Another year same piss weak leaders going out with a whimper. When the side is sliding it's up to the leaders to control the game.
Murphy - Let Chaplin waltz through him, which lead to a goal. Jogs after his player when they have the ball. Just a rubbish game.
Gibbs - Did he actually do anything positive? How many kicks did he completely stuff up?
Henderson - Every game he get's into position to mark and drops it. He is a terrible forward, pure and simple. When your one highlight for the night is a knock on to Menzel as a number one forward it's just poor.
Jameson - Is not a team player. He will worry only about his player and if he gets out of position, oh well, I'll still get picked next week.
Rowe - A battler at best, found a home at CHB and because of a stupid selection had to pushed all over the ground covering ruck, KP back because Jaksch was too light for Griffiths.
I was howled down for asking should we trade Murphy, Gibbs. I'm saying now we should!
We will go no where with those two cruisers leading this club. I thought last year they both turned the hardness corner but soft as butter.
We only appear to have one leader and he wears the number 5. The rest can go and get as far as I am concerned. Raydan, maybe we should have traded some players for youngsters that actually give a crap about working hard to win a game.
Jogs after his player when they have the ball. Just a rubbish game.
We have a list full of them, first they turn it over, then they sook it up, drop their heads and jog sulking after the opposition!
The ones I love the most, the guys who finger point when they lose a 50/50 like every time they have one. We shouldn't call it 50/50 at our club, we should call it a 0/100 turnover!
We have a list full of them, first they turn it over, then they sook it up, drop their heads and jog sulking after the opposition!
Agree, but when you're a Captain you have to set an example. I suppose he has. ::)
By the length of the Flemington Straight. Our blokes (to a man) don't play for the coach or more importantly, the jumper.
Or each other.
I used to love playing team sports, going out there with mates, knowing that they had your back and you have theirs.
I'd like to play with White, Cripps ..... but I wouldn't give my back to any of the rest.
I'd like to play with White, Cripps ..... but I wouldn't give my back to any of the rest.
Actually White wasn't too bad tonight, he can probably sneak into our best, FMD in amongst our best! :o
If hell froze over and Geelong, Syd or Haw put in a performance like that, after one qtr of tripe, Selwood, Jack and Hodge would have got them together before going to the huddle , read them the riot act and the tripe would have ended instantly. Our Captain would go to the huddle and get his hair done. They show no signs of wanting to better themselves or recognise poor effort.
Really we should have had the balls to trade away every one of those first picks, might have landed a good footballer with some nous, instead of those generational down hill skiers....
I'd trade Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuser, Henderson and Menzal and start again. But they wont, so we will have another decade in the wilderness.
Thought Henderson was pretty good.
Does drop a few but his first half was good and FMD he does some hard running.
We'll be lucky to keep him if we keep going crap.
Murph and Gibbs were embarrassing.
Another year same piss weak leaders going out with a whimper. When the side is sliding it's up to the leaders to control the game.
Murphy - Let Chaplin waltz through him, which lead to a goal. Jogs after his player when they have the ball. Just a rubbish game.
Gibbs - Did he actually do anything positive? How many kicks did he completely stuff up?
Henderson - Every game he get's into position to mark and drops it. He is a terrible forward, pure and simple. When your one highlight for the night is a knock on to Menzel as a number one forward it's just poor.
Jameson - Is not a team player. He will worry only about his player and if he gets out of position, oh well, I'll still get picked next week.
Rowe - A battler at best, found a home at CHB and because of a stupid selection had to pushed all over the ground covering ruck, KP back because Jaksch was too light for Griffiths.
I was howled down for asking should we trade Murphy, Gibbs. I'm saying now we should!
We will go no where with those two cruisers leading this club. I thought last year they both turned the hardness corner but soft as butter.
Bottom line, we failed on the big stage witnessed by a national audience. Shame. Our club is dying...
I really feel for younger supporters of the CFC, sorry, but there was... really (believe it or not), a time when our club was strong and feared. But not now, our club is surviving only on reputation and as a moderate corporate entity which can provide some income to sponsors, and coaches.
We are no longer an on-field force, just a reputation.
@Baggers
Hardly a reputation Baggers - more of a memory or piece of nostalgia for old blokes (like me). :(
Give Hendo a 5.5 out of 10 so up against the other leaders a grand effort.
Too many prissy, pretty boys at Princes Park.
Any why are our lads ALL so slow over the ground?
MM a 1 out of 10. failed to do anything when Richmond woke up....
Our forwards didn't chase their defenders and they exposed that.
Really we should have had the balls to trade away every one of those first picks, might have landed a good footballer with some nous, instead of those generational down hill skiers....
I'd trade Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuser, Henderson and Menzal and start again. But they wont, so we will have another decade in the wilderness.
Trade Menzel? Surely not.
If hell froze over and Syd put in a performance like that
They did, in last year's Grand Final.
How did a kid called McKintosh tear us a new one. It was the first time he ever stepped out on the MCG. I know he is a decent sized unit, but he also made us look like snails when he decided to run with the ball.
Another year same piss weak leaders going out with a whimper. When the side is sliding it's up to the leaders to control the game.
Murphy - Let Chaplin waltz through him, which lead to a goal. Jogs after his player when they have the ball. Just a rubbish game.
Gibbs - Did he actually do anything positive? How many kicks did he completely stuff up?
Henderson - Every game he get's into position to mark and drops it. He is a terrible forward, pure and simple. When your one highlight for the night is a knock on to Menzel as a number one forward it's just poor.
Jameson - Is not a team player. He will worry only about his player and if he gets out of position, oh well, I'll still get picked next week.
Rowe - A battler at best, found a home at CHB and because of a stupid selection had to pushed all over the ground covering ruck, KP back because Jaksch was too light for Griffiths.
I was howled down for asking should we trade Murphy, Gibbs. I'm saying now we should!
We will go no where with those two cruisers leading this club. I thought last year they both turned the hardness corner but soft as butter.
agree
Like :)
i snipped my own work ..agree with the comment above
@Raydan
Good post - we have a massive on-field leadership problem with no one who has any clue about rallying the troops. MM knows that and hence his remarks tonight about losing Daisy who, although struggling for form, does show more of the qualities needed in this department. It's a very poor situation though if we are relying on him.
@Raydan
Good post - we have a massive on-field leadership problem with no one who has any clue about rallying the troops. MM knows that and hence his remarks tonight about losing Daisy who, although struggling for form, does show more of the qualities needed in this department. It's a very poor situation though if we are relying on him.
we are rebuilding. sos has a massive amount of work to do.. for the first time tonight I am starting to question MM as a future coach...
Is Murphy injured.....or simply more interested in a pretty boy haircut?
Should not be CFC Captain.
we are rebuilding. sos has a massive amount of work to do.. for the first time tonight I am starting to question MM as a future coach...
Tonight really emphasised just how big SOS's task is - I just pray we have recruited the right person in him!
They did, in last year's Grand Final.
But the leaders looked like the gave a feck.
Tonight really emphasised just how big SOS's task is - I just pray we have recruited the right person in him!
SOS has a tough gig....not much to trade, Henderson to re-sign and probably not much in the free agency market with
Dangerfield almost certain to line up for Geelong.....
It starts again with U18 players.....
Not sold on SOS. He did not come with 35 draft picks to help out this time.
Not sold on SOS. He did not come with 35 draft picks to help out this time.
Most would agree with you that SOS is still a work in progress and unproven but also needs a chance to prove himself....
Most would agree with your that SOS is still a work in progress and unproven but also needs a chance to prove himself....
Agree. But some people on her think he will solve all our problems. Wont happen
SOS has a tough gig....not much to trade, Henderson to re-sign and probably not much in the free agency market with
Dangerfield almost certain to line up for Geelong.....
Its start again with U18 players.....
With our drafting last year I wonder if the club understands that yet? We could waste another year while that penny drops.
When the weakest links are our top shelf blue chip players, then we have big issues.
Murphy GiBBS and Yarran all turned the ball over on our half forward line which resulted in a counter attack and goal.
Clem smith did it once but he's a noob so he's allowed.
4 times 12 point turnarounds. Add the poor accuracy at times and there is no wonder we lost.
Mind you Richmond are rubbish. We made them look good tonight.
Mind you Richmond are rubbish. We made them look good tonight.
And that's the concern. We'll play like contenders against sides like Geelong (still lose mind you) and then struggle against crap like Richmond.
When the weakest links are our top shelf blue chip players, then we have big issues.
Murphy GiBBS and Yarran all turned the ball over on our half forward line which resulted in a counter attack and goal.
Clem smith did it once but he's a noob so he's allowed.
4 times 12 point turnarounds. Add the poor accuracy at times and there is no wonder we lost.
Mind you Richmond are rubbish. We made them look good tonight.
Yarran had 4 ineffective disposals from 18 where as Gibbs went at 50%. If you think we lost on the back of 3 players then you're an idiot. It's back to the same old lack of Football smarts. Nobody got to the right position, the ball just fell into the hands of Richmond players, and they just wanted it more. We smashed them in clearances but we just don't work as a team. It's been so obvious for the last 3 years at least.
Did we miss Robbo? I'm thinking yes.
No we didn't, Gibbs kept kicking it around his body so we effectively had another Robbo out there.
Hehe very funny but I'm thinking we most definitely missed his hardness around the ground, especially when the Tiges got a run on, we lacked a player who was willing to put their body on the line and change the momentum of the game. Bell is like a d-grade Robbo.
Missed his attack on the ball, didn't miss his crap disposal and lack of intelligence.
Cripps will give us hardness, but a couple of years away.
Missed his attack on the ball, didn't miss his crap disposal and lack of intelligence.
So the players that were there to take his place how did they go? People criticised Robbo but fact is he always won contested ball under pressure. His kicks were always hurried for that very reason.
Cripps will give us hardness, but a couple of years away.
That's in a couple of years but what about now? Do we even have someone out there willing to fly the flag or their mates? Possibly Simon White (who was really good BTW) and that's it! Mick has ripped the heart out of this club and replaced it with emptiness.
So the players that were there to take his place how did they go? People criticised Robbo but fact is he always won contested ball under pressure. His kicks were always hurried for that very reason.
That's in a couple of years but what about now? Do we even have someone out there willing to fly the flag or their mates? Possibly Simon White (who was really good BTW) and that's it! Mick has ripped the heart out of this club and replaced it with emptiness.
Thats where Mitch Robinson was good. Had no skill, but fought the fight when it was required
So the players that were there to take his place how did they go? People criticised Robbo but fact is he always won contested ball under pressure. His kicks were always hurried for that very reason.
That's in a couple of years but what about now? Do we even have someone out there willing to fly the flag or their mates? Possibly Simon White (who was really good BTW) and that's it! Mick has ripped the heart out of this club and replaced it with emptiness.
Good to see you acknowledge White. You have been a decent critic of him, but you saw exactly what you get from him. 100% effort 100% of the time. On a game breaker to top it off.
