Carlton should give Ratten one more year
Columnist By Michael DiFabrizio, 11 Jul 2012 Michael DiFabrizio is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- AFL, Brett Ratten, Carlton Blues, Mark Thompson, Mick Malthouse, Paul Roos
The finger shouldn't be solely pointed at Ratten for Carlton's tough year (Slattery Images)
Related coverage
Prior to last weekend’s surprise win over Collingwood, the jungle drums were beating about the future (or lack thereof) of Brett Ratten as Carlton coach.
As they say, a week is a long time in football. Though Ratten clearly isn’t safe yet.
Talk of a Mick Malthouse or Paul Roos takeover is likely to reemerge after the Blues’ next loss, and will be intense if finals footy does not eventuate.
My view on this is simple: Maybe Ratten is the right man to lead Carlton to another flag, maybe he isn’t. But surely he’s entitled to a bad year.
Last year, there was some very public pressure from board level for him to win a final. If he didn’t do that, he’d most likely have been sacked then.
Now, he needs to take the next step again to avoid being crucified.
That may sound like a harsh description, but club president Stephen Kernahan could’ve gone a little further when he told Eddie McGuire, “Brett Ratten will coach to the end of the year.”
If replacing the coach is indeed the path Kernahan and the rest of the board decide to go down, it would show a remarkable lack of respect for Ratten. After all, how often do teams conveniently improve slightly year after year after year?
Honestly, it just doesn’t work that way.
If you are a side on the rise, you can almost be guaranteed a down year will happen at some point. Collingwood were five points away from a grand final in 2007, but struggled to get to a similar position again until 2010, the year it won the premiership.
Obviously Malthouse had a few more runs on the board than Ratten does now, but imagine if the Magpies decided he needed to be sacked after one of those poorer years.
Geelong provide a more extreme example. In 2006, their season was eerily similar to the one Carlton are enduring now. Pre-season hype was backed up by some strong early wins, but from there the wheels fell off and they couldn’t make the finals.
The Cats very nearly sacked Mark Thompson that off-season, but in the next three years he became a dual premiership coach.
If there’s a consistent trend that a coach is failing to deliver, by all means, pull the trigger.
But this is Ratten’s first year in charge of the Blues where the team is likely to go noticeably backwards.
They were a four-win team the year he took over in 2007. Then they were a 10-win team. Then they spent two years in that 7-8 range on the ladder. Then they finished fifth and won a final.
Yet one bad year and all of a sudden he can’t coach?
Give me a break.
It’s becoming obvious that some clubs buy a little too much into pre-season hype, and it’s those same clubs that get a little too intimidated by media pressure later in the season.
Perhaps the best approach is to ignore what’s written and instead, take a look at some not-too-recent history and accept no club has a perfectly smooth ride to greatness.
Besides, as last week showed, sometimes when things appear to be at their darkest, something unexpected is just around the corner.
Michael DiFabrizio is completing his journalism degree. As an AFL writer, he has been an expert columnist at The Roar since 2009, and appeared in The Age and on ABC television and radio. Follow Michael on twitter @mdifabrizio
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Passionate about your AFL? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily AFL email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
The Crowd Says (28) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- AFL, Brett Ratten, Carlton Blues, Mark Thompson, Mick Malthouse, Paul Roos
July 11th 2012 @ 9:07am
brendan said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Micheal i understand the logic of your argument however personally i feel that a change of coach may be a good thing for Carlton at years end.One final win irregardless of this years injuries ,if that is the case is hardly a great coaching record for Ratten in his tenure at the helm(people forget Essendon had the bye in the last round last year and as Ratten himself pointed out to West Coast the bye was a disadvantage).Changing coaches often brings out the best in sides due to a new a strategy and a fresh approach .Like everyone you cite the example of Geelong and Mark Thompson’s coaching record( how often did Thompson say these blokes coach themselve) as an indicator to stick with the incumbent but equally his departure resulted in a fresh approach from Chris Scott resulting in not only a flag but a well tuned run to a dominant final series.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:23am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Brendan I don’t think the bye makes as much of a difference as there was between the blue and the bombers last finals series.
