Pressure on Buckley to justify the ‘Kirribilli agreement’
Columnist
By Vince Rugari, 19 Jan 2012 Vince Rugari is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- AFL, Chris Scott, Collingwood Magpies, Mick Malthouse, Nathan Buckley, Rodney Eade
Collingwood Captain Nick Maxwell is consoled by Assistant Coach Nathan Buckley after the AFL 2011 Toyota Grand Final match between the Collingwood Magpies and the Geelong Cats at the MCG, Melbourne. Slattery Images
Related coverage
Has there ever been a first-year AFL coach under more pressure than Nathan Buckley? It’s going to be incredibly intriguing to watch the 2003 Brownlow Medalist’s debut season in charge of Collingwood, assuming the mantle after a less-than-smooth transition of power from Mick Malthouse.
Instead of becoming the club’s director of coaching this year, Malthouse is now happily retired and enjoying a role in the media – and the spotlight is firmly on the man who used to be his captain.
The ‘Kirribilli agreement’ was always going to be a controversial one and is guaranteed to take up plenty of column inches this season.
It’s for good reason. The next 12 months will not only vindicate or condemn the Collingwood hierarchy for their decision, it will also test the ability and the character of Buckley.
Unlike Mark Neeld, Brendan Sanderson, Scott Watters and Brendan McCartney, Buckley will get no honeymoon period.
The expectation is that he is up to the job. That was the whole point of his apprenticeship under Malthouse. He had nearly three years to absorb as much knowledge as he could from the triple premiership coach to be ready for the moment he took over. By now, he should be equipped with everything he needs.
He has a capable group of assistants, headed by Rodney Eade – former St Kilda legend Robert Harvey, 251-gamer Matthew Lappin, sophomore defensive coach Max Hudghton and two-time premiership winner Ben Hart.
Eade is key, and a luxury for Buckley. ‘Rocket’ is fresh out of the game and is widely (perhaps questionably) regarded as one of football’s great tacticians.
He was arguably stiff when sacked by the Western Bulldogs last season and his appointment suggests the Pies believe he still has plenty to offer.
Aside from his coaching staff, Buckley also is employed by a club that is innovative, willing to invest in its football department and with enough cash to send their best players off to Arizona in the middle of the season to get some miles in their legs.
He has also inherited an excellent playing list, certainly one of the best in the competition. What’s more, last year’s premiers Geelong will lose retired pair Cameron Ling and Brad Ottens, who were key in their grand final win. Collingwood are still good, their nearest rivals will be weaker – this all adds to the pressure for Buckley.
His character will also be given a fierce examination. He admitted last week to The Age that his failure to win a premiership as a player still eats away at him. He should turn that into motivation.
He was a champion footballer, possibly one of the best the game has ever seen. It would be of great advantage to him if he could bring that same hunger for the ball to his new gig. A guy like Buckley would not have entered coaching if he didn’t think he would engross himself in and obsess about the art of guiding a team to the top.
The real heat, though, will be on the club that decided to give Buckley his opportunity at the expense of Malthouse. It’s still remarkable that the Magpies went ahead with the transition of leadership. It was a big statement, that they could afford to do away with wily Malthouse because they thought they had another mastermind waiting in the wings.
There’s every chance they could. By winning the flag in 2011, Chris Scott showed there are no bounds to what a rookie coach can do if he enters a well-structured environment with the necessary resources.
Collingwood’s resources are beyond necessary – they have a terrific list, a great coaching panel, a favorable draw, a reputation that strikes fear into the hearts of other teams and plenty of money to splash around.
But with great power, to mangle the words of Uncle Ben Parker, comes the unenviable pressure of being in charge of the most popular club in the AFL.
Buckley is expected to deliver straight away, with no grace period. If he slips up, both coach and club will be held to account. How this all unfolds will be captivating.
