It has been said that the modern era is the hardest era to be a senior AFL coach, with the constant media scrutiny, the unrivalled pressure from the board, fans and media, and the now 24/7 aspect of the job these days.
In the last two years, two clubs, in Carlton and Melbourne, have removed coaches in the middle of their contract.
For Carlton, it unseated Brett Ratten in the middle of his contract to secure the services of Mick Malthouse. Melbourne recently sacked Mark Neeld, and has been replaced for the moment by Neil Craig as a caretaker coach, but it is no secret that the Demons would love to be coached by Paul Roos.
This has come by an interesting new addition to coaching advertisements. While clubs have sometimes gone for coaches with previous senior coaching experience, the addition of “premiership coach” by Carlton and Melbourne to their criteria for senior coach.
It’s interesting to compare the two clubs and where they are at to Port Adelaide, who replaced Primus after he stepped down as coach from the club and was replaced by Ken Hinkley, after a short coaching stint by Garry Hocking.
Carlton appointed Mick Malthouse after Brett Ratten could only lead the Blues to a ninth place finish. Ratten had been much maligned by the Carlton fan base, and these elements of the Carlton fan base called for the head of their coach after a disappointing season, in which Carlton aimed to push for top four.
Malthouse’s availability for the senior position, after being ousted at Collingwood by Nathan Buckley also played a factor in Carlton’s decision to terminate Ratten’s contract due to the availability of a “premiership coach” with serious senior experience across several clubs.
The football community undoubtedly respects Malthouse, and many Carlton fans believed that Malthouse’s appointment would be the silver bullet to Carlton’s issues and perhaps it would have a crack at the premiership after a gap of almost 20 years for the historically successful club.
While Malthouse deserves more time to work with the club, and fans calling for his ousting are far too hasty to pass judgment, it is clear that the Malthouse experiment has not gone to plan.
It is clear that some of Malthouse’s coaching decisions have been questionable, such as the continued usage of the undersized Bootsma and the lack of opportunities given to players like Bell, Duigan and Laidler after they stepped up well last year due to injuries to Carlton players.
Duigan’s exclusion from the side is particularly surprising given that he was considered a large part of the leadership group at the start of this season.
Over at Melbourne, a club that seems to be stuck in a perpetual loop of rebuilding has had 6 coaches over the last six years, and will look to add a seventh coach with what it hopes will be able to secure the services of former Swans coach Paul Roos.
The hopes are that Roos will be able to build the club, which none of the coaches before him have been able to do. The most interesting point is that the expectations on Roos, if he signs up, are completely the opposite of the expectations placed on Malthouse at Carlton.
While Carlton hope that Malthouse will be able to lead them onto a premiership, no one at the Demons are thinking that, and if Roos manages to lead them to be more competitive in general it’s already worth it.
Compare these two situations with what happened at Port Adelaide, after a shocking season last year. Port coach Matthew Primus stepped down and at the end of the season they appointed unknown coach Ken Hinkely.
In the off-season, Hinkley instilled a fitness regime at Port that looked to build up stamina of the players. At the start of the season, much to everyone’s surprise, Port won it’s first five games.
While none of the teams it had beaten were of note, the pace at which Port had set at the start of the season was truly a credit to Hinkley, his fitness regime and the recruiters who brought in Ollie Wines, Jake Neade and Chad Wingard as well as rejuvenating the careers of Justin Westoff, Jay Shulz, Hamish Hartlett and Angus Monfries.
While Port fell off the pace in the middle of the season, they still managed to claim major scalps, beating both the reigning premiers Sydney and Collingwood in successive weeks.
It’s clear that if Port are able to maintain their program there shouldn’t be any reason why the team cannot improve when they get a few more seasons into their younger players.
The idea behind selecting a “premiership coach” is that a coach who has led a team to a Premiership is capable of doing so again, potentially with another club, at least this seems to be the motivation behind Melbourne and Carlton’s decision to search for one.
However, the reality is that before these coaches had won a premiership, they were also not premiership coaches. A brief look at the past nine years shows that since the Lion’s reign of dominance only two “premiership coaches” had in fact been premiership coaches before they won.
The list includes some of the fantastic coaches such as, John Longmire, Alastair Clarkson, Chris Scott, Paul Roos, and John Worsefold. The only two coaches to have been premiership coaches before a premiership win has been Mick Malthouse and Mark “Bomber” Thompson who won two premierships in the last nine years after a highly successful stint with undoubtedly the best team of the last decade at Geelong.