Thompson said “these blokes coach themselves later in his tenure not in 2007 or 2008.
And while the blues have only won one final, the three they have lost have all been interstate and all very close and hard fought games.
I really believe that if someone new were to take over they would be getting the rewads of Rattens work.
And sorry to be a pedant but irregardless isn’t a word.
July 11th 2012 @ 4:27pm
brendan said | July 11th 2012 @ 4:27pm | Report comment
Irregardless is considered a word that is a combination of irrespective and regardless.Just as you are entitled to your opinion so am i but the judge of Ratten’s tenure will be the last eight weeks of the year.
July 11th 2012 @ 4:36pm
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 4:36pm | Report comment
Considered by who,people don’t know that they should use irrespective or regardless? For example you could of said “irrespective of injuries” or “regardless of injuries”. Why would you need to combine to words that essentially mean the same thing?
And I have said the last 8 weeks will determine Rattens future so our opinion is the same, however I am very confident the blues will win the majority of the 8 remaining games.
July 12th 2012 @ 1:12pm
brendan said | July 12th 2012 @ 1:12pm | Report comment
Its in the dictionary thats enough for me.Hold on Macca Micheals headline is Carlton should give Ratten another year for you to state “” I really believe that if someone new were to take over they would be getting the rewards of Rattens work”" imples you agree with him rather than agreeing with my contention that he has the rest of the year to save his job.
July 12th 2012 @ 1:32pm
Macca said | July 12th 2012 @ 1:32pm | Report comment
Brendan – I just googled it and in the urban dictionary there it was -
irregardless
A word used by uneducated people intending to sound intelligent
Used by people who ignorantly mean to say regardless. According to webster, it is a word, but since the prefix “ir” and the suffx “less” both mean “not or with” they cancel each other out, so what you end up with is regard.
So I suppose you are right, but it is a pyhrric victory.
As far as me agreeing with Michael or you, I completely agree that at this point Ratten deserves another season and if the season goes as I expect (ie winning at least 6 more games and making finals) he should be given another season. However if by some chance he loses every game from here on in or something similar then I doubt he will be given that chance,
July 12th 2012 @ 1:40pm
Macca said | July 12th 2012 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Also -
This is from “Grammar girl” – Although it’s true that the American Heritage Dictionary, the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, and the Oxford English Dictionary all list the word irregardless, they also note that it’s considered nonstandard. Listing a word as nonstandard is a way that dictionaries concede that a word is in common use, but isn’t really a proper word.
So basically the people who make dictionaries have conceded we are all to stupid to use the correct word.
July 12th 2012 @ 1:53pm
Nathan of Perth said | July 12th 2012 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
Irregardless (
)of that Macca, this is a sports site, not a spelling bee!
July 12th 2012 @ 1:57pm
Macca said | July 12th 2012 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
I know Nathan and I make more than my fair share of spelling mistakes but irregardless is a word that annoys the hell out of me.
I did apologise for being a pedant.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:18am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
Great article Michael. The hysteria about getting Ratten was clearly ridiculous, I am not sure if there has been a coach who despte his success has been under this much pressure for this long. I would also add that with the blues run home and key players returning from injury “going backwards” isn’t assured either.
On top of that the injuries the blues have had will in fact improve the club for next year Watson, McInnes and Bootsma have all had good exposure to the top level and Brock McLean got the chance at an extended run and took it. On top of that emerging forwards Mitchell and Casboult are finally fit and could emerge next year.
The blues do have some list management issues, I would suggest Thornton, Bower & Russell have played their last games for the blues but I doubt they would have much currency. Robbie Warnock is the interesting one, with Kreuzer clearly more suited to playing in the ruck and Hampson the better key forward of the trio do the blues move Warnock on despite all his attributes and potential? With Collingwood and Port Adelaide short ruckmen (assuming Jolly is getting close to the end) could he be part of a play for Cloke or Boak?