Love your AFL? The Roar has openings for live bloggers - with possible paid opportunities. Tell us which upcoming game you'd like to trial on.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
AFL articles
- Giants lose NAB Cup games but win respect (58)
- NAB Cup banished from free to air (53)
- GWS show plenty of promise at Blacktown (53)
- Television ratings for Fox Footy impresses (49)
- How to watch AFL in 2012 (48)
- Time for the AFL to make that conference call (44)
- Giants inspired to prove doubters wrong (38)
- Exciting AFL prospect to play in NAB Cup (2)
- Collingwood Magpies: 2012 season preview (12)
- Time to change the AFL finals system (26)
- Kevin Sheedy: Father, Teacher and Madman (11)
- 2012 AFL season preview: North Melbourne (3)
- Cats face tough AFL task, says Scott
- Swans leadership group has balance, says Jack
- Explore:
- AFL, Chris Scott, Collingwood Magpies, Mick Malthouse, Nathan Buckley, Rodney Eade
January 19th 2012 @ 7:39am
Redb said | January 19th 2012 @ 7:39am | Report comment
I think there is less pressure than if Collingwood were 2011 Premiers.
It’s somewhat of a blessing in disguise that the Pies lost as this helped both Malthouse and McGuire to find a reason to split up what was already an unconscionable deal for Malthouse after he coached the team to the 2010 flag.
There will be lots of media scrutiny on Buckley for sure, however he’s not the type to get his feathers ruffled easily. I reckon he will handle it pretty well when Collingwood slide down the ladder this year
January 19th 2012 @ 10:07am
BigAl said | January 19th 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
I’m sure you’re right here Red.
I remember watching the GF last year when the camera focused on Buckley and thinking . . . now there’s a man caught between a rock and a hard place.
January 19th 2012 @ 7:52am
Jeff Dowsing said | January 19th 2012 @ 7:52am | Report comment
Oh yeah, Mick & Ed were jumping for joy at 5.30 grand final day last year… So many trees suffered unnecessarily for all the tosh written about the Mick/Bucks situation.
As to the article, not sure how playing the top 5 sides twice constitutes a favorable draw but that is another CFC myth that gets recycled every year it seems.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
January 19th 2012 @ 11:59am
amazonfan said | January 19th 2012 @ 11:59am | Report comment
Which tosh are you referring to specifically?
I remember how many critics questioned whether Malthouse would be at Collingwood next year, and it turns out that we were right.
January 19th 2012 @ 8:28am
piesman2011 said | January 19th 2012 @ 8:28am | Report comment
When Collingwood, Buckley and Malthouse signed the agreement at the end of 2009 Malthouse had been at Collingwood for 10 years without a flag (unlucky 2002, 2003). Maybe the coaching hand over agreement sparked Collingwood in 2010 to win the flag maybe not. What I do know for sure is that if I could go back in time I certainly wouldn’t change it in anyway.
January 19th 2012 @ 8:52am
Steve said | January 19th 2012 @ 8:52am | Report comment
Pretty sure Hudghton has returned to the Saints. The favourable draw comment is laughable most journos summary of the draw was that the pies had the hardest draw of 2012.
January 19th 2012 @ 9:13am
Vince Rugari said | January 19th 2012 @ 9:13am | Report comment
You’re right on Hudghton, Steve – Collingwood need to update their website.
Also, the Pies don’t have to travel until round 7, have only five games outside Victoria and have one stretch of seven games in a row at the MCG. That’s certainly not unfavourable.
January 19th 2012 @ 9:28am
The Cattery said | January 19th 2012 @ 9:28am | Report comment
The pies have to travel five times this year??!!
I’m surprised Eddie hasn’t called for a royal commission!!
January 19th 2012 @ 10:29am
TomC said | January 19th 2012 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Going to defend Steve here. Collingwood play each of last year’s top five twice (Hawthorn, West Coast, Carlton and Geelong) and each of GWS, Gold Coast, Brisbane and Port only once. Five away games outside Victoria would be (I think) probably on par with all other Victorian teams.
Compare that to the Adelaide Crows, who get to play GWS, Gold Coast and Port Adelaide twice, and only one of last year’s top five (Geelong) twice.
Collingwood’s draw would have to be one of the toughest any Victorian team has had in recent memory.
January 19th 2012 @ 11:16am
Jeff Dowsing said | January 19th 2012 @ 11:16am | Report comment
It’s more about who you do and don’t play twice. And given Collingwood’s record, the interstate reference doesn’t bare too much relevance. And whilst the first trip is R7, like last year, if most of the interstate games are the second half of the year and leading into the finals, how’s that advantageous?