The issue here is that until you win a premiership, you aren’t a premiership coach, the reality is successful coaches are coaches that are discovered and build a team not poached.
Edan Nissen
Roar Rookie
Yes, but the argument doesn't work in the case of Malthouse at Carlton.
Edan Nissen
Roar Rookie
Many Carlton fans were lead to believe that Ratten was an obstacle to winning a premiership, because many felt that he wasn't capable of taking the club to that level of success (I disagree with the assessment, but we probably won't find out whether he was capable or not now). Meaning that the belief was that the list was fine, and it was just the coach. The belief was very much that replacing Ratten with a coach who was capable (meaning they had done it before) of delivering a Premiership. I don't think it's fair to judge the two coaches head to head, after all, I don't think anyone could successfully argue that Malthouse's results at Carlton were better than Hinkley's at Port as without taking any other factors, Port finished ahead of Carlton with more wins for the season. Consider the following factors as to why Carlton's list has to be considered close to one of the best in the competition. Merely 2 years ago, Carlton was outright 5th on the ladder, and it's biggest criticisms was no key forward (Waite spent a large amount of time on the sidelines for various reasons, same with Kreuzer), and couldn't beat a Top 4 side. The next season, Carlton won it's first 3 games of the season, including a convincing 10 goal victory over Collingwood. However, the next week is when the wheels came off the wagon. Early in round 4 against Essendon, Carazzo (at that time Carlton's shut down player, who was in top form having shut down Pendlebury to 15 touches while racking 29 possessions and a goal). Without looking at that effect on games in past the Essendon one with the loss of Carazzo alone. For the match against Essendon, Carazzo was going against Stanton. Carazzo was subbed out in the first quarter, Stanton got 36 possessions, took 17 marks, had 5 inside 50s and kicked a goal. A few games later, Carlton lost one of it's best midfielders in Marc Murphy in a collision with Patrick Dangerfield. I'm not saying Carlton was a shoe in for top 4, but there was enough evidence before injuries to key players derailed Carlton's 2012 campaign to suggest that they were capable of improving on it's 2011 record, in which it came 5th. Then at the start of this season, a few players that had earned spots in the Carlton side, found themselves playing VFL football (Duigan, Laidler, Bell). While players who still require time to develop, such as Bootsma and Lucas, were given regular starting positions.
TomC
Roar Guru
Was he promised as a sliver bullet? I don't remember that, but I stand to be corrected. It's probably worth reviewing Port Adelaide's injury record over the last couple of years. I'm not sure why you say you're not comparing the two as coaches. That certainly seems to be what you're doing. I'm surprised that you're arguing that anyone who considered Carlton were a top 4 team was not guilty of overrating their list. It's pretty clear that they were.
Edan Nissen
Roar Rookie
Sorry Tom, but the judgement on which coach is better isn't based on their head to head record, which Malthouse leads Hinkley 2-0. It's about the fact that Hinkley, over the course of the season turned a previously average side into one that came in 7th after becoming a very difficult to beat team at AAMI Park. Carlton, looked very good, at stages throughout the year but Malthouse was unable to take a decent list and actually pull anything with them. I wasn't actually making a comparison between Malthouse and Hinkley as individual coaches, it was more a commentary of how and why the respective clubs picked them. Malthouse was supposed to be the saviour at Carlton, a Premiership coach to win a Premiership. As I said in the article, a single season is too quick to judge, but Carlton axed Ratten on the back of 1 poor season which was crippled with injuries. At the same time, Malthouse has undoubtedly had a better run with injuries this season and has performed worse. The arguments put against Ratten last year was that he wasn't capable of winning a Premiership, because he wasn't a Premiership coach. Hinkley, on the other hand, was picked from obscurity, and don't be surprised to see Hinkley leading the Power to becoming a contender in the next few years. As for Carlton's list being over-rated, take a look at the lists it has had over the last few seasons. Carlton was right to push for top 4 last season, with a very similar list to this years. In 2012, the following players played 16 games or less, Murphy (16), Walker (15), Laidler (4), Henderson (11), Waite (11), Duigan (16), Jamison (16), Carazzo (14). That is quiet a few key players in Carlton's midfield and defence. Murphy and Carazzo both had long term injuries, coming off their best seasons the year before. Duigan and Laidler were both important to the Carlton defence, not to mention the important role that Jamison plays week in week out taking the opponents no 1 big forward. In 2011 Carlton had a very good run injury wise, with only a few injuries coming to players at the end of the year, and they did well against West Coast in the West. Then 2012 they were hampered by injuries. This year, once again they have had a pretty remarkable run with injuries and they have gone backwards. Malthouse was promised to the Carlton faithful as a silver bullet, all I'm doing in this article is saying that it was a lie.