I don't think Robbo would've made a difference, except in the turnover column perhaps.
Bell is supposed to be a robbo v2.0 but i remember any big collisions that back that up.
I did see Clem Smith give a decent hit though. Encouraging signs from the 1st gamer.
To me the biggest disappointment was Murphy. Simply not good enough. Did next to nothing all game both with and without the ball.
I reckon we missed Casboult out there...but i', not sure who you drop to bring him in as everyone in a similar role did 'ok'.
Everyone can have a bad game. Hopefully it is the rare occasion where all our leaders had one and it doesn't occur again.
Gee the skills were so good, glad Robbo wasn't there. :-\
Another year same piss weak leaders going out with a whimper. When the side is sliding it's up to the leaders to control the game.
Murphy - Let Chaplin waltz through him, which lead to a goal. Jogs after his player when they have the ball. Just a rubbish game.
Gibbs - Did he actually do anything positive? How many kicks did he completely stuff up?
Henderson - Every game he get's into position to mark and drops it. He is a terrible forward, pure and simple. When your one highlight for the night is a knock on to Menzel as a number one forward it's just poor.
Jameson - Is not a team player. He will worry only about his player and if he gets out of position, oh well, I'll still get picked next week.
Rowe - A battler at best, found a home at CHB and because of a stupid selection had to pushed all over the ground covering ruck, KP back because Jaksch was too light for Griffiths.
I was howled down for asking should we trade Murphy, Gibbs. I'm saying now we should!
We will go no where with those two cruisers leading this club. I thought last year they both turned the hardness corner but soft as butter.
I can understand your frustrations, Ray, but I don't know that getting rid of all these guys is the answer.
I would, however, replace Murphy with Carrots or Simmo as quickly as possible. Murphy has struggled with the role on the field and struggled with injury. He needs to go back to the VFL and get his issues fixed. We cannot afford a leader who is so far off the pace at the moment.
Murphy has never been the same since Dangerfield knocked the stuffing out of him.
Murphy has never been the same since Dangerfield knocked the stuffing out of him.
no, after Hodge poleaxed him
Not sold on SOS. He did not come with 35 draft picks to help out this time.
the most uninformed statement
attending the Carlton function last month with butterfant, sos and MM
SOS answered that direct question - even if you have 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks - you still have to pick correctly
sos had a pick 50 at gws and was traded out at mid 20's
my take..hughes and rodgers had heaps of 1st and 2nd rounders and selected spuds...
We only appear to have one leader and he wears the number 5. The rest can go and get as far as I am concerned. Raydan, maybe we should have traded some players for youngsters that actually give a crap about working hard to win a game.
God help us when Judd retires... he's the only the one who looked like he gave a fark last night.
Yarran had 4 ineffective disposals from 18 where as Gibbs went at 50%. If you think we lost on the back of 3 players then you're an idiot. It's back to the same old lack of Football smarts. Nobody got to the right position, the ball just fell into the hands of Richmond players, and they just wanted it more. We smashed them in clearances but we just don't work as a team. It's been so obvious for the last 3 years at least.
Milkit I sense you are clouded by Yarran's potential. That was arguably his worst 4 quarter effort for the club in his career, and clearly was rattled by Morris.
The fact is, on ability he is a top 5 player of the game, and yet last night he was an also ran.
We can't afford that from one so gifted.
Now when I look at a player, and see potential I'm going to compare them to our clubs history. Yarran is better than Andrew McKay. Did you ever remember a 4 quarter effort from McKay that even resembled last night?
Mind you I didn't know about the knee "looseness". Still we need a grade output from a grade players else we won't win which speaks for where we are at as a footy club.
Murph is continuing to prove that he was a token selection as captain for publicity etc and nothing else. Richmond were on the charge and only a couple points behind and he got walked through by Griffiths on their fifty heading towards goal.
Any captain in the AFL let alone the better ones would have gone in just to make a collision any sort of way, they were pushing at this point someone had to push back not stand and try to hug him as he coming towards you. There is no natural or instinctive behavour about Murph as a captain and he can't sense the moment in games and was never a leader. Same goes to the rest of the "leadership" group.
Milkit I sense you are clouded by Yarran's potential. That was arguably his worst 4 quarter effort for the club in his career, and clearly was rattled by Morris.
I thought whilst he made a few errors, he at least looked a threat and was still trying to swing the game our way with 10 minutes to go. Yarran is far from our greatest problem.
Yarran and Docherty were the only two guys who tries to take the game on, they didn't have much support.
Murph is continuing to prove that he was a token selection as captain for publicity etc and nothing else. Richmond were on the charge and only a couple points behind and he got walked through by Griffiths on their fifty heading towards goal.
Any captain in the AFL let alone the better ones would have gone in just to make a collision any sort of way, they were pushing at this point someone had to push back not stand and try to hug him as he coming towards you. There is no natural or instinctive behavour about Murph as a captain and he can't sense the moment in games and was never a leader. Same goes to the rest of the "leadership" group.
I did a little experiment for myself, I went thru our entire playing list and had a good hard look at who I would choose as captain if I could wave my magical fairy wand and sprinkle some fairy dust (minds out if gutter please!!), I really could not find anyone. So as much as people are banging on about Murphy being a questionable captain, who else would you choose to step in right now?
History tells us that great players careers have been hampered or held back by being made captain. The additional responsibility, the burden and the expectation simply bogs them down and they just cant be themselves because they are simply not being themselves. Does the club announce that Murphy is stepping down because he cant cope because that is a huge slap in the face no matter which way you look at it.
I can only speak personally here from my own experience as being a manager where I had to lead 27 people in a medium size company.. I had some pretty basic philosophies that I always followed. I always set the expectation and foundation of what I expected from everyone else. I was never late for work, I never took sickies. No job was to lowly for me to do, I remember a few times jumping inside the large bin skip hosing it down and brushing it down from all the mold and stuff that would be rotting inside, my god that stunk! I would always assist others and help them, I was never afraid to take chance and put my neck on the line for others to help them out whether it was for work or things outside of work. I relished getting my hands dirty. I told people clearly and concisely when they were performing well/poorly, I don't believe in grey areas, things are black and white for me. If i could do it then i expected everyone else to do it, its simple really.
This is what i expect of the captain, he should be running the hardest, being the loudest, crunching the hardest, he should be expectation and foundation of the rest of the team, leading by example, because if our captain is doing by golly the rest of the team should be bloody well do it also.
^^
And I reckon he was doing that in the second half of last season, and it showed in our results.
Can anyone confirm if he had an injury interrupted preseason?
^^
And I reckon he was doing that in the second half of last season, and it showed in our results.
Can anyone confirm if he had an injury interrupted preseason?
I believe it was not sure to what extent. He needs the creativity back in his game though. Forward pocket while he gets his mojo and fitness back?
God help us when Judd retires... he's the only the one who looked like he gave a fark last night.
All too true. He really lifted in the last and tried to spark the team. Pity so few of the others responded.
When it came to the clutch moments, we fumbled: dropped marks, poor kicks making turnovers, ineffective spoils and poor kicks at goal. If we make these, we improve. But we don't look like it.
BTW, if you want to know why Mark Murphy is the way he is, just watch the sniper Luke Hodge and his AFL sanctioned buggery!
^^
And I reckon he was doing that in the second half of last season, and it showed in our results.
Can anyone confirm if he had an injury interrupted preseason?
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/marc-murphy-will-miss-another-carlton-nab-challenge-game-with-injury-mick-malthouse-returns/story-fni5f5nx-1227256779041
CARLTON will roll out a completely different side in its second NAB Challenge game against Collingwood on Sunday, with as many as nine senior players set to return.
But captain Marc Murphy won’t be one of them, with the Blues keeping the midfielder under wraps with a calf strain until their last pre-season hitout against Geelong next weekend.
BTW, if you want to know why Mark Murphy is the way he is, just watch the sniper Luke Hodge and his AFL sanctioned buggery!
Kade Simpson got knocked out cold by Wellingham a couple of years ago and he's still the same. Getting hit is part of football, the greats get back up and keep going.
When you read all the various posts, in this thread and others, it seems to point to more pre-season bullsh1t delivered to us from our club. The bullsh1t hasn't changed, just the bullsh1t delivery method!
These blokes are either unfit, injured or both!
Kade Simpson got knocked out cold by Wellingham a couple of years ago and he's still the same. Getting hit is part of football, the greats get back up and keep going.
Wellingham got five weeks for his dog act, Hodge the sniper got off!
That sort of disparity has an effect on a players mindset, it can leave you feeling unprotected and vulnerable!
By the way, why do those dog acts keep happening to us?
Is it the fact we discard blokes like Fev, Robbo, O'hAilpin and Waite, ones who do actually push back a bit? We don't seem to value the darker side of players at all, but you need it just like the Dawks need Hodge!
At the moment we have White, Rowe and not much else!
The Wellingham incident was embarrassing because he ended up getting 3 weeks when 5 was lenient but still, the Hodge and the Wellingham incident against Murphy and Simmo were very, very different.
The Wellingham incident was embarrassing because he ended up getting 3 weeks when 5 was lenient but still, the Hodge and the Wellingham incident against Murphy and Simmo were very, very different.
If you watch carefully hodge speared his shoulder into murphys head...
I hope one day carlton square it up with that mob...
I did a little experiment for myself, I went thru our entire playing list and had a good hard look at who I would choose as captain if I could wave my magical fairy wand and sprinkle some fairy dust (minds out if gutter please!!), I really could not find anyone. So as much as people are banging on about Murphy being a questionable captain, who else would you choose to step in right now?
History tells us that great players careers have been hampered or held back by being made captain. The additional responsibility, the burden and the expectation simply bogs them down and they just cant be themselves because they are simply not being themselves. Does the club announce that Murphy is stepping down because he cant cope because that is a huge slap in the face no matter which way you look at it.
I can only speak personally here from my own experience as being a manager where I had to lead 27 people in a medium size company.. I had some pretty basic philosophies that I always followed. I always set the expectation and foundation of what I expected from everyone else. I was never late for work, I never took sickies. No job was to lowly for me to do, I remember a few times jumping inside the large bin skip hosing it down and brushing it down from all the mold and stuff that would be rotting inside, my god that stunk! I would always assist others and help them, I was never afraid to take chance and put my neck on the line for others to help them out whether it was for work or things outside of work. I relished getting my hands dirty. I told people clearly and concisely when they were performing well/poorly, I don't believe in grey areas, things are black and white for me. If i could do it then i expected everyone else to do it, its simple really.
This is what i expect of the captain, he should be running the hardest, being the loudest, crunching the hardest, he should be expectation and foundation of the rest of the team, leading by example, because if our captain is doing by golly the rest of the team should be bloody well do it also.
Kade Simpson.
Interestingly enough out of our lot he played the most with players that were part of the good old Carlton era.