January 19th 2012 @ 5:04pm
Phelpsy said | January 19th 2012 @ 5:04pm | Report comment
Pies travel 5 times – which is comparable to other clubs surely. And people forget that Eddie brokered a deal to stop the farcical siutation of finals having to be played at the MCG – and thus a non-vic team having to play there when they had earned the righjt to play at home – part of that was Collingwood playing there games there for most part – given the crowds – the MCG ripped up the previous contract. To say Pies have a favourable draw is stupid at best – have a look at it – please……. what does each other Victorian club travel?
January 19th 2012 @ 11:31pm
TomC said | January 19th 2012 @ 11:31pm | Report comment
McGuire stopped that? News to me.
I thought it was stopped because it was a freaking ridiculous rule.
February 6th 2012 @ 12:05am
Richard said | February 6th 2012 @ 12:05am | Report comment
Here you go Steve. The ‘Pies have the toughest draw this year. They had a tough draw last year too. And the year before that.
“NEW Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley faces the toughest draw in the AFL in his debut season, according to statistics gurus Champion Data.”
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/numbers-add-up-to-a-tough-draw-for-collingwood/story-e6frf9jf-1226262703781
Those whingers who snipe at the ‘Pies about their draw are just that, whingers.
Despite the tough draw, the Collingwood Football Club is the most successful club in the history of Australian Rules Football, and one of the most successful clubs in world sport. Good on you ‘Pies!
February 6th 2012 @ 2:02am
amazonfan said | February 6th 2012 @ 2:02am | Report comment
Most successful? This is not the first time you’ve called CollIngwood the most auccessful club, yet that is simply absurd, considering two clubs have won more flags than you. As for being the most successful club in the history of Australian Football, several SANFL/WAFL clubs would have something to say about that, such as Port Adelaide.
Collingwood is a great club, and it is a giant, but it’s not the only giant. Not in the slightest.
Furthermore, why should non-Collingwood fans care how successful Collingwood is or isn’t?
January 19th 2012 @ 9:00am
The Cattery said | January 19th 2012 @ 9:00am | Report comment
I like the reference to the Kirribilli Agreement, especially since Harry presented Julia with her own pies jumper yesterday.
January 19th 2012 @ 9:56am
TomC said | January 19th 2012 @ 9:56am | Report comment
The thing that strikes me about this handover is that the current Collingwood team very much belongs to Malthouse. He built it over a decade, and has always seemed to get the most out of the players. Who’d have thought players like Krakeour and Leigh Brown could have been solid contributors to a team that finished top of the ladder?
I’m not sure anyone could get the same performances out of that squad that Malthouse did, and I’m particularly unsure that a man with such narrow experience of AFL footy as Buckley can.
January 19th 2012 @ 11:00am
Redb said | January 19th 2012 @ 11:00am | Report comment
“and I’m particularly unsure that a man with such narrow experience of AFL footy as Buckley can.”
It’s interesting you say it that about Buckley whom I respect immensely as a player and a person. However, in an interview on Pardon the Interruption (PTI) on ESPN this week, Buckley hinted he’d love nothing more than to be still be playing and he gets frustrated with not being able to help out on the field. I’m sure this would also happen with James Hird, great champions act on instinct when they play and rise to the big occasions, the trick for them as coaches is to translate that intangible onto their players.
Time will tell, its too early to assess Buckley as a coach.
January 19th 2012 @ 12:17pm
Ian Whitchurch said | January 19th 2012 @ 12:17pm | Report comment
Redb,
And thats the scary bit. From the outside, its looking like Leigh Matthews and Tony Shaw all over again.
January 22nd 2012 @ 10:06am
Veni, Vedi, Sherrin Calcitravi said | January 22nd 2012 @ 10:06am | Report comment
Perhaps a return of the old Captain-Coach arrangement last seen with Jezza?.. now ‘d like to see that from both clubs on ANZAC day.
January 19th 2012 @ 11:18am
Jeff Dowsing said | January 19th 2012 @ 11:18am | Report comment
“I’m not sure anyone could get the same performances out of that squad that Malthouse did, and I’m particularly unsure that a man with such narrow experience of AFL footy as Buckley can”
Surely you’re trolling?