July 11th 2012 @ 9:47am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Warnock’s out of contract isn’t he? There have been rumours for a little while that GWS have been looking at him and they wouldn’t have to trade for him as they’ve still got this year to sign uncontracted players. Obviously the AFL will give them some compensation, assuming that is actually happens, but I’m not sure how much he’s worth given he’s struggled to nail down a spot in the Blues best 22.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:55am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:55am | Report comment
Yeah Matt he is out of contract and this will possibly lead the blues into another Jacobs situation where the potential is obvious but because the achievements aren’t there yet and they don’t need to be traded the blues might get screwed on the compensation.
Last years finals series demonstrate what Warnock can do if he get’s a good run with injury and if the blues do let him go I have no doubt he will be an asset to whatever team takes him but can the blues really keep him?
July 11th 2012 @ 10:10am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:10am | Report comment
I don’t think the Blues can keep him unless they start to play him more often. He’s probably on some reasonable money as well given his reputation when signed from Freo. Like Seaby at the Swans he’s probably worth a spot but not for the money that he’s most likely on.
The main issue here is that, as you mentioned, most of the players that the Blues might look to move on have very little trade value. Warnock is one who might have, due to the potential, but GWS won’t have to trade for him and his achievements to date will probably mean that the AFL wouldn’t give Carlton much compensation for him.
That being said Carlton wouldn’t need to use Warnock to get Cloke given that he will be a free agent, although the latest talk is that he will re-sign with Collingwood very soon anyway.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:21am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:21am | Report comment
I must sya I am not really up with all the ins and outs of free agency, I know if a club offers him money Collingwood have the opportunity to match it but if they don’t what if any compensation do they get?
I wouldn’t mind having Boak run through the midfield at Carlton either.
As for value, I think the blues big hope would be with the expansion clubs, Russell, Thornton and Bower could all be hnady for them, maybe if they packaged them together they might get a pick in the 30′s.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:33am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:33am | Report comment
My understanding of free agency is this. If a player has been at one club for:
0-8 seasons: He’s not a free agent and can only leave by the traditional draft/trade route.
10+ seasons: Unrestricted free agent and can go wherever he wants.
8-10 seasons: This is where it gets a little bit complicated.
If he’s in the Top 10 ,or Top 25%, paid players at the club then he is a “restricted” free agent (I’m not sure how you can be called both free and restricted at the same time but that’s another issue) which means that he can leave for nothing if another club offers him more money than his current club. However if his current can match the financial offer of another club then he can’t walk away. He can still choose to leave but must be traded or run the draft gauntlet.
If the player has been at the same club for 8-10 seasons and is in the bottom 75% of of players at his club (in terms of salary) then he is an “unrestricted” free agent.
Cloke’s a “restricted” free agent so he can’t walk away if Collingwood can match the financial package offered from another club. The issue for Collingwood is that they don’t have the cap room to match what other clubs can offer. Of coruse Cloke can choose to take less money and stay if he wants to, which it now appears that he will.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:35am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Thanks
July 12th 2012 @ 5:05pm
Macca said | July 12th 2012 @ 5:05pm | Report comment
Matt F – Warnock just resigned with the blues.
Could this just be to strengthen theirposition at the trade table?
July 11th 2012 @ 9:40am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:40am | Report comment
The big problem for Ratten is that he said pre-season that the Top 4 was the aim. It’s always dangerous to state your goals like this, just ask Peter Schwab!
As for what should happen with Ratten, it depends how the Blues perform during the rest of the year. If they can string some wins together, make the Top 8, and be competitive during the finals then that should be enough for him to hang around. However if the Collingwood win was a one-off and they return to their form of the previous two months and fall out of finals contention then the heat will justifiably be on him.