Watched a replay, he's not fit, I reckon it's osteo.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/marc-murphy-will-miss-another-carlton-nab-challenge-game-with-injury-mick-malthouse-returns/story-fni5f5nx-1227256779041
There you have it, he was rusty. Not the end of the world I expect him to improve next week and be somwhere near his best by round 3. Might I add though, that doesn't excuse the p1ssweak attempt to tackle.
To be fair murphy attempting to tackle Griffiths was never going to end well. im not saying smaller blokes cant tacjle big blokes but Maric ragdolled Woid once or twice and the difference between them isn't as drastic.
To be fair murphy attempting to tackle Griffiths was never going to end well. im not saying smaller blokes cant tacjle big blokes but Maric ragdolled Woid once or twice and the difference between them isn't as drastic.
TBF, it's all about intent, and a captain's job is to lead the way with these kinds of things. It was despicable effort IMO. Had he clung on for dear life and just been shrugged off in the end you could accept that but what he did was the same boloney that separated him from being a great player and a champion footballer in the past.
TBF, it's all about intent, and a captain's job is to lead the way with these kinds of things. It was despicable effort IMO. Had he clung on for dear life and just been shrugged off in the end you could accept that but what he did was the same boloney that separated him from being a great player and a champion footballer in the past.
Precisely. Just ask guys who were smashed by Jonny Wilkinson in the early stages of his career..or one of the greatest, and small by today's standards, centres..Brian O'Driscoll. Tackling is about intent and technique. You can down a guy 30% your size regularly if you know what you're doing. So either they are not being taught correctly or its a question of character. I say it's both.
^^
Spot on.
A great example is our game vs North late last year at Etihad. The ball was deep in our forward 50m and a North player picked up the ball and saw Murph coming and basically paid him no respect and tried to shrug him. The North player was a fair sized bloke as well. Murph's intent was such that the North guy had no chance, he pounced and dragged him down straight away, won the free kick and kicked the team lifting goal. I have no doubt at all that Murph's actions in that brief moment gave our boys the inspiration to go on and win the game. That's all it takes, and that's what separates the great leaders from the average ones.
We seen when he is fit his intent is fine, he is almost certainly playing injured.
LP's diagnosis is OP. ;)
By Murphy's standards;
- Stuff all lateral movement.
- Low agility.
- No acceleration.
- No speed.
- No power.
- Timid in traffic.
This bloke is playing in pain.
I suspect the only reason he was out there is because the club is bullsh1tt1ng about the current state of the injury list and we have stuff all other options on the table!
We seen when he is fit his intent is fine, he is almost certainly playing injured.
LP's diagnosis is OP. ;)
By Murphy's standards;
- Stuff all lateral movement.
- Low agility.
- No acceleration.
- No speed.
- No power.
- Timid in traffic.
This bloke is playing in pain.
I suspect the only reason he was out there is because the club is bullsh1tt1ng about the current state of the injury list and we have stuff all other options on the table!
This is what I fear. Like many of our important players, Murphy is fragile. The club has to realize that playing unfit players is a recipe for disaster.
For all that, I would think that Simmo would be a better Captain. I'd be resting Murphy and getting him fit. Simmo and Carrots can carry the load while he recuperates.
I know we have issues with Matthew Kreuzer and Daisy (and Giles), but we are not going to make the improvements we need with a Captain who can only go at half rat power. He needs to be in form and confident, not carrying the weight of the world on his shoulders while he can't respond as he needs to respond.
I know it is common for clubs to play champs when they are not right: the Weagles and Judd is a perfect example. However, it does not make the champ any better. WC just about ruined Judd and probably took 2 years off his career. It was a bad choice and they suffered for it on the field. I do not not want to go down that path. It is STUPID! If Murphy is going to last, he has to be managed better than Judd was.
Simpson or Carrazzo should have been Captain...Murphy fit or not isnt up to it....
The other alternative is the good ordinary player way ie Maxwell, Harley... when you pick Mr average who gets on with everyone, has some media savvy
and isnt aligned to any factions or clicky groups within your list...Sam Rowe would be that type of player...
Not sure the club and Mick have the gonads to say they got it wrong though...
Simpson or Carrazzo should have been Captain...Murphy fit or not isnt up to it....
The other alternative is the good ordinary player way ie Maxwell, Harley... when you pick Mr average who gets on with everyone, has some media savvy
and isnt aligned to any factions or clicky groups within your list...Sam Rowe would be that type of player...
Not sure the club and Mick have the gonads to say they got it wrong though...
Not sure who would actually take responsibility for that decision.
I can't help but think the choice of Murphy was more of a club/marketing decision rather than a coach driven decision. Given Malthouse was the one who made Worsfold and Maxwell captains previously. Murphy doesn't fit the mould.
Not sure who would actually take responsibility for that decision.
I can't help but think the choice of Murphy was more of a club/marketing decision rather than a coach driven decision. Given Malthouse was the one who made Worsfold and Maxwell captains previously. Murphy does fit the mould.
Agree....Murphy was more a marketing pretty boy face of the club decision so maybe the coach didnt get his man......
Funny how I just made that previous post and dropped a Karma point..... :D.....
It was a player decision but Mick made comments around needing his endorsement
It was a player decision but Mick made comments around needing his endorsement
Have to be careful about that.
Votes are counted by the club and have been rigged before.
Murphy showed signs late last year that he was up to it. I reckon he'll rebound but he needs to make that a one off occurrence.
Duigan was the best leader but he was a fringe player.
I know it is common for clubs to play champs when they are not right: the Weagles and Judd is a perfect example. However, it does not make the champ any better. WC just about ruined Judd and probably took 2 years off his career. It was a bad choice and they suffered for it on the field. I do not not want to go down that path. It is STUPID! If Murphy is going to last, he has to be managed better than Judd was.
We went down that path, we turned a Roll Royce(Judd) into a battering ram to cover for the spud extras that surround him.
Murphy is / was an elite outside player who could finish, look at the weekend and see what has happened to his kicking and power. It's a travesty!
Put the spuds on the inside and teach them to power handball!
Murphy showed signs late last year that he was up to it. I reckon he'll rebound but he needs to make that a one off occurrence.
We can hope.
The problem I see is not whether Murphy is up to the job, but whether he is the right man for it in the first place.
Since he has been Captain he has struggled with form and injury. It is hard to show his best in those circumstances and it has left him open to criticism for not doing the things we think a leader should show.
There probably would be questions over Murphy even if he were not the Captain: his lack of fitness and relative lack of effort are not the things we see when he is at his best.
So, should we put the pressure on him to do the job, when he is forcing himself to be there when he shouldn't be?
Probably not.
If we are to get the best out of Murphy, it might well be better for him to be relieved of the Captaincy and allowed to develop into an on field leader as his body allows him to. There is no doubt at all that he played better before he was Captain. There is also no doubt that, if we were silly enough to play him at well less than 100 %, that he would continue to be a liability as a leader.
Give him time and some protection, he could develop into the real on field leader we need.
Judd wasn't a bad Captain, but it was something he was not comfortable being. Now he is no longer the Captain he is no less the on field leader he was. Look at his last term on Thrusday Night against Richmond. We needed something and Juddy delivered. With some help.... But that is another tale.
Of the potential candidates to replace Murphy as Captain, the 2 that stand out are Carrazzo and Simpson. Neither is a candidate for our best player, but they really do deliver, especially when they have had the responsibility in the past. The problem is that neither is close to the beginning of their careers. Carrazzo, in particular, has struggled with injury in recent times. His form, at the moment, looks good.
After that things look less certain. Gibbs is a chance. he has lifted his game significantly, even though he was not at his best against Richmond. He is becoming the on field leader we were looking for. But is he yet? I am not so sure. I'd like to see how he responds, especially as he gets match fit again.
Kreuzer or Thomas? Neither can get on the park, let alone show the aggression we require.
Rowe or Jamison? They both deserve to be in the leadership group, but neither is playing close to their best and neither is young.
Yarran? Definitely not. He is an important player for us, but he does not show the physicality that we would prefer.
I could continue, but the point is quite clear. We really don't have a huge number of on field leaders.
We really need to import some as a major priority. Of those we have, I think Simmo would probably be the best fit as Captain for the near future. Gibbs could be if he can keep us the hardness and drive he showed last year.
We have been spoilt in our leadership quality over the years, but we just don't have a Jesaulenko, a Nicholls, a Fitzpatrick or a Kernahan at the moment. This is the sort of leadership we need. Murphy may someday have it, but he is not there at the moment.
Murphy is the wrong type to be a captain.
Have a think about our best captains.
None of them were silky outside small ball winners. All of them were immovable objects with nous, hardness and took no prisoners.
Murphy is more Camporeale than Rats. Nothing wrong with that, but its just not captain material.
Murphy is the wrong type to be a captain.
Have a think about our best captains.
None of them were silky outside small ball winners. All of them were immovable objects with nous, hardness and took no prisoners.
Murphy is more Camporeale than Rats. Nothing wrong with that, but its just not captain material.
agree 100%.. when he got poleaxed by Hodge....that was it for me
Murphy is the wrong type to be a captain.
Have a think about our best captains.
None of them were silky outside small ball winners. All of them were immovable objects with nous, hardness and took no prisoners.
Murphy is more Camporeale than Rats. Nothing wrong with that, but its just not captain material.
Totally agree - you need a fearless warrior type who is also smart as captain, one who can lead and inspire in the heat of battle. Murph is not and never will be that type. Don't really think Juddy is either btw - both Murph and Judd are more the quiet types who are more focused on their own performances.
Totally agree - you need a fearless warrior type who is also smart as captain, one who can lead and inspire in the heat of battle. Murph is not and never will be that type. Don't really think Juddy is either btw - both Murph and Judd are more the quiet types who are more focused on their own performances.
what you are effectively saying cookie is we want a Dominator...
what you are effectively saying cookie is we want a Dominator...
There was a bloke who turned and won games from his own heroic deeds that inspired others! Ah, happy days. A Luke Hodge type would do though! ;)
Actually, if you've read Bernard Cornwell's "Warrior Chronicles", Uhtred of Bebanburgh would fit the bill. :) 8)
Well, there's a lot of rubbish in this thread ::)
The club's leaders have to both play their designated role and help to ensure that their team mates play theirs. If one of the leaders has a bad game, for whatever reason, it doesn't mean that they are not leading.
Murphy, Gibbs and Jamison, and the unofficial leaders, have the respect of the players and the players do their utmost to meet their leaders' demands. Unfortunately, the talent and skill is not quite there and the coaching holds us back.
Murphy, as a smaller, skillful player, is always going to be questioned as captain; he's not Big Nick. However, that does not mean that he can't control the playing group and get the best out of them.
It was interesting listening to Brad Sewell's comments about the game. Hawthorn had a much more mature and experienced line up and the players were given the freedom to respond to on field developments - a bit like our 1995 side. Our blokes don't seem to be entrusted with on field decision making. If the leaders were given more freedom to exercise leadership, I suspect we'd be more competitive.
