting as much as we are. Do you really think they don't feel the same way as we do - MM included?

orie · Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2003 11:39 am

Always read what everyone has to say but rarely post. However I must say that I am in accordance with the questioning of Mick's coaching. Did anyone hear the interview with Tery Daniher on 3AW after the match? It was pointed out to him that Heath Scotland had 12 minutes game time. Terry's explanation was quite vague and almost intimated that perhaps that was an oversight. It wasn't just me that took it that way. Very strange . The way we were playing , surely they had nothing to lose by given him more of a go.
And what the hell is up with Anthony? I have always been a supporter of his but at the moment he's not even able to give us a physical contest let alone a goal.
Yesterday the hawks hit our boys hard and that hurt. Lonie copped it, Williams from Graham even Burns. Cloke and Wooey both had stitches for cuts.
We need to be more physical and I'm not sure we have the players.