p!$$ off MM
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| David wrote: | Malthouse wasn't lucky that he wasn't sacked before 2010; we were lucky that we didn't sack him. I think history proves that point.
As for the old story that the handover won us a flag, I've always thought it was pretty doubtful to be honest. It's a great narrative but ignores the fact that nearly every coach (at least, if they're in charge of a team that is anywhere near finals contention) wants to win the flag every year. We finished top four in 2009, so by any objective analysis our premiership clock was at 11. Given our ruck problems, and given Luke Ball's fortuitous falling out with St. Kilda, why wouldn't we have taken those two players? I'm sorry, but it just doesn't seem credible.
(And as for the other popular claim that it was all the work of the forward coach... look, I have a lot of respect for Buckley, but let's just say I haven't been hearing that one much of late.)
There's no doubt that McGuire thought the handover was a masterstroke – and it certainly was an adept move as these things go – but it wasn't quite adept enough, and I think his failure was that he and the rest of the administration were listening too hard to impatient fans and journalists and just panicked.
Did we really need the benefit of hindsight to see that all that stuff about Malthouse failing and Buckley being the messiah was naive? I feel like I'm in a position to say this now because I was arguing that precise point back then, too. I still believe Buckley is a good coach, and sure it would have been a little disappointing to see him go to another club, but that was a chance we had to take. The responsible thing to do would have been to remain patient, let Malthouse leave when the time was right and then anoint the best available replacement (which might have been Buckley, might not have been).
As for Malthouse's personality, is it a little too glib to say I don't care how much of a nice guy he is or what he says on commercial radio? He succeeded in the role he had at the club and that's what matters. |
I've always wondered to myself whether Mick staying on for an extra year or two and effectively delaying the handover would have resulted in another flag but we'll never know how it would have transpired had it turned out that way.
I'm not disparaging Mick's coaching record for us because he was an great coach for us and the right man for the job when he was first appointed at the end of 1999. He was the person we needed to restore respectability to the club and make it a powerhouse again.
I don't think Eddie and the board panicked with the decision of the handover because it was media-driven or a small section of supporters wanted Mick sacked. In my personal opinion (so not necessarily factual) I think the decision to go down the path of a coaching handover was handed down based on a number of reasons:
1). Eddie always feared that Bucks would be a coach elsewhere and rather than waiting to find out, he wanted Bucks to coach us rather than anyone else. It was well-known North Melbourne were interested in him but ultimately they appointed Brad Scott who happened to be an assistant with us in 2009. I also think the romanticised notion of our favourite son being a coach and leading us to a dynasty was also appealing to Eddie and the board, but on top of that they must have believed Bucks was capable enough to be a good coach for us in the long-term. I had my doubts back then but I was willing to go with it because I thought the club wouldn't be silly enough to appoint a coach if they didn't believe he had the necessary skills to be successful with us no matter who he was.
2). Eddie and the board seemed to believe that Mick was coasting along in his coaching job knowing that consistent finals finishes most years would be enough to secure and retain his job and they wanted us to go the next step, hence providing a coaching end date, which would force Mick to go all out because it was now or never for him to deliver us the ultimate success that we had been waiting for, for nearly two decades.
3). Eddie seem to indicate that he was concerned about Mick's health. Whether Mick had genuine health issues or the club has exaggerated these claims no one will ever know, but he was 56 years of age when the coaching handover decision was made so he wasn't exactly young for a typical AFL coach and I think Eddie knew Mick wouldn't last forever so he needed to plan for the long-term.
Anyway, you make the point that we should have let Malthouse leave at the right time but when would have the right time been? Mick didn't strike me as the type of person to walk away at his own accord and I think in the end it would have become messy one way or another if Mick was kept on beyond 2011. You just have to look at Mick's toxic presence at Carlton and the way he literally brought the whole club down around him when things were not going his way and he was beginning to fail.
Yes, the handover decision may be perceived to be harsh from Mick's perspective and I don't think delaying it by a year or two would have been the worst thing either, but I think Mick should have been grateful we gave him more than a decade to win us a flag when many other clubs are not as patient as that with their coaches and the fact he wasn't being sacked, but rather he was going to enter into a new designated role after 2011 with a cushy pay package should have left him grateful to the club for everything they had given to him rather than being vindictive towards us.
Mick was a great coach for us, so no one will dispute that but he won't ever be loved by the majority of supporters. It's sad how it ended but the lack of love towards Mick is self-inflicted more than anything else.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
 |
didick
didick
Joined: 17 Jun 2009
Location: Brisbane
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Heard Paul Roos accept responsibility for poor selections after their loss to the Power. Refreshing to hear a coach accept responsibility.
_________________
"The night is a very dark time for me" Chaz Michael Michaels |
|
|
|
|
Bob Sugar
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Location: Benalla
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Member 7167 wrote: | | Bob Sugar wrote: | | I thought Micks comments were pretty balanced, and he's more entitled than anyone around here to make comments regarding us, so <Snip - TTBN please, the mods>. |
Whey has he a right to comment. He is an ex-employee of the Collingwood Football Club. He currently has no association with the club at all. He is a bitter and twisted individual who has had an illustrious coaching career.
I would suggest that current Collingwood Members have a much greater right and vested interest than a past employee. |
Why does he have a right to comment? he was our head coach for over 10 years, and was what he said controversial? $£$%^%%$ Tony Shaw made Mick sound like a mute after he was sacked.
_________________
Defender...........
On the day before the first, Daicos created God.
You like this. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^He has a right to comment. And we have the right to say that his comments are not really about Collingwood, but about his bitter ego, and that this shows him to be a narcissistic attention-seeker. Case closed. .
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