Well, there's a lot of rubbish in this thread ::)
The club's leaders have to both play their designated role and help to ensure that their team mates play theirs. If one of the leaders has a bad game, for whatever reason, it doesn't mean that they are not leading.
Murphy, Gibbs and Jamison, and the unofficial leaders, have the respect of the players and the players do their utmost to meet their leaders' demands. Unfortunately, the talent and skill is not quite there and the coaching holds us back.
Murphy, as a smaller, skillful player, is always going to be questioned as captain; he's not Big Nick. However, that does not mean that he can't control the playing group and get the best out of them.
It was interesting listening to Brad Sewell's comments about the game. Hawthorn had a much more mature and experienced line up and the players were given the freedom to respond to on field developments - a bit like our 1995 side. Our blokes don't seem to be entrusted with on field decision making. If the leaders were given more freedom to exercise leadership, I suspect we'd be more competitive.
Are you sure about this DJC? Do you have inside knowledge?
Well, there's a lot of rubbish in this thread ::)
The club's leaders have to both play their designated role and help to ensure that their team mates play theirs. If one of the leaders has a bad game, for whatever reason, it doesn't mean that they are not leading.
Murphy, Gibbs and Jamison, and the unofficial leaders, have the respect of the players and the players do their utmost to meet their leaders' demands. Unfortunately, the talent and skill is not quite there and the coaching holds us back.
Murphy, as a smaller, skillful player, is always going to be questioned as captain; he's not Big Nick. However, that does not mean that he can't control the playing group and get the best out of them.
It was interesting listening to Brad Sewell's comments about the game. Hawthorn had a much more mature and experienced line up and the players were given the freedom to respond to on field developments - a bit like our 1995 side. Our blokes don't seem to be entrusted with on field decision making. If the leaders were given more freedom to exercise leadership, I suspect we'd be more competitive.
Who cares if those 3 'leaders' simply don't turn up on any given night?!
What does tHAT SAY TO THE PACK THAT RESPECT THEM BLAH BLAH.
Are you sure about this DJC? Do you have inside knowledge?
If I'm wrong about this the club is in more trouble than I thought.
I'm only going on the comments by the leadership group and other players. That suggests that Murphy, Gibbs and Jamison are very well respected, as are Judd, Simpson and Carrazzo. Rowe and Thomas are up there too.
If I'm wrong about this the club is in more trouble than I thought.
I'm only going on the comments by the leadership group and other players. That suggests that Murphy, Gibbs and Jamison are very well respected, as are Judd, Simpson and Carrazzo. Rowe and Thomas are up there too.
Ah! OK.
Murphy, Gibbs and Jamison, and the unofficial leaders, have the respect of the players and the players do their utmost to meet their leaders' demands. Unfortunately, the talent and skill is not quite there and the coaching holds us back.
Every now and again the foot soldiers will stand up for their captain and other leaders but they'd do that under Ratten when they felt like it too. There still isn't that tight everyone look after each other group we so desperately need.
At present across all Carlton online forums, rightly or wrongly, Marc Murphy is copping a heap of flack, mainly in relation to his leadership credentials. This is not an easy subject to dissect as most Blues supporters are fully supportive of Marc Murphy as a player, but they may not be as supportive of him as captain believing that he is not the right person for the job due to being uninspiring, too quiet and lacking in genuine leadership skills.
He came to the club as a highly talented #1 draft pick, has played some brilliant football after walking into the team immediately. On the flipside, some people believe that he hasn't taken his game up to another level like most elite players do when they get into that peak 26-30 age bracket.
The club awarded him the captaincy after Judd as he was the next in line as vice-captain. Many would argue that there wasn't a long list of captaincy options and it would of been a tough gig to take especially when you had to play in the team with Judd still there.
Having said that, when you compare him to some of the other team leaders in the competition (Selwood, Hodge, Cotchin etc), there is a stark difference in persona & presence to Murphy which may be one of the reasons that his leadership is being questioned right now.
Therefore, are the supporters right about this and if so, what should the club do about it ??
Or, is he the right man for the job and everyone should get behind our man ??
For mine, I would find it difficult to stand down a captain if they haven't transgressed to such an extent that they have brought the club into disrepute. On the flipside, sometimes you make decisions that seemed right at the time but further down the track prove to be flawed and steps have to be taken to rectify the situation.
Maybe there should be an indepth review to ascertain how much he really wants the job because I feel that he may have been a reluctant recipient initially. If that was the case, then the club could announce that the captaincy is affecting his overall onfield output and make a change, even if it is a short-term one, and then look at who may be the next best coming through the ranks.
I can see both sides of the argument here, he is a ripper player but maybe the captaincy role is too much of a burden for him right now ??
Every now and again the foot soldiers will stand up for their captain and other leaders but they'd do that under Ratten when they felt like it too. There still isn't that tight everyone look after each other group we so desperately need.
Agree. If it's not in people's nature they just won't do it.
The club awarded him the captaincy after Judd as he was the next in line as vice-captain. Many would argue that there wasn't a long list of captaincy options and it would of been a tough gig to take especially when you had to play in the team with Judd still there.
I think the club wanted to find a new captain so that Judd could / would extend his career, Malthouse said as much even before his first day on the job!
I think one of the better things our club could do is get a spread of players through the captains / leadership roles.
What other clubs have changed captain in recent years while the old captain plays on, Hawthorn, Swans, Brisbane anybody else?
@Sheik
How did the Hawks handle the Mitchell to Hodge transfer? That would seem to me a good case study. Mitchell is an excellent player but it was said at the time that Hodge was the spiritual leader of the team and seemed to get the captaincy via force of popular sentiment.
@Sheik
How did the Hawks handle the Mitchell to Hodge transfer? That would seem to me a good case study. Mitchell is an excellent player but it was said at the time that Hodge was the spiritual leader of the team and seemed to get the captaincy via force of popular sentiment.
Subjectively I'd say Carrazzo is our spiritual leader, but he makes too many mistakes and like Simpson he is too old to get the job now!
Next in line if they can make him accountable, Buckley maybe or perhaps even Yarran!
If he could get a regular game Armfield would be right at the top of the list, he reminds me of Scotland in the 1/4 time huddles.
Down the track, Cripps looks another likely type.
I think it is a bonus if you can have a Captain who is also a General, but it is not a requirement that the Captain is both!
Buckley can't get a game, how is he going to be given the captaincy? Murphy is going to keep it until he's 30 or perhaps if we swap coaches.
Buckley can't get a game, how is he going to be given the captaincy? Murphy is going to keep it until he's 30 or perhaps if we swap coaches.
At VFL games it's obvious who talks and who listens, Rowe got the captaincy earlier but I can tell you at VFL games he's a church mouse!
We have very few voices in the huddles, lots of listeners. Judd was a church mouse who turned into Hercules at the bounce, but few have that capability.
The blokes I listed above, they have the attitude to step forward, and doing so may actually help their game. Not unlike Richie Vandenberg!
@Sheik
How did the Hawks handle the Mitchell to Hodge transfer? That would seem to me a good case study. Mitchell is an excellent player but it was said at the time that Hodge was the spiritual leader of the team and seemed to get the captaincy via force of popular sentiment.
The Hawks handled it very well, there didn't appear to be a ripple of discontent and they went on from strength to strength.
Murphy was never captain material and the half wits that made him captain are even worse leaders. It comes from the top as the successful clubs are proof of.
The biggest issue is that we can't even name one person who should be captain or is a better choice than Murphy. That is the biggest issue with our group. Simpson etc should have been given the nod but were looked over by the half wits concerned only with membership etc. Success on field gets you memberships!!!!
With Hawthorn I think even Mitchell saw Hodge as the real captain even though he wasn't. It is often said Mitchell was the off field captain of the club and Hodge on field so it was always an easy transition. Credit has to go to Mitchell also.
For mine he has to see out this year otherwise you might ruin his confidence all together but there has to be a review at the end of this year and if he is deemed the leader of the group by the PLAYERS, no club appointed "captains" then so be it.
Murphy was never captain material and the half wits that made him captain are even worse leaders. It comes from the top as the successful clubs are proof of.
The biggest issue is that we can't even name one person who should be captain or is a better choice than Murphy. That is the biggest issue with our group. Simpson etc should have been given the nod but were looked over by the half wits concerned only with membership etc. Success on field gets you memberships!!!!
With Hawthorn I think even Mitchell saw Hodge as the real captain even though he wasn't. It is often said Mitchell was the off field captain of the club and Hodge on field so it was always an easy transition. Credit has to go to Mitchell also.
For mine he has to see out this year otherwise you might ruin his confidence all together but there has to be a review at the end of this year and if he is deemed the leader of the group by the PLAYERS, no club appointed "captains" then so be it.
@JC
Agree, the captain has to be the "spiritual leader" as far as the players are concerned and they have to be very comfortable with who that may be. Future options at CFC appear limited or a way off. I'm struggling to suggest anyone tbh - maybe if we change coaches the new coach will want to bring someone along with him?
Its interesting the image that a captain has....Murphy has all the credentials but not the persona or image..he is still seen very much as a young man
who has trouble looking after himself much less others.
Hawks Hodge has the image and persona to go with the ability..he looks a man out there and carries himself like a leader unlike Murphy who has to try and create the look.
Lewis will be the next captain of Hawthorn and on first look he seems the part, good tough player, skilled smart etc etc...but have been told he doesnt have the Hodge ability
to get on with every player on the list and Hawthorn are working on this aspect of Lewis character...the good thing for the Hawks though is Lewis does agree he needs some work in this area to improve..
You dont have to be buddies with every player but every player has to respect you.....
I've borrowed this from another thread that KingKouta43 (Big Bad Bill) started....it's something I've talked about before.
When a young player comes to Carlton they don't seem to be protected as much as those teams consenting for a premiership.When a youngster goes to a contending club they are allowed to develop at a steady pace and have strong leadership around them that seems to bring out the best in those players.
I look at the "stars" at Carlton and think they are nothing compared to a Bartel, Hodge, Mitchell etc
We lack real character and heart and something else that is underrated in footy smarts.
The legacy of the Pagan years lives on.
After Pagans arrival , for various reasons there was a clean-out of our natural leadership.
Young players like Murphy, Gibbs and Kreuzer came to a club devoid of leadership.
Younger players who went to the Geelongs, Hawthorns and Sydneys at the same time had the guidance and protection of strong leaders.
Murphy was knocked stupid in his first few years and nobody raised an effort in his defence.
There seemed to be a bit of an improvement under Ratten
Judd made a slight difference but he was more a leader by example than a physical presence.
The first act of defiance I can actually remember from a Carlton player during this period was when Wiggins put a hit on a Judd tagger one game.
Our leaders have had no-one to learn from....and having let it slip to this stage it's hard to know how to fix it other than giving up some of our high draft picks for leaders from other clubs....but you're not going to get a combination of leadership and highly skilled players...they cost too much.