Cat
Roar Guru
One thing overlooked is the resources available to different coaches at the same club. Matthew Knights was viewed a failure at Essendon but was given half the resources Hird is getting. Brad Scott at the Kangas finally has the training facilities his predecessors never had. Ken Hinckley has arrived at a time in Ports history where the footy department spending is on the increase, same with Brenton Sanderson in Adelaide and whomever succeeds Michael Voss in Brisbane is already assured that Brisbane plans on increasing footy department spending and 100% player payments, neither of which Vossy got. If Roos takes over in Melbourne he will undoubtedly be given many more resources then the previous 6 coaches could have ever dreamed of, and that will have as much to do with his success as anything Roos will bring to the table directly.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Spot on TomC. Witness Ron Barassi's second coming to Melbourne, though many wish they hadn't. Depends a lot on your list. Johnny Longmire inherited a great team in waiting but put his own attacking style on it. Similarly Chris Scott. Both are a good chance of adding. Chris' bro' may yet add another premiership or two to the family.
TomC
Roar Guru
To be honest I think the logic of the article is essentially flawed. Two out of nine isn’t a bad strike rate for premiership coaches, and the previous six flags before that were won by coaches who aleady had premierships, so to say the least it is a highly selective stat. It’s also kind of strange to hear Hinkley compared favourably to Malthouse the week after Carlton beat Port at Footy Park. I know there was a big gap in expectations for those two sides before the season started, but I think that was largely due to Carlton’s list being overrated and the Power underrated. In my opinion, it’s not a strong enough example to build an argument around, particularly after only one season. Whether or not a coach has won a premiership, it’s important to get the right person for the job. But the evidence marshalled in this article against premiership coaches is actually pretty flimsy. I’d say generally premiership coaches who return at another club have a good record. On the positive side there is Malthouse at Collingwood, Matthews at Brisbane, Parkin at Carlton. On the negative side there’s Denis Pagan at Carlton, Alan Joyce at Footscray and Malcolm Blight at St Kilda. I’m sure there are other examples I’m forgetting, but without going through the list exhaustively it seems like there are more spectacular successes than spectacular failures.
Edan Nissen
Roar Rookie
At the moment it's hard to see any coach making Melbourne a better team, and I say that with no happyness as well. Even though I'm a Carlton Supporter, there will always be a place in my heart for a competitive Melbourne Football Club. Melbourne should eventually reach that point naturally with many of their young players developing naturally. Hopefully with a fully fit Dawes, Hogan, Clark, Viney, Frawley, Jones and Trengrove. As well as more time and development invested in the players coming up like Toumpas, Terlich, Watts and Blease, Melbourne can raise itself out of the doldrums.
Ian Whitchurch
Guest
Personally, I'd be hiring Mark Williams with Junior McDonald as his assistant.
Griffo
Guest
As a Melbourne supporter the only thing i fear with Roos is that he ends up like Blight at St. Kilda. Gets an offer too good to refuse but fails dismally cos his heart isn't in it. I get the feeling though that Roos doesn't want this outcome for how it might reflect on his coaching career and reputation. I think it's good that he's taking his time and not jumping at the money. He doesn't need to win a premiership at Melbourne to be a success. As the author said it's about making Melbourne competitive. If Roos turns it down I hope that maybe Mark Williams wants the job because he seems like a smart coach who still has the fire burning
Franko
Guest
Nice piece Edan, well worth reading. The problem for many clubs is taking a gamble on an unknown 'assistant', for every Longmire, you have a Primus and a Neeld. In the end, Port got lucky with Hinkley, he'd missed out on Richmond, Geelong and St Kilda and we had missed out on Eade and I think Scott Burns. At the end it was a marriage of conveniance that is producing delightful offspring. It would be a huge risk for Melbourne to do the same.