January 19th 2012 @ 12:01pm
TomC said | January 19th 2012 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
No Jeff I’m not trolling. And I take offence at that, frankly.
I guess you don’t like me calling Buckley’s experience ‘narrow’. What I mean is he’s only ever played and worked at Collingwood, bar one season as an 18 year old at Brisbane. The only successful head coach he’s ever worked with is Malthouse, and he hasn’t had the rounded experience of most successful AFL coaches.
I think it’s self-evident that if you work at a range of teams, with a range of people, you’ll have a broader understanding of the role of an AFL head coach, and a larger scope of ideas you can apply to your team.
January 19th 2012 @ 12:48pm
Redb said | January 19th 2012 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
As far as coaching is concerned Buckley has had just 2 of those 15-20 years as a coach, it is narrow. If the club thought he was ready to step right up on his own in they would not have appointed Rodney Eade as mentor type coach like Bomber Thompson at Essendon is to James Hird or as the plan originally outlined for Malthouse.
On the other hand Collingwood talk about their player development system and game plan not relying on any one person. This will be tested in 2012. Pie fans I know reckon Buckley just has to steer the ship, avoid the rocks,etc.
January 20th 2012 @ 2:10pm
Jeff Dowsing said | January 20th 2012 @ 2:10pm | Report comment
Apologies Tony, took your opinion slightly the wrong way and was a bit OTT.
But I would contend that 280 games at the highest level having played under Walls, Matthews, T Shaw & Malthouse, plus having captained a club for 8 years inc 2 GF’s – and the tutelage of his father and upbringing that had him play in NT and at Port Adelaide under John Cahill, would have Buckley reasonably well rounded and qualified to coach at the highest level.
Funny, no-one really said the same about James Hird.
January 20th 2012 @ 4:11pm
TomC said | January 20th 2012 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
I did.
In fact, virtually everyone who doesn’t bleed red and black had at least a question mark over James Hird’s experience.
Here’s just one of the many articles.
http://www.theroar.com.au/2010/09/24/a-warning-to-essendon-and-james-hird/
As for Buckley’s experience, that would be one year under Walls, two years under Matthews, four years under Shaw (you reckon he learnt much there?) and twelve under Malthouse as a player and assistant. I think it’s fair to say that Malthouse’s influence dominated the time of Buckley’s career where he learnt about leadership and strategy.
January 20th 2012 @ 4:22pm
Richard said | January 20th 2012 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
I don’t think your point is of much value, frankly. If only “experienced” people got jobs, then absolutely no-one would be working – everyone has to get a start. Buckley has had a fine preparation for his role, as a player, a coach and an AFL assistant coach. He has worked with some of the best in the business. He’s well supported by his employer, has solid mentors in place, is an intelligent and capable man, and is ready for the role.
Footy clubs are multi-million dollar businesses these days with serious commitments to sponsors, members, employees, suppliers and the code. Clubs like Collingwood and Essendon, and a few others now well understand that. The question is not whether the person is “experienced” whatever that means, but whether he/she is capable, prepared and supported. Buckley ticks all three.
Don’t know what your beef is, but it’s clear you’ve never run an organisation.
January 20th 2012 @ 4:56pm
TomC said | January 20th 2012 @ 4:56pm | Report comment
I feel like I’ve already explained the value of diversity, but I would suggest that in any field where someone is put in charge of 40 odd highly paid professionals, plus a team of support staff, in a high profile role; a varied range of experiences, working with a wide variety of people, would be considered an asset, if not a necessity.
I don’t feel like I have any ‘beef’. I’m not interested in revealing anything that’s on my CV, but I will just say that I feel Richard should be careful about using his black-and-white tinted glasses to read into my background.
Maybe Buckley will be an excellent coach. Malthouse seemed to teach Worsfold a lot, after all. All I’m saying is that Buckley would improve his chances of success if he’d spent more time working with different senior coaches at other clubs before he took on this role.