Watching the Crows carve up Norf, Tex Walker seems like an inspired selection as skipper.
Watching the Crows carve up Norf, Tex Walker seems like an inspired selection as skipper.
Thought exactly the same thing - be interesting to see how things work out longer term.
Watching the Crows carve up Norf, Tex Walker seems like an inspired selection as skipper.
Reminds me of Sticks in more ways than one!
So much for reporters asking the tough questions nowadays. Why didn't anyone ask Malthouse at the post game presser a question like "Were you happy with your players leadership out on the ground tonight?"
I'm sure Blues supporters would love to hear the answer to that question !!
The answer would say a lot about either the coach or the players, but good luck finding someone willing to ask that kind of question these days....
There is a bloke called Patrick Dangerfield effectively on the market this year, no brainer for me throw everything at him, including Bryce and Kreuser at Adelaide......
There is a bloke called Patrick Dangerfield effectively on the market this year, no brainer for me throw everything at him, including Bryce and Kreuser at Adelaide......
If they have a big year he would be crazy to leave!
There is a bloke called Patrick Dangerfield effectively on the market this year, no brainer for me throw everything at him, including Bryce and Kreuser at Adelaide......
Bandaid solution !!
If they have a big year he would be crazy to leave!
An Adelaide premiership must be worth serious bucks post football. Wonder if we could put something to match it, if it's a reality.
forget dangerfield...STOP THE QUICK FIX ...we need to start again...
recruit a core group of 10 players 1st and 2nd rounders over the next 2-3 years that will play 200 games
the club has got to hold firm and follow through with the build of a proper list...
i fear that Carlton may be getting wobbly again with the MM contract extension talk
we run the risk our club could be running around in circles again...losing a 2nd generation of supporters,, one generation has already been lost
Dangerfield will only be 25 for next season. Hardly a stop gap. How long do you think a "cycle" in the AFL is? If Danger is no chance at the next Carlton assault on the flag, our plan is plain and simply wrong.
forget dangerfield...STOP THE QUICK FIX ...we need to start again...
recruit a core group of 10 players 1st and 2nd rounders over the next 2-3 years that will play 200 games
the club has got to hold firm and follow through with the build of a proper list...
i fear that Carlton may be getting wobbly again with the MM contract extension talk
we run the risk our club could be running around in circles again...losing a 2nd generation of supporters,, one generation has already been lost
Agree. Talk of hiring Voss together with a big $ guy like Dangerfield makes me very nervous - deja vu!
I'd love to have Danger but would we be repeating the Judd story with all of our expectations focused on one very expensive player?
Opportunity cost needs to be weighed up. If we can get him for less than 900k a year then sure, and i expect our captain or Daisy to get a haircut for it!
Better still, cut Daisy to 400k and Murph to 600k, give the change, another 500k on top and the captaincy to The Dangerman.
Edit: Sheesh I'm starting to sound desperate.
Opportunity cost needs to be weighed up. If we can get him for less than 900k a year then sure, and i expect our captain or Daisy to get a haircut for it!
:))
Sheesh Thry, don't go promising more haircuts, they're fixated on those already, we'll never get them to concentrate on their footy!
Better still, cut Daisy to 400k and Murph to 600k, give the change, another 500k on top and the captaincy to The Dangerman.
Edit: Sheesh I'm starting to sound desperate.
if we are going to win a premiership we take a geelong approach combined with the old Carlton approach...
that is...the club always said to its players, if you look after the jumper the jumper will look after you (carlton)
fix all salaries to a medium capped figure with variation in between to build a dynasty of players ..(geelong)
no highly paid marquee players...
assuming we win a premiership or 2, the club then provides the business and post player opportunities that doesn't breach the salary cap...
Addressing the leadership is the key here and is the overall topic, not who should be recruited and why.
For what it's worth, Raydan made a bold statement in the OP, he said we should trade Gibbs & Murphy now whilst they have maximum value. I tend to agree with him because if we did, we'd be loading up on Top 10 picks for the next year which is exactly what Hawthorn did some years ago.
They read the draft well that year, offloaded players with some shelf life and laid a foundation for what you see now in front of you.
The players they brought in were leaders, not run-of-the-mill types !!
They traded into the now famous Judd/Hodge/Ball draft with Croad but they bottomed out for their Franklin/Roughead draft, pretty sure they got Lewis in that as well and Mitchell was a second round pick.
To get the quality of leadership needed would probably mean we would have to be prepared to trade with our top echelon players, few as there may be.
Another year same piss weak leaders going out with a whimper. When the side is sliding it's up to the leaders to control the game.
Murphy - Let Chaplin waltz through him, which lead to a goal. Jogs after his player when they have the ball. Just a rubbish game.
Gibbs - Did he actually do anything positive? How many kicks did he completely stuff up?
Henderson - Every game he get's into position to mark and drops it. He is a terrible forward, pure and simple. When your one highlight for the night is a knock on to Menzel as a number one forward it's just poor.
Jameson - Is not a team player. He will worry only about his player and if he gets out of position, oh well, I'll still get picked next week.
Rowe - A battler at best, found a home at CHB and because of a stupid selection had to pushed all over the ground covering ruck, KP back because Jaksch was too light for Griffiths.
I was howled down for asking should we trade Murphy, Gibbs. I'm saying now we should!
We will go no where with those two cruisers leading this club. I thought last year they both turned the hardness corner but soft as butter.
Yes, if our leadership group was a flavour it would be vanilla. I much prefer hot and spicy like the Hawks.
To get the quality of leadership needed would probably mean we would have to be prepared to trade with our top echelon players, few as there may be.
Fortune favours the brave ........ ;)
Fortune favours the brave ........ ;)
Yep - time to roll the dice.
I have come to the same conclusion time to gut the team completely. Trade Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuser, Henderson, Walker. Sack Warnock, Watson, Armfield, Touhy. Retire Judd, Simpson, Carrazo. Find a hungry intelligent lucid assistant and promote them to head coach, (Dew,Tudor) or re-ignite one of the sacked ones with a point to prove(Voss, Sanderson,McKenna).
In one fell swoop we could raise up to five/six top twenty picks, and/or at least one or two gun up and comers (Trelor, Whitfield, Mitchell). Or a genuine champ like Dangerfield.
Now or never, could be the most audacious move in the games history, and who here seriously wouldn't support such a depraved and desperate move, one that either is dynastic in the making, or the biggest self destructive and crazy move ever. But at least they tried, I could live with that. :o ??? ::)
Edit: Sssch where'd I put my meds......
@Hanwell
I fear the alternative may be perpetual mediocrity.
Hear hear Cookie, as Neil said "Better to burn out, than fade away, my my hey hey "
I think we would be crazy to trade out what little leadership we have.
We did the Same thing under Pagan. Ill go hee if we repeat the mistakes.
Gibbs is the one I would be seriously thinking of trading come end of the year at this stage. I always hoped that he would just have that one season like Goddard did when he absolutely explodes but I can't see it in him to be honest. I think he has peaked and if he doesn't do it this year then I think his time is up in terms of getting in that top bracket of players.
I would be trying to prise Talia or something out of Adelaide perhaps not sure?
Wish we went after Taylor Walker a few years back. Would have been our Captain by now and the gun fwd we so desperately we need.
Gibbs is the one I would be seriously thinking of trading come end of the year at this stage. I always hoped that he would just have that one season like Goddard did when he absolutely explodes but I can't see it in him to be honest. I think he has peaked and if he doesn't do it this year then I think his time is up in terms of getting in that top bracket of players.
I would be trying to prise Talia or something out of Adelaide perhaps not sure?
Should have let him go last year as a FA. Would have had pick 8. Could have traded our drafted at the top end if the draft and still got the KJ trade done.
Gutless.
Are you guys serious? He's on 500k FFS that is a bargain.
@Hanwell
I fear the alternative may be perpetual mediocrity.
Isn't that where we are now though Cookie? :o
Isn't that where we are now though Cookie? :o
I think we are mediocre but we'll know for sure as the season unfolds - only my opinion. It'll take a lot of work and expertise at the draft and trade tables to get us out of it. We could start by getting our current players into their best onfield roles and sticking with that as a foundation building exercise.
How many players would want to come to CFC having watched CFC show zero loyalty to players who have shown loyalty to it including Gibbs who could've gotten a crapload more $ elsewhere last year - I mean really imagine gutting the entire playing list - just bloody stupid.
Here's a thought - get a screwing coach that can get the best out of them!
How many players would want to come to CFC having watched CFC show zero loyalty to players who have shown loyalty to it including Gibbs who could've gotten a crapload more $ elsewhere last year - I mean really imagine gutting the entire playing list - just bloody stupid.
Here's a thought - get a screwing coach that can get the best out of them!
Here's another thought - maybe we've already seen the best of them? Hell, they've been given plenty of opportunities, how many more will it take? Why would we want to keep on doing the same things that have been unsuccessful over a period of years? Also, changing the list and changing the coach are not mutually exclusive. It may need a combination of both.
Having good leadership with little talent is probably going to land us exactly where having good talent with little leadership has.
Add gutting basically the entire club to that, along with our administration basically pushing members away and we may as well shut up shop.
Having good leadership with little talent is probably going to land us exactly where having good talent with little leadership has.
Add gutting basically the entire club to that, along with our administration basically pushing members away and we may as well shut up shop.
I haven't seen those proposals yet IOT.
We need a long term approach to change our standards and attitudes.
I said years ago, one of the best captaincy appointments was Richie Vandenberg. He took over from pretty boy Crawford.
Was he a great player? Far from it. But he was tough, even dirty at times, but he set a standard for his team mates. Tackling, chasing and squaring up when necessary.
Remember the line in the sand? That wasn't a game, it was a time. From that point on things were different. They may have lost a few players along the way but they never got stood over again.
We need to get some tough players throwing their weight around, and they need someone to lead the charge. Guys like Wood, Rowe, Casboult, White & Bell etc need to be enforcers, not only against the opposition but within our club. If team mates don't meet the standards set, let em know.
We need to get some tough players throwing their weight around, and they need someone to lead the charge. Guys like Wood, Rowe, Casboult, White & Bell etc need to be enforcers, not only against the opposition but within our club. If team mates don't meet the standards set, let em know.
I like your thinking JH :)
There is a school of thought that you need someone like Carey, Nicholls, Whitten, Barassi or Matthews as captain to really inspire/frighten the team to perform at its best. However, for better or worse, we've got Murphy (and I'm quite comfortable with that). What that means is that there must be a team rule that no-one messes with Murphy and anyone who does is dealt with by Wood, Rowe, Casboult, White, Bell or the nearest player.
Lods mentioned the Chief sitting a bloke on his butt for trying to rough up Judd and that's probably the last time I've seen a Carlton player go out of their way to look after our captain.