July 11th 2012 @ 9:51am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 9:51am | Report comment
I agree that the rest of the year will be critical but not that making the top 4 an aim pre season should be held against him. Firstly surely everyone is aiming for the top 4 and secondly as the situation changes so should the targets.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:22am
Matt F said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:22am | Report comment
I wouldn’t say that every team has Top 4 as an aim. obviously every team would love to finish there but I don’t think that clubs like the Tigers, Bulldogs, Lions, Demons etc were ever considering Top 4. The problem for Ratten is that, when you make such a goal public knowledge, then you set supporter expectations. If you fail to achieve the goal then you have to look at reasons why they didn’t make it.Those reason will generally come down to, lack of talent, bad coaching or injuries.
It’s hard to suggest that the Blues don’t have talent, especially given their upward trend over the past few seasons and how close they were to the top 4 last year.
Injuries have obviously played a part but they’re not the only club to have this issue. Two of the sides with the worst injury lists have been Collingwood and West Coast yet their both well on track for a Top 4 finish. You could argue that they both have more depth then the Blues but list management is partly the coaches responsibility. It’s also hard to use injuries as an excuse when they didn’t stop them beating Collingwood last week. The other issue is how big of an impact have the injuries had? If a “Top 4″ side has injuries but still finishes 6-8 then that’s probably acceptable but if they finish 10-12th then that’s probably considered very dissapointing.
That leads to the coaching. I’m not going to make a judgement on ratten just yet as there is still a long time to go in the season. If Ratten can get the Blues into the finals then he’ll probably be given a pass mark given their injuries but if they fall away then he has issues.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:33am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Matt F – I have said here before Carlton are still developing their depth where as West Coast and especially Collingwood are further along the development curve. On top of that the depth the blues have have been hit with injuries as well, Casboult, Mitchell, White, Davies and Rowe have all missed considerably games this year and are the most likely replacements for the likes of Waite & Laidler.
Plus if Carlton have the same injuries next year the likes of Watson, Bootsma and McInnes will be in much better shape to handle the extra load and hopefully the likes of Lucas and Buckley will be able to mature with another preseason under their belt.
The depth is coming it is just taking time, especially in the key positions which always take longer.
July 11th 2012 @ 11:24am
Nathan of Perth said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:24am | Report comment
For what its worth, a season like this should go a long way to developing your depth. 2010 led into 2011 and 2012 for us in large part because of the depth it provided combined with some extra fresh legs.
July 11th 2012 @ 11:35am
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 11:35am | Report comment
You only have to look at the performance of Watson in recent weeks to see the benefits, the exposure to AFL really benefits these blokes. Hopefully McInnes will do the same.
Brock McLean is the other big winner, knowing he wasn’t going to be dropped at any time seems to have given him some confidence and now he is getting 25 plus touches, laying tackles and getting clearances, everything we recruited him for. A midfield with Judd, Carrazzo, Robinson and Mclean inside and Murphy & Simpson outside is suddenly a lot more dangerous.
July 11th 2012 @ 5:07pm
Hamish said | July 11th 2012 @ 5:07pm | Report comment
Are the Giants easing out Sheedy so they retain Williams to prevent him going elsewhere judging by the Kevin Sheedy medal announcement today
July 11th 2012 @ 5:13pm
Macca said | July 11th 2012 @ 5:13pm | Report comment
Not sure Hamish but does the B&F medal have to have a name? Surely they could just had being the best and fairest until someone at the club had done something worhty of the name.
Now they could have the medal named after a bloke who coached their club for a year to one win.
July 11th 2012 @ 10:42pm
Little Aussie Battler said | July 11th 2012 @ 10:42pm | Report comment
Are you a Collingwood or Essendon supporter?
July 13th 2012 @ 7:17pm
Michael DiFabrizio said | July 13th 2012 @ 7:17pm | Report comment
Negative.
July 19th 2012 @ 10:05pm
john said | July 19th 2012 @ 10:05pm | Report comment
A week is indeed a long time in footy, and two weeks is even longer. Poor old Rats. What’s been overlooked here is the arguments against him at the concrete level of coaching style. He certainly has been prone to making a few questionable moves, in one respect, and in another sometimes seems a bit slow on the uptake.