There are two distinct schools of thought on what the Carlton Football Club should do with their embattled coach – some say he is the best person to lead the team through a rebuild and should be given another lengthy contract to get the job done, others want him sacked yesterday.
Up until very recently I was willing to continue down Mick’s path – concerned that jettisoning him now would simply waste the work he has done to this point as another coach builds the team in their own image.
I have now changed my mind.
1. No plan B
We all know Mick’s game plan, as he has had the same one for close to a decade now.
It revolves around long kicking, scrambling the ball forward in anyway possible (i.e hacking it forward from contested situations) and staying as close to the boundary as possible. But we are now in the third year of implementing this game plan, the results are getting worse, and we have seen no changes in strategy.
It seems Mick is prepared to keep turning over players at each year’s end until he has a team that can do what he wants, rather than adapt a plan to suit the team he has.
The really odd thing about this lack of plan B is that his predecessor copped all sorts of grief for not being able to go to a plan B when a game started going against him – Malthouse won’t adapt after two seasons going against him!
2) Selection
Given Malthouse’s game plan requires a forward able to crash packs and take contested marks, questions have to be asked why Levi Casboult wasn’t selected for Round 1 and why he was dropped for Round 5 so the Blues could play Cameron Wood and Robert Warnock in the same team. The line trotted out as to why he was dropped was so that he could get some confidence, which makes perfect sense as nothing gives a player confidence like being dropped!
The other major issue with selection is the opportunities provided to young players – Carlton are supposedly rebuilding this year and in the entire time Malthouse has been in charge it has been obvious we need to get games into some of our younger players so that they can improve and provide a platform for the future. Yet Nick Graham is still playing VFL, despite being in the best players 17 times from 21 starts, Dylan Buckley has never been given more than three games in a row despite winning a rising star nomination last year and many plaudits for his game against St Kilda this year, and Nick Holman was given just one game last year where he was played out of position in a side Port flogged by 20 goals.
On top of that even when these young players are selected they are routinely used as the sub and given limited game time before being sent back down.
What makes this treatment of young players even more curious is that Malthouse is selecting players like David Ellard and Dennis Armfield, who while they are good soldiers (and I have a lot of time for their effort) are 28 and 26 and are probably the definition of list cloggers.
3. Lack of performance
This is the biggest issue, a lot of people who defend Malthouse say that he couldn’t be expected to do any better with the list he has, but if you look at the 2011 semi-final side that lost to West Coast by under a goal you will see 12 players still on the list, with Bryce Gibbs and Matthew Kreuzer not playing the West Coast game due to injury.
The players missing are Jeff Garlett, Mitch Robinson, Eddie Betts, Jeremy Laidler, Heath Scotland, Nick Duigan, Bret Thornton, Setanta O’Hailpin, Aaron Joseph and Marcus Davies.
The first four have moved on under Mick’s reign and are currently performing adequately at other clubs, with the blues receiving essentially Dale Thomas and Clem Smith in return, the next two retired and the final four were delisted.
Now people can make their own judgements about the ranking of the replacements in today’s AFL, but the players who have come in are the equal of those who they replaced and the argument could be made that they are slightly better.
Some will observe that Jarrad Waite was not included in the 2011 side and for completeness I should point out that he only played 12 games in 2011 and kicked just 16 goals.
Now the question for me becomes if Brett Ratten could take that 2011 side to within a whisker of a preliminary final (after taking similar sides to finals in 2009 and 2010), why can’t Malthouse take the list he has out of the bottom four? And if the answer is that we have lost all of our best goal kickers since then whose fault is that – we lost Betts because his money was used to recruit Thomas (whose relationship with Mick is self evident), Mick delisted Garlett (who didn’t seem happy under Mick anyway) and Waite was in and out of the side under Malthouse and took job security at North.
For me if the the coach is unable to adapt, is unwilling to play the younger kids to build for the future, and unable to get the best out of his list he can not be kept on.
AUSI
Guest
Keep it simple when thinking about Malthouse - his utterances, many of them, are bizarre - make no sense and everybody just laughes or shrugs it off.. He has had it - past his use by date and there is no way the players or any rational person can respect him. Any replacment coach MUST be better. The palyers are another problem - replace the coach first and let the new coach do his own recruiting.
Macca
Guest
If we compare Bell of 2015 to Robinson of 2011 we see Bell has 2.7 less disposals, the same tackles,07 less frees against, 1.4 less clangers, just 0.9 less effective disposals, 0.1 less 1%ers and 1.3 more goals per game. I would say Bell is a step up.
Macca
Guest
Gecko - I was only talking about the side that played in the 2011 Semi - Gibbs missed it so he comes in for Scotland - if I didn't do that we are saying there are 13 players who are the same as 2011 and someone like Davies gets squeezed out and we put Cripps, Docherty or Bell out onto the "extra depth list" with shown below. Also players like Gibbs and Murphy were still very young and should really be playing better football now than they were 4 years ago. There are lots of like for likes and Betts - Thomas is a downgrade but I would say at least Cripps and Docherty are better than the players they are replacing. Also Mick has chosen to let the likes of Betts, Garlett, Laidler and Robinson go - so if their replacements aren't better that is on Mick. And again the players I include as replacements don't include Buckley, Jaksch, Smith, Boekhorst, Whiley, Di ck and Graham (5 of which were recruited under Mick) or say Viojo Rainbow who was drafted last year - the depth should be greater. As I said at the very least the list is at least as strong.