Murphy is not just a skillful midfielder, he is the club's chosen on field leader. Opposition players set out to knock him off his game and to establish a physical dominance. Anyone who tries that should learn that it is not a healthy thing to do. It may take a few games, and possibly a week or two on the sidelines, but the lessons will have an impact.
The older folk will remember the day Vinny Waite took out Hawthorn's captain, David Parkin, with a pretty crude bump to the head. Leigh Matthews smacked Vinny and I reckon Waite's headache was worse than Parko's. Of course, you can't go around snotting blokes now, but you can still make them aware that our captain is off limits. Parko was captain (and a very good one at that) but Matthews was a leader.
How many players would want to come to CFC having watched CFC show zero loyalty to players who have shown loyalty to it including Gibbs who could've gotten a crapload more $ elsewhere last year - I mean really imagine gutting the entire playing list - just bloody stupid.
Here's a thought - get a screwing coach that can get the best out of them!
Well said.
How many players would want to come to CFC having watched CFC show zero loyalty to players who have shown loyalty to it including Gibbs who could've gotten a crapload more $ elsewhere last year - I mean really imagine gutting the entire playing list - just bloody stupid.
Here's a thought - get a screwing coach that can get the best out of them!
So would another coach (say hypothetically Clarkson) turn our current squad into players that are feared and respected by other teams?
So would another coach (say hypothetically Clarkson) turn our current squad into players that are feared and respected by other teams?
An excellent question.
So would another coach (say hypothetically Clarkson) turn our current squad into players that are feared and respected by other teams?
Without a shadow of doubt GiC, without a shadow of doubt!
As much as I despise the sniper, he and his assistants have instilled a culture of toughness and ruthlessness into the playing group. That happened before they enjoyed premiership success and is a significant contributor to their success.
Our list is capable of much more than they are currently delivering and being harder is just one area.
Remember Yarran's comments about the first pre-season under Malthouse; he was pleased that they weren't doing full blown tackling in training because someone might get hurt?
So would another coach (say hypothetically Clarkson) turn our current squad into players that are feared and respected by other teams?
No chance.
Without a shadow of doubt GiC, without a shadow of doubt!
As much as I despise the sniper, he and his assistants have instilled a culture of toughness and ruthlessness into the playing group. That happened before they enjoyed premiership success and is a significant contributor to their success.
Our list is capable of much more than they are currently delivering and being harder is just one area.
Remember Yarran's comments about the first pre-season under Malthouse; he was pleased that they weren't doing full blown tackling in training because someone might get hurt?
Cannot disagree with you more on this. This group (barring Judd, White, Simpson and some of the newbies I haven't seen play yet) refuses to engage in physical contact and is as soft as butter. Jesus Christ couldn't get them to be tough and ruthless don't care what anyone says. I have seen enough in the last 4-5 years to tell me this mob just doesn't cut it in the hard/ruthless stakes. Middle of the road team at best.
Cannot disagree with you more on this. This group (barring Judd, White, Simpson and some of the newbies I haven't seen play yet) refuses to engage in physical contact and is as soft as butter. Jesus Christ couldn't get them to be tough and ruthless don't care what anyone says. I have seen enough in the last 4-5 years to tell me this mob just doesn't cut it in the hard/ruthless stakes. Middle of the road team at best.
x2...been like it for a decade or more , we just cannot recruit players who can deliver a physical contest every week for 4 quarters...we need some harder players who can lead the way but
in todays football your hard players have to be skilled as well....not meatheads with no talent...
So it really sounds like we are looking to find the impossible. Other clubs find them or grow them. We can't do either. Typical case of "No guts, no glory", but on a talented level. Where do these kids hide is the key question ??
Cannot disagree with you more on this. This group (barring Judd, White, Simpson and some of the newbies I haven't seen play yet) refuses to engage in physical contact and is as soft as butter. Jesus Christ couldn't get them to be tough and ruthless don't care what anyone says. I have seen enough in the last 4-5 years to tell me this mob just doesn't cut it in the hard/ruthless stakes. Middle of the road team at best.
So already we're missing Robbo? :P
I've seen enough in the last two and a bit years to say that Mick isn't good enough and doesn't have the patience to turn this club around. You can't sack a whole team (albeit that is what Mick has attempted to do). Time to give someone with the patience and passion for turning our once great club around an opportunity and let the grumpy one retire with his millions. No doubt he will be straight back in the media crap canning our club. Have you ever thought of that?
So already we're missing Robbo? :P
I've seen enough in the last two and a bit years to say that Mick isn't good enough and doesn't have the patience to turn this club around. You can't sack a whole team (albeit that is what Mick has attempted to do). Time to give someone with the patience and passion for turning our once great club around an opportunity and let the grumpy one retire with his millions. No doubt he will be straight back in the media crap canning our club. Have you ever thought of that?
Agree wholeheartedly.
How can it be the players again? It was the players in his first season now in the third season with half of our talented players either getting the hell away from him or being let go for nothing, it's still the players? At some point you've got to accept he was not and is not the right person for the job.
Constantly on this forum people write that he only has assistant coaches that he knows will not push him or stab him in the back - I'm all for loyalty but it seems this bloke puts himself first before the good of the club.
MM is quite clearly not inspiring these players - even if he has turned over half the list, there's no attitude change at all - we are as crap as we were two seasons ago!
Must admit looking at MM's last video message yesterday it all seemed a bit tired and formulaic. It certainly failed to inspire me.
MM is quite clearly not inspiring these players - even if he has turned over half the list, there's no attitude change at all - we are as crap as we were two seasons ago!
I actually think we are much worse, both in list quality and output.
We need a win! :D
I think our problems remain because our club behavior isn't changing, we still appear too tricky for our own good.
I want less effort of subterfuge and more effort on results.
I don't think Murphy is a bad leader, he has done well in the past but I doubt he is fit and ready to play. Don't be surprised if we hear at the end of this season that he has been struggling with an injury all season.
Last year 1AW limped through a season, Armfield, Jammo and Hendo as well, we are our own worst enemies in this regard. We claim to be playing the long term game, but we make short term decisions. This affects on field results and has nothing to do with our captain, it's a symptom of a club that has a bunch of players in survival mode! ;)
Clubs like the Dawks or Geelong would have wrapped the better players in cotton wool ready for the next year and played the season out with the juniors to give them some experience. Instead we delay, delay, delay!
When it comes to decision making, we have the putting yips!
I think our problems remain because our club behavior isn't changing, we still appear too tricky for our own good.
I want less effort of subterfuge and more effort on results.
I don't think Murphy is a bad leader, he has done well in the past but I doubt he is fit and ready to play. Don't be surprised if we hear at the end of this season that he has been struggling with an injury all season.
Last year 1AW limped through a season, Armfield, Jammo and Hendo as well, we are our own worst enemies in this regard. We claim to be playing the long term game, but we make short term decisions. This affects on field results and has nothing to do with our captain, it's a symptom of a club that has a bunch of players in survival mode! ;)
Clubs like the Dawks or Geelong would have wrapped the better players in cotton wool ready for the next year and played the season out with the juniors to give them some experience. Instead we delay, delay, delay!
When it comes to decision making, we have the putting yips!
Is it any wonder when last time the coach was forced to rotate the squad heavily he was sacked, and the bloke currently in charge is on a slippery slope one game into his third season at the helm and one of the major knocks on him was giving Clem Smith a game?
Think about it.
WE HAVE CAUSED THIS.
Im not saying appoint Malthouse, but when he goes, we need to appoint someone we have faith in, and actually show some faith in them, and rather than go for the types that people are thinking, we should be looking squarely at the following two names:
Matthew Lappin
David Teague
Both have been around the traps as assistants. Teague's work as the Bullants coach was very impressive back then, and he has been an assistant at multiple AFL clubs now. Ditto Lappin who has been at Collingwood and is now having a go at the GC and still seems to think fondly of his time at Carlton.
@ Thry
Agree that we should we be looking closely at both of those guys if MM does indeed go. However, changing the coach I fear is nowhere near the complete solution to our predicament. A successful solution will also be heavily dependent on SOS's work, to mention just one area.
I like Lappin but is he head coach material?
WE HAVE CAUSED THIS.
Hmmm, I think the ire of supporters and officials comes after the fact.
Hmmm, I think the ire of supporters and officials comes after the fact.
The ire of supporters and officials may very well come after the fact.
we gave a young draftee a round 1 debut, and due to circumstances outside of anyone's control he goes on as the sub after 1 minute, and all of a sudden it was the worst move in history.
Meanwhile, this same match is an idication that the coach should be sacked and this decision is one of the reasons. Why? Because a more seasoned bloke wasnt chosen yet, here we are trying to get a young kid up to speed of AFL footy.
I would be more concerned about our coach going into self preservation mode, and playing your David Ellards, Dennis Armfields and what not as the sub because they are focussing overly on winning games rather than blooding youngsters, yet have a look at everyone who is condemning that decision.
If we can't blood youngsters via the sub, then when can we? We don't really want to blood a whole host of youngsters in one hit, particularly if they have played very few matches.
Even the decision not to play Casboult. We are moaning about it a little, but lets face it, the issue last thursday is that we lacked mobility. Would Casboult have helped that? Only if he came in at the expense of Rowe, and we sent Henderson back, but on the form of last season, we had no reason to believe that this was a good decision aside from assisting our ruck division. Which would not have benefitted majorly from having Casboult in (as his ruckwork has been average at best).
We have created an environment where the second the coach starts playing more for the benefit of our future, rather than the benefit of the present, he is walking on thin ice. That is a recipe for having coaches constantly in self preservation mode, and to the detriment of developing our team. That is a recipe for disaster.
It's hard to figure atm whether the club as a whole is playing for the long term or purely just looking to the short term in terms of memberships etc. etc. Certainly memberships and playing finals are clearly important but there may be a recognition in the club that we need a longer term to really sort ourselves out and maybe that's what the covert strategy may be. It's just not being fully articulated publicly.
In the meantime they try and appeal to fans in ways that will attract memberships, and that includes playing coy about MM's contract?
The ire of supporters and officials may very well come after the fact.
we gave a young draftee a round 1 debut, and due to circumstances outside of anyone's control he goes on as the sub after 1 minute, and all of a sudden it was the worst move in history.
Meanwhile, this same match is an idication that the coach should be sacked and this decision is one of the reasons. Why? Because a more seasoned bloke wasnt chosen yet, here we are trying to get a young kid up to speed of AFL footy.
I would be more concerned about our coach going into self preservation mode, and playing your David Ellards, Dennis Armfields and what not as the sub because they are focussing overly on winning games rather than blooding youngsters, yet have a look at everyone who is condemning that decision.
If we can't blood youngsters via the sub, then when can we? We don't really want to blood a whole host of youngsters in one hit, particularly if they have played very few matches.
Even the decision not to play Casboult. We are moaning about it a little, but lets face it, the issue last thursday is that we lacked mobility. Would Casboult have helped that? Only if he came in at the expense of Rowe, and we sent Henderson back, but on the form of last season, we had no reason to believe that this was a good decision aside from assisting our ruck division. Which would not have benefitted majorly from having Casboult in (as his ruckwork has been average at best).