January 20th 2012 @ 6:12pm
Richard said | January 20th 2012 @ 6:12pm | Report comment
Diversity? Well lets see. Seems to me Buckley’s worked with some of the best. Walls, Matthews, Malthouse. He’s recently worked closely with four other current coaches, great coaches too, Scott, McKenna, Neeld and Watters, and has close relationship with a fifth, Sanderson. He also worked closely with that clever strategist and six year NM coach Dean Laidley. He has Rodney Eade (and Mick Malthouse and Eddy Maguire) as mentors. He has played for three successful “A” grade clubs, Port Magpies (where he played in a premiership team), Brisbane and CFC. He has a proven record as captain, has coached successfully (AIS & CFC), and has worked in the media. He’s a Magarey medalist, a Brownlow medalist, a Norm Smith Medalist and club champion six times. According to Mike Sheahan, he’s one of the top fifty players of all time. That’s diversity.
Would he be any better prepared if he had spent time at Port with Primus, or Carlton with Ratten, or with Longmire at the Swans or Hardwick at Richmond ? I can’t see it. Buckley’s preparation for his role is much more extensive than Hird’s , it’s even more extensive than Chris Scott’s who is already a premiership coach.
Buckley may have learned one or two more tricks by being at another club for a while, but I don’t think it would have been worth the wait. With my black and white tinted eyes did you say, I reckon he’ll learn more in the next year as the man in charge than he’d learn in a decade with another club right now. And he’s picked the right group of players at the right time under the right administration to do it
You’re overestimating the so called common wisdom about working at other clubs. He’s ready.
January 20th 2012 @ 7:48pm
TomC said | January 20th 2012 @ 7:48pm | Report comment
‘You’re overestimating the so called common wisdom about working at other clubs’
I would argue that the Magpies have been guilty in the past of underestimating that ‘common wisdom’. As were Brisbane and Port Adelaide recently. Time will tell with Essendon.
In 1979 Alex Jesaulenko was the last player-coach to win a premiership. Since then the only two coaches to win flags without any leadership experience at another VFL/AFL club were Tony Jewell in 1980 and Alan Joyce in 88 and 91. And both of them had been successful VFA senior coaches.
Out of curiosity, did you throw Eddie Mcguire in as a mentor to check if I was reading the whole thing?
January 20th 2012 @ 9:11pm
Richard said | January 20th 2012 @ 9:11pm | Report comment
“I would argue that the Magpies have been guilty in the past of underestimating that ‘common wisdom’.
The Magpies are the most successful club in the history of the AFL. They were a founding club of the VFL, have the most members, they have been in more grand finals than any other club, they have played in finals more than any other club,, they consistently get the biggest crowds. If that’s underestimating the common wisdom, then long live it.
Your anti-Black&White bleatings betray you. You would argue? Of course you would.
January 21st 2012 @ 12:34am
TomC said | January 21st 2012 @ 12:34am | Report comment
Pot calling the kettle black and white, Richard?
January 20th 2012 @ 5:19pm
Redb said | January 20th 2012 @ 5:19pm | Report comment
“Funny, no-one really said the same about James Hird”.
Funny, I just gave a comparison to James Hird above and elsewhere. That Hird like Buckley goes into senior coaching as one club champion players with a mentor senior coach.
January 19th 2012 @ 10:32am
Greg Mac said | January 19th 2012 @ 10:32am | Report comment
I think Buckley might have it a little easier than when Scott came to Geelong. It was pretty clear at the end of 2010, that the Cats had to make some changes in order to be successful… I think Collingwood on the other hand could largely go through 2012 with 2011′s MO and still make the GF if not win it… remember they only lost to one team last year, and as the article points out, the cats have lost some key players.
January 19th 2012 @ 2:50pm
Vince Rugari said | January 19th 2012 @ 2:50pm | Report comment
I agree with that. Some people expected a Geelong slide in 2011. Nobody is expecting Collingwood to slide this year.
January 19th 2012 @ 10:54am
brendan said | January 19th 2012 @ 10:54am | Report comment
Collingwood have lost an All Australian -Davis, a pinch hitter ruckman-Brown and McCarthy.Tarrant is 32 so cannot be expected to get over injury as quickly as a younger player.Cut Buckley some slack they were fortunate to make the G/F last year so Micks celebrated game plan only delivered one flag .This agreement smacks of arrogance particularly on Malthouse’s behalf ,thankfully he had the grace too leave at the right time.They have many senior players who have played there best football ala Didak, Jolly and Johnson and if Nathan Brown doesnt come back to peak form quickly enough a top four finish might be a great effort by Buckley.