Gecko
Guest
Macca that's an interesting list of replacements since Ratten's time. Not sure what you mean by Scotland being replaced by Gibbs. Gibbs was a 50+ game player in 2011 so Ratten had Scotland AND Gibbs. The other players I'd rate as roughly replacing like for like, except replacing Betts with Thomas has turned out to be a downgrade. Also, with Judd breaking down so often nowadays, he has provided less leadership since Mick took over. I don't think you've made a strong argument that Mick's list is equal or better. If Mick is replaced, either during or at the end of the season, I think the new coach will also struggle for a few years until they get some decent recruitment or player development.
Macca
Guest
See Simpson is out of today's game - the Blues go in with plenty of their best 22 sitting on the sidelines but I am looking forward to seeing live how the young blokes like Graham, Cripps, Buckley and Smith go.
Macca
Guest
Andrew if Kreuzer gets fit I would play him as the number 1 ruck and Casboult as the ruck forward - I don't think we fully utilize Kreuzers strengths playing him as the ruck forward and Casboult offers more than Wood or Warnock.
Andrew
Guest
Kreuzer if ever fit can play same role but unfortunately he has to be on the park 1st. His injury plagued time at the Blues has been quite heart breaking to himself and his supporters. I hope for his sake he is past the reoccurring injuries and can spend the rest of his career being the player we want him to be.
Macca
Guest
I agree that it will be morale sapping but he is integral to our structure (the only player who can play the ruck forward role) and he crashes packs. On top of that this year they dropped him for round 1 where they played him in the ruck and brought him back for round 2, then they dropped him last week where they played him on the ruck and brought him back- how does dropping him for 1 week, not playing him forward and then brining him back without kicking a goal help?
Col of Brissie
Guest
Macca, you also have to take in to account the morale sapping influence on the other players when they bust a gut to get the ball into the forward line and see their efforts rewarded with a miss from 20 metres. They could probably handle the occasional miss but when it it happening on a regular basis it has got to have an effect. Does it deflate you when you see him miss easy shots? Imagine how his teammates feel.
Col of Brissie
Guest
Both Chris Judd and Marc Murphy have publicly backed Malthouse and stated that he is the coach to take the club forward, but you say they are not playing for him. David Parkin and Wayne Carey have said Malthouse is the right person to oversee a rebuild. The only media person to say Malthouse should be sacked is Mark Maclure and he funnily enough was the strongest critic of Brett Ratten and called for him to be sacked. I find it funny how the players and other identities have stated that MM is the person to take Carlton forward but other people outside of the club know better.
Andrew
Guest
Also makes him that much more valuable to the Blues. Buckley and Dochety have shown that they are capable and Tuohy as well but I think at this stage they will be b graders. I have an in form Yarran as an A grader at his best. He can break from the packs, carry, step round players with his pace, even outrun quick players, then hit a lead on the chest or slot goals on his own. Players with that class have been fairly rare at the Blues and I wouldn't want to trade that player out.
Andrew
Guest
No but if he spills that mark, will he put that bit extra for a coach he gets on well and has shown faith in him rather than drop him at first mistake? I'd wager that if he had a good relationship with his coach, he may go for a second effort eg an offensive tackle and try his best to make ammends. I agree that they should give their all every game but it doesn't mean that they do/will.
Andrew
Guest
They did play for Ratten in his last year, just not the injured ones. That year was one of the worst years I'd seen with injuries at the Blues. We were lucky to get 10th with that injury list.
Macca
Guest
Col- My argument would be leave him up show some faith and take the pressure off so he grows in confidence and starts to kick them. We agree it confidence but it the chicken and the egg thing
jax
Guest
I think that there is something deeper going on than just MM and his relationship with the players. I'm not sure that the board and/or management are 100% behind Mick and if that's the case it can't be helping matters. The players aren't playing for him and that's unusual for a MM led team and I can't recall seeing this level of non-commitment in any of the other teams that he has coached previously. That would make me stop and think twice before sacking him. I always thought that it was strange that they replaced Ratten with Mick for the purpose of pushing deeper into Sept overnight. I knew that it would take him time for him to improve the team because Ratten and MM are chalk and cheese. Ratten was an offensive coach while Mick is defensive. Ratten let them play freer, less encumbered footy while Mick demands total commitment and discipline to his defense first game plan. They were always going to go backwards before they could go forwards for mine and that's how it has played out although I didn't think they would as bad as they have been. I'd be digging a little deeper to see what is going on behind the scenes at the Blues before I sacked Mick. Maybe it is time for someone else to take over at the end of the year I'm not sure but I am very, very surprised that these guys aren't playing for Mick ATM. They didn't play for Ratten at times either, especially in his final year when he needed the wins to gain a new contract and the same is happening again but this time to Mick. I think the players need to have a good hard look at themselves and so does the board and management. The guy that has a 30 year+ coaching resume and a proven track record of getting buy-in from his teams can't seem to do it at the Blues so is it Mick or something much deeper? Carlton had a lot of problems long before Mick arrived. Maybe that's where they should start looking before sacking a coaching legend.
Col of Brissie
Guest
Macca, don't get me wrong I like Casboult and he has great potential but maybe when he is constantly missing kickable goals it affects him mentally and his form drops off. Maybe that is why he gets sent back to the seconds, to try and build his confidence up. We don't know because we aren't involved.
Col of Brissie
Guest
Then a good enough reason to kick the goal!!!!
Macca
Guest
No when Casboult is lining up I think he is thinking if I miss this Malhouse will drop me again!
Macca
Guest
I am not saying Malthouses is the only issue Col- if we could trade for a quality key forward it would clearly be of benefit
The Original Buzz
Guest
The team needed to make a statement against Collingwood and make a statement they did. Their performance in Malthouse's hour of Glory against his former side said it all!