We have created an environment where the second the coach starts playing more for the benefit of our future, rather than the benefit of the present, he is walking on thin ice. That is a recipe for having coaches constantly in self preservation mode, and to the detriment of developing our team. That is a recipe for disaster.
You arguing against yourself, because we took three first Carlton game players into the season opener!
As for Smith I don't accept the early Sub as bad luck, the problem occurred at the selection table and was a design fault not a case of good or bad fortune!
If they want to give kids like Smith a run then select a side around him that can afford to carry him and play him from the start, not as a Sub and not surrounded by two or three other first game players.
We do not do the Sub well, and the Malthouse continually asking for the end of the Sub exposes that he doesn't understand or like it. FFS, how many times did we pick McLean as Sub and still go into the match with a top heavy side?
But some clubs do the Sub very, very, very well as part of a progressive game plan!
You arguing against yourself, because we took three first Carlton game players into the season opener!
As for Smith I don't accept the early Sub as bad luck, the problem occurred at the selection table and was a design fault not a case of good or bad fortune!
If they want to give kids like Smith a run then select a side around him that can afford to carry him and play him from the start, not as a Sub and not surrounded by two or three other first game players.
We do not do the Sub well, and the Malthouse continually asking for the end of the Sub exposes that he doesn't understand or like it. FFS, how many times did we pick McLean as Sub and still go into the match with a top heavy side?
But some clubs do the Sub very, very, very well as part of a progressive game plan!
I disagree that I am arguing against myself here.
Thats just plain unlucky. Not just in terms of having Smith play 4 quarters, but also in the fact that we lost a small for a small, and went in top heavy.
We stuffed the sub up last week, we selected him to play the last quarter and it blew up in our faces.
I like Lappin but is he head coach material?
Don't think so Carrots, but he could take a mean grab and snag a few goals.
Would love Dew to be our next coach. By all reports, one of the better assistants going around
Don't think so Carrots, but he could take a mean grab and snag a few goals.
Would love Dew to be our next coach. By all reports, one of the better assistants going around
It's hard to judge blokes until you get to hear them talk quite a bit. If they are not articulate and clear enough they are going to struggle. This must have been one of Ratten's problems, his message was often muddled!
But being articulate doesn't mean your message is also clear, just listen to Malthouse, I hope his messages to players are clearer than his discussions with media! :D
Parkin was articulate as well as clear to the point of being brutal, he delivered some of the most clearly defined and intimidating messages I have ever heard! Yabbie Jeans was also in the same category. But those guys would get no respect from kids in AFL these days, the kids are too well trained into identifying bullying no matter how you dress it up or deliver it!
We stuffed the sub up last week, we selected him to play the last quarter and it blew up in our faces.
I dont disagree with you, and I think the plan was to take off a tal for a small, and although it may have been a contributing factor to losing the match, it wasnt the sole reason why we did.
Parkin was articulate as well as clear to the point of being brutal, he delivered some of the most clearly defined and intimidating messages I have ever heard! Yabbie Jeans was also in the same category. But those guys would get no respect from kids in AFL these days, the kids are too well trained into identifying bullying no matter how you dress it up or deliver it!
Problem is that players are too soft these days.
I dont disagree with you, and I think the plan was to take off a tal for a small, and although it may have been a contributing factor to losing the match, it wasnt the sole reason why we did.
It was a huge factor. We won or broke even in all the contested footy stats but they smashed us on the rebound.
Problem is that players are too soft these days.
You have to be careful with those descriptive terms, soft not in a physical strength or fitness sense, nor a gut running sense.
Softer in terms of not being bastards or brutes, no doubt that is true!
Hawthorn has Hodge, Lewis and others who seem to be bridging the gap between the new age players and the old world pricks! We have no-one like this, not one!
It was a huge factor. We won or broke even in all the contested footy stats but they smashed us on the rebound.
I reckon we got burnt on the turnover at half forward too easily and thats where we lost.
I believe it was worth 4 goals to Richmond rather than 4 goals to us, and this is despite us playing poorly, forced to use the sub in the first quarter, and having another bloke playing through broken ribs.
IF our club embraced this as an issue to fix, we would start winning more games faster without having to improve overly other than making sure we hit our targets.
I reckon we got burnt on the turnover at half forward too easily and thats where we lost.
We turn it over on our HF line because the slow game plan lets opposition clubs set up and wait for us to get there! They are setting up while we are touring the boundary line!
We turn it over on our HF line because the slow game plan lets opposition clubs set up and wait for us to get there! They are setting up while we are touring the boundary line!
Either that or our so called A graders can't hit the side of a barn.
Either that or our so called A graders can't hit the side of a barn.
We have no A graders...judd murph and gibb are b plus to b unfortunately. ...
We have no A graders...judd murph and gibb are b plus to b unfortunately. ...
I reckon Parko is a pretty good judge and he says we have four; Judd, Murph, Gibbs and Simpson.
It was a huge factor. We won or broke even in all the contested footy stats but they smashed us on the rebound.
Mate, it was far from ideal. But to suggest it cost us the game is BS.
There is almost never just '1 reason' why you lose a game.
Thomas injured.
Jaksch injured.
No 2nd ruck
Piss poor accuracy in front of goal.
Lack of communication between forward targets
Piss poor delivery to our forwards.
Lack of spread, run from our midfielders.
They were all things that cost us the game.
Mate, it was far from ideal. But to suggest it cost us the game is BS.
There is almost never just '1 reason' why you lose a game.
I agree but this was one of those times. The tigers were playing through whoever he was near because they knew he couldn't chase. I can't recall another game where we have allowed players to consistently run the ball down the wings like they did last week, it was embarrassing.
I agree but this was one of those times. The tigers were playing through whoever he was near because they knew he couldn't chase. I can't recall another game where we have allowed players to consistently run the ball down the wings like they did last week, it was embarrassing.
Doesn't this beg the question of who the ^&*% was there to help him out ? A first gamer, called on well before he was supposed to, playing against a pretty decent running outfit, clearly lacking a decent tank, and not one of our "leaders" thinks "hmm, most of the Tigers play is going through our first gamer, he's completely rooted, maybe someone should give him a a chop out ? Surely they weren't playing to instruction ? Why wasn't this picked up in the coaches box ?
We have been complaining about the lack of on field leadership for some time now. Last week it was an issue. We had plenty of others as well: not working hard enough, structural issues, turning the ball over, etc. Well, the off field leaders have had a week to do something about it. They were probably no happier than we were. So, let's see what we can get. I really hope o see some of our issues addressed tonight. The conditions should help in a way: we can't kick any worse than we already do, while they can. Let's see if we can put enough pressure on them to reduce their skills to what we can cope with.
Then again, the Horse may learn how to sing.... ::) ::) ::) ;D
Doesn't this beg the question of who the ^&*% was there to help him out ? A first gamer, called on well before he was supposed to, playing against a pretty decent running outfit, clearly lacking a decent tank, and not one of our "leaders" thinks "hmm, most of the Tigers play is going through our first gamer, he's completely rooted, maybe someone should give him a a chop out ? Surely they weren't playing to instruction ? Why wasn't this picked up in the coaches box ?
Unfortunately in today's game everyone has to hold their own, if there is a weak link it will get exposed. The midfield tried to cover but when they did they hand balled or kicked over the top to the man they left. I'm not blaming the kid as it wasn't lack of effort, he physically couldn't run.
Unfortunately in today's game everyone has to hold their own, if there is a weak link it will get exposed. The midfield tried to cover but when they did they hand balled or kicked over the top to the man they left. I'm not blaming the kid as it wasn't lack of effort, he physically couldn't run.
Yet a very public part of our game plan is to have players that can be used anywhere, in other words not in their preferred or most potent positions.
It's a standardisation plan and it sets a new level of mediocrity, you end up with the ground covered in players who are doing OK!
What we really need are players who excel!
Unfortunately in today's game everyone has to hold their own, if there is a weak link it will get exposed. The midfield tried to cover but when they did they hand balled or kicked over the top to the man they left. I'm not blaming the kid as it wasn't lack of effort, he physically couldn't run.
MBB, I can tell from your language that you're not blaming Smith, just stating the facts.
Why not try to play him as far from the action as possible ? Forward or back pocket, give him more time on the bench etc.
I'd bet London to a brick that if the game was Tigers vs Hawks, and Hawthorn was 1 rotation down, they still would've won. And therein lies the problem - one of them anyway.
It's interesting to read different folks' reasons for our loss.
I don't think anyone has mentioned the two loose players Richmond had behind the ball who cut off almost every attempt we made rebound out of defence.
I suspect that the better teams (a) wouldn't have let that happen or (b) would have countered it after the first or second interception. You could blame our failure to respond on the coach but I reckon that it is the responsibility of the on field leaders. However, I wonder whether they have been empowered to do so or whether they lack the confidence to change the coach's set up.
@DJC, 3rd year and we still can't work out what to do against the spare man.
It's interesting to read different folks' reasons for our loss.
I don't think anyone has mentioned the two loose players Richmond had behind the ball who cut off almost every attempt we made rebound out of defence.
I suspect that the better teams (a) wouldn't have let that happen or (b) would have countered it after the first or second interception. You could blame our failure to respond on the coach but I reckon that it is the responsibility of the on field leaders. However, I wonder whether they have been empowered to do so or whether they lack the confidence to change the coach's set up.
For me it is clearly an issue with the game plan, our ball movement is too slow, plain and simple.
Those spares guys are not there all the time, and the opposition don't have some super-athletes who sprint up and down the ground all day. The opposition forwards roll off and like a domino effect their lose man propagates down the field to our forward line. But they can only do it because we move the ball slowly around the boundary line.
As far as I can tell, our game plan would only work with one of either Roughead or Walker inside our F50. There isn't another forward in the competition that can deal with our slow ball movement and this type of game plan! If Casboult was a lot stronger he may be able to work it as well, but his body on body stuff is below average for his size which leaves him out of the contest.
For me it is clearly an issue with the game plan, our ball movement is too slow, plain and simple.
Those spares guys are not there all the time, and the opposition don't have some super-athletes who sprint up and down the ground all day. The opposition forwards roll off and like a domino effect their lose man propagates down the field to our forward line. But they can only do it because we move the ball slowly around the boundary line.
As far as I can tell, our game plan would only work with one of either Roughead or Walker inside our F50. There isn't another forward in the competition that can deal with our slow ball movement and this type of game plan! If Casboult was a lot stronger he may be able to work it as well, but his body on body stuff is below average for his size which leaves him out of the contest.
Forgive me if this is inaccurate, but if we move the ball so slowly for them to get loose players back, then forgive me if this is wrong, but shouldnt we be able to man up forward accordingly and end up with an even distribution of players forward?