January 19th 2012 @ 11:36am
Jeff Dowsing said | January 19th 2012 @ 11:36am | Report comment
Agree Brendan, Davis is a big loss as he made a massive impact as a precise rebounding defender with built in X-Factor.
But Leeroy… didn’t fire too many shots anyway in 2011, granted a replacement still needs to be found. Keep an eye on Witts, he may be something else. McCarthy…um?
Jolly will again be a telling factor in the Magpies’ fortunes.
As to the article itself, I think the importance of the coach is overplayed. As Yabby Jeans told me, the two most critical things that determine a premiership are money and what players you have at your disposal.
January 19th 2012 @ 12:06pm
brendan said | January 19th 2012 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
I know Brown wasn’t at his peak in 2011 but he was a revelation in 2010 the year they won it.
January 22nd 2012 @ 10:15am
Veni, Vedi, Sherrin Calcitravi said | January 22nd 2012 @ 10:15am | Report comment
‘at his peak’- is that a reference to how he did his second major knee of the year while on the verge of coming back Rnd 18 as he was getting fitness training in at Arizona? If so,well punned.
January 19th 2012 @ 11:51am
Rester said | January 19th 2012 @ 11:51am | Report comment
People need to step back from the hype around Mick Malthouse and look at the facts. For the amount of time he coached, three flags is not a great return. In his time at Collingwood, they got into five grand finals (including the draw) and won one. Last year he didn’t coach the finals at all well. He insisted on playing Didak who, great player though he has been for the Pies, gave us nothing. He made changes late (consider how long he left an injured Ben Reid on when he was getting a bath.)
The biggest force behind the Pies revival has been their recruiting team headed by Derek Hines.
January 19th 2012 @ 2:55pm
Vince Rugari said | January 19th 2012 @ 2:55pm | Report comment
If Mick Malthouse is not a good coach, then who is? Kevin Sheedy has four in in 27 years. Leigh Matthews has four in 20 years. Malthouse is only one flag behind these two coaching legends. Is that not a ‘great return’?
January 19th 2012 @ 5:12pm
Phelpsy said | January 19th 2012 @ 5:12pm | Report comment
He should have had more – that’s the thing – poor coaching against Brisbane in the first one cost us – and he took it out on Cloke – who never recovered – and poor coaching last year cost us as well. And we were lucky not to lose 2010 first up….. to slow to make moves – and needed to cut Didak for sure last year.
January 19th 2012 @ 7:27pm
piesman2011 said | January 19th 2012 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
Malthouse is a strong believer in sticking to the game plan. Once he has put a player in a position they are going to play the whole game there no matter what. This has backfired on a few occasions. Locker V Farmer (farmer kicked 9 goals) in 2000 Brown V Brown in 2011?. Reid ( injuried many peoples opinion) V Hawkins 2011 grand final, are just a few examples of this. His thinking is that:
1. if I move them off the oponent that is destroying them then they will loose all confident in themselves. If I leave them on the opponent they may start to do better.
2, It will stuff up another match up or even the whole team game plan by shuffling players around.
I must admit that I have screamed a few times at Malthouse to get the player off (including in the 2011 GF). But he sticks to this philosophy. Sometimes it probabaly even works.
January 20th 2012 @ 1:58pm
Jeff Dowsing said | January 20th 2012 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
Phelpsy, I’d contend that MM’s coaching was a major factor to Collingwood even making the 2002-03 & 2011 Grand Finals. And it wasn’t poor coaching that cost the 2002 GF, nor ruined J Cloke’s career (he was a limited player tactically utilised very well). Sure, Tarrant not being dhifted to Hawkins was in hindsight a mistake, but Collingwood was never going to win the game. At best it might have been a 3 goal instead of 6 goal loss.
January 20th 2012 @ 12:13am
amazonfan said | January 20th 2012 @ 12:13am | Report comment
I think it is a fantastic return. To win even one flag is a great return, and personally I think Malthouse is better than Matthews (but not as good as Sheedy.)
January 20th 2012 @ 2:09pm
Richard said | January 20th 2012 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
Malthouse has been great at Collingwood. He’s the man as far as I’m concerned. His contribution, along with Eddy and the others, has been to recreate a great club from the basket case they inherited. We may only have one flag to show for it, but it has been a hell of a ride with some great moments along the way. Now, once again, I’m proud of my footy club, proud to wear the black and white on the weekend. Thanks Mick.
January 20th 2012 @ 2:13pm
Jeff Dowsing said | January 20th 2012 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
+ 1
January 20th 2012 @ 12:06am
amazonfan said | January 20th 2012 @ 12:06am | Report comment
I can’t really comment on his specific coaching performances (although to come so close against an eventual triple premiership team is amazing), however I completely disagree that that three flags is not a great return for the amount of time he has coached. It is massively difficult to win a flag, and for him to win three is an incredible achievement.
I consider Malthouse to be one of the ten greatest coaches of all time, and there are five reasons why: (in no specific order)
1)He has coached three clubs to at least a preliminary final in four straight decades. This showcases incredible consistency, and that he was able to do so with different teams (Footscray, WCE, Collingwood) is even more impressive.
2)He has built and rejuvenated teams. Rester, you may not be happy with the results of 2002 and 2003, but that he coached Collingwood to consecutive GFs three seasons after you finished last is an amazing achievement. Add to that he further rejuvenated Collingwood, and was able to coach you to a flag seven seasons later, is amazing. Hines and the recruiters have done an incredible job; however considering that when Malthouse arrived, you were a wooden spoon team, and he almost took you to a flag, and then he actually did so eight years ago, I think he deserves tremendous credit.
3)He has coached three flags. I don’t care what anybody says, to coach a flag is very good, to coach two flags is amazing, to coach three flags is extraordinary. Some coaches may coach for 30 years, and not win a flag. To say that three flags are not a great return for the amount of time he has coached, completely understates how incredibly difficult it is to win a flag. Don’t forget that since Malthouse begain coaching (1984), four Victorian clubs (Melbourne, Richmond, St Kilda, the Bulldogs) haven’t won any premierships, and three other Victorian clubs (Carlton, Collingwood, North Melbourne) have won less than three flags, Malthouse has therefore won more flags than all but three of the ten current Victorian clubs.
I understand that many passionate fans want their clubs to win as many premierships as possible, however you are lucky if you win even one. Three premierships is amazing, and I don’t think it should be lessened.
4)He has coached for the second most number of games ever, over 28 seasons. Yes, longevity is of by itself not necessarily a measure of greatness, however at the very least, it indicates that Malthouse was pretty darn good to coach for so long.
5)He coached the Eagles to the finals ten years in a row. IMO this was his greatest achievement, and this is why he will truly be remembered as one of the greatest coaches of all time (although I think he needed a third flag to cement his top ten credentials.) To coach a club to the finals more consecutive seasons than most people coach is simply astonishing. Yes, he had stars, and yes, the salary cap wasn’t as aggressively policed, however it doesn’t lessen his achievement. He is still the only person to have done so in the modern game, and most coaches don’t come close.
I hate Collingwod with a passion, but I have a tremendous respect for Malthouse, even though he made some idiotic comments (such as calling Milne a rapist.)
January 19th 2012 @ 10:39pm
Strummer Jones said | January 19th 2012 @ 10:39pm | Report comment
I do very much understand your clever reference to the “Kirribilli Agreement” because Mick Malthouse looks very similar to John Howard, but Buckley doesn’t look anything like Peter Costello. Otherwise, a very good piece of journalism.
January 20th 2012 @ 12:03pm
Vince Rugari said | January 20th 2012 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
The real question is – where is Tony Abbott in all this?
January 20th 2012 @ 1:46pm
Strummer Jones said | January 20th 2012 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
Geez, Tony Abbott coaching Collingwood….
Player (P) “Can I play full forward this week”
(TA) “No”
(P) How about we push Harry up the field this quarter
(TA) “No”
(P) I need to attend my closest friends funeral
(TA) “No”
(Eddie) I need to phone a friend
(TA) “No No No!”
January 20th 2012 @ 2:03pm
Richard said | January 20th 2012 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
Stop mentioning Tony Abbott. I feel like I just stepped in something.