I would have thought that that slow ball movement should be more conducive to ending up with more bodies forward, and that moving the ball quickly would allow their plus one to chop off the forward entry rather than the opposite?
Mind you, slower ball movement should also mean more precise ball movement, picking out a team mate rather than blazing away and kicking to a contest which is 2 to 1 against.
I don't think slow ball movement is a factor in the situation I was referring to.
Picture the ball in Richmond's forward 50 along with most of the players. Two of Richmond's defenders haven't followed their opponents and position themselves just forward of centre. We get the ball and attempt to clear it but our kicks, handpasses or run and carry are intercepted/stopped by on of the two defenders.
By this stage our players are streaming forward and the ball is roosted back into Richmond's forward 50 and an unmarked player.
Forgive me if this is inaccurate, but if we move the ball so slowly for them to get loose players back, then forgive me if this is wrong, but shouldnt we be able to man up forward accordingly and end up with an even distribution of players forward?
I would have thought that that slow ball movement should be more conducive to ending up with more bodies forward, and that moving the ball quickly would allow their plus one to chop off the forward entry rather than the opposite?
Mind you, slower ball movement should also mean more precise ball movement, picking out a team mate rather than blazing away and kicking to a contest which is 2 to 1 against.
So you want more bodies in the F50, you want us to crowd our own F50?
Your pointing out the idiosyncrasies in the game plan, we don't crowd our own forward line and we keep bodies behind the ball, which means opposition can roll back and create numbers.
Again it's our slow moving contested game plan that creates more opportunity for opponents to setup, defenders want setups and numbers, forwards want freedom and space!
Sides press too easily against us in the real season, in the NAB Cup you saw Carlton using fast breaks with man-on-man football which we generally don't play.
I don't think slow ball movement is a factor in the situation I was referring to.
Picture the ball in Richmond's forward 50 along with most of the players. Two of Richmond's defenders haven't followed their opponents and position themselves just forward of centre. We get the ball and attempt to clear it but our kicks, handpasses or run and carry are intercepted/stopped by on of the two defenders.
By this stage our players are streaming forward and the ball is roosted back into Richmond's forward 50 and an unmarked player.
It's a feature of the same game plan, bodies behind the ball and an arm wrestle around the boundary. There are no fast breaks because we have numbers behind the ball, no man on man contests, no space and nobody to kick to! Yet apparently it's a good plan! :o
I don't think slow ball movement is a factor in the situation I was referring to.
Picture the ball in Richmond's forward 50 along with most of the players. Two of Richmond's defenders haven't followed their opponents and position themselves just forward of centre. We get the ball and attempt to clear it but our kicks, handpasses or run and carry are intercepted/stopped by on of the two defenders.
By this stage our players are streaming forward and the ball is roosted back into Richmond's forward 50 and an unmarked player.
Im with you, we got burnt in the transition from offense to defense too often. Usually through skill errors, or poor decision making and rather than looking at the wing, or the corridoor, I prefer to look at "thirds" of the field. Defensive, middle, offensive. You can afford to make the odd mistake in the attacking third, but your team will function more cohesively if they can all "push" up the ground together.
If you get blokes going too quick, then you isolate your forwards, usually outnumbered as everyone seems to play a +1 these days and make it an all or nothing contest for them. They either win the ball, and get the scoring opportunity, or they dont, and that ball is a turnover.
You advance the ball up the park, and sure, you might crowd your forwards in their attacking 50, but if that ball turns over, there should be little scope for it to rebound quickly as there will be numbers around the ball in your attacking third, and its more likely to fall out in a situation where we can "lock it in".
We did that very well in the first quarter on thursday. The Tigers started working through it though, and we were not smart enough to lock it in, and I feel we got sucked into to playing end to end footy which is an absolute disaster unless you have very quick players, or a potent forwardline.
I dont think we have much of either at the moment.
The one and only way to get rid of the +1 is fast ball movement!
Our current game plan is a like a concession to failure, no risk with no rewards!
But it makes a lot of supporters happy, less blow-outs! ;)
I'd rather have a few 100 point victories mixed in with a few 100 point losses, and bet on a favorable split for the rest, than have a season full of gallant defeats!
The one and only way to get rid of the +1 is fast ball movement!
Our game plan is a like a concession to failure, no risk with no rewards!
Don't think it needs to be quick if it's precise but slow movement followed by a stray kick is death.
Don't think it needs to be quick if it's precise but slow movement followed by a stray kick is death.
It doesn't matter who you are, eventually there is a stray kick and if you move slowly enough a zone is setup to pick it off!
Nobody, not one player or any team, kicks at 100%
The game plan has to craft a win while dealing with imperfections in players.
Our game plan want or needs defensive perfection, but it creates such extreme pressure on the players trying to implement it that it becomes self-defeating! Then to top off their exasperation they get dragged over to the boundary for another earful of confidence, they look puzzled because they tried to do what was asked but failed! It's not like they did something wrong, just that the didn't succeed at it!
Nobody is perfect, not Malthouse and not the players, have a game plan that can deal with it!
The one and only way to get rid of the +1 is fast ball movement!
Our current game plan is a like a concession to failure, no risk with no rewards!
Our current game plan is different to our game plan last year.
Geelong are the 'king of the corridor.'
Our NAB cup game against them showed some pre-game stats (After 2 NAB games) and we were 1 and 2 for corridor use.
So what happened?
We lacked run!
Daisy going down early hurt us as he is one of our best runners.
Walker not playing.
Murphy having a crap game.
Yarran hurting his knee(?) didn't help.
Losing some rotations because of Jaksch injuries meant everyone was not as well rested as a result.
Smith obviously wasn't full of run.
Murphy was pretty good in his latest presser, shows why he is a players choice! ;)
When on-field leadership is faltering it is also worth asking if the playing group actually fully respects and trusts the leadership.
What continues to worry me is this;
We've heard rumors Murphy isn't right, he doesn't look right physically, we heard rumors Judd is sore as well, and other several rumors that certain blokes are borderline on the cut each week.
But when Murphy and Judd cop additional attention, the sort of attention that their status demands, as a playing group we don't seem to offer any assistance, almost nothing!
Since the arrival of Judd that is the way it has been, and that is the way it continues to be!
I will stick my neck out...
Taking judd has prevented the development of leaders just like gazza at gold coast
Murph gibbs are too soft now and fall into bad habits when the heat is on.
.
I will stick my neck out...
Taking judd has prevented the development of leaders just like gazza at gold coast
Murph gibbs are too soft know and fall into bad habits when the heat is on.
.
Rubbish.
Those two are soft irrespective of one C. Judd.
Rubbish.
Those two are soft irrespective of one C. Judd.
Ok ...u watch em carefully this Saturday
I will stick my neck out...
Taking judd has prevented the development of leaders just like gazza at gold coast
Murph gibbs are too soft now and fall into bad habits when the heat is on.
.
If what you postulate is true, then both Murph and Gibbs have questionable characters to begin with, and are probably not leadership material, irrespective of whether Judd came to the club or not.
The footage in the WCE game during one of the breaks, showing Judd giving the troops a rev up rather than Murph, is worrying. Yes, it's only a tiny snippet, and I don't know what happens in the thousands of hours we don't see, but it's a disturbing snippet.
Most people on here, and everywhere else that I've spoken to, acknowledge that neither Murph nor Gibbs has any mongrel or fire in the belly. They are both talented footy players of course and ones that any club could gain great benefits from having on its list, but not in the leadership area.
I have nothing personal against these two, it is their individual natures, that's how they are wired. I would love to be proved wrong on this, this week especially.
Most people on here, and everywhere else that I've spoken to, acknowledge that neither Murph nor Gibbs has any mongrel or fire in the belly. They are both talented footy players of course and ones that any club could gain great benefits from having on its list, but not in the leadership area.
I have nothing personal against these two, it is their individual natures, that's how they are wired. I would love to be proved wrong on this, this week especially.
So our solution to balance this equation is to get rid of Robbo, knowing we had already lost Duigan!
It's mis-management, it is not Murphy or Gibbs problem!
I'm not pointing the finger at you, but there are posters on here who would have required Craig Bradley to be a battering ram!
So our solution to balance this equation is to get rid of Robbo, knowing we had already lost Duigan!
It's mis-management, it is not Murphy or Gibbs problem!
I'm not pointing the finger at you, but there are posters on here who would have required Craig Bradley to be a battering ram!
I hear what you say LP and I agree with the principle of what you are saying - we do not seem remotely competent in terms of playing guys to their strengths, but are very good of putting them into places where they can be more easily embarrassed or smashed physically. It's been happening for a long time.
Name me one player who Robbo would respect enough to actually pull his head in if they told him to pull his head in?
I cant think of one.
Not one. The result? Anyone trying to get him to play differently would struggle.
Leading teams really would have tanked at our club. I can't imagine our players having the gonads to actually tell their teamates what they are doing wrong, and I would expect that many of them would get defensive.
There was one of those Q&A grabs of a few of our players including Murph and Gibbs in the Nab challenge where they ask silly questions like who has the worst fashion sense etc.... One question was asked which I think is telling to the players mentality. Who is the coaches pet? They all said Daisy which on face value is not surprising but considering that MM has acknowledged we are a team of introverts I'm sure a big part of him wanting Daisy here was for his voice and clearly even he is struggling to get through.
It's easy to have a go at him for his injury woes and struggles to find form but if he's been brought to this club as a premiership winning all Australian to help create a culture of hard work and a team first ethic, calling him "the Coaches pet" shows where we're at.
Name me one player who Robbo would respect enough to actually pull his head in if they told him to pull his head in?
I cant think of one.
Not one. The result? Anyone trying to get him to play differently would struggle.
Leading teams really would have tanked at our club. I can't imagine our players having the gonads to actually tell their teamates what they are doing wrong, and I would expect that many of them would get defensive.
Then it's a coaching / player development problem, because in a sample of 40 people there is no way you could randomly select a group of 100% introverts! ;)
FWIW, I think there are very few draftees who come into the system as extroverts, most spend the best part of their first year or two in awe of their team-mates and opponents. The system makes introverts, if you have a system that works!
Question...can a captain be a soft player?.......do you pick a less talented but more robust player like Simon White instead...he would be our version of Nick Maxwell as an example...
Question...can a captain be a soft player?.......do you pick a less talented but more robust player like Simon White instead...he would be our version of Nick Maxwell as an example...
Tom Harley's another example.
Leading teams really would have tanked at our club. I can't imagine our players having the gonads to actually tell their teamates what they are doing wrong, and I would expect that many of them would get defensive.
Not only do we break coaches....we even broke "Leading teams". :(
I wonder who let them go..... and why.
Tom Harley's another example.
I think you have the wrong definition of soft!
I think you have the wrong definition of soft!
I was towing the more robust, less talented line. I thought the soft reference was aimed at at Murphy
Tom Harley's another example.
Yep Harley was another good ordinary player......think Harley's appointment was more faction based...cats like most clubs had/have
a few groups within a group and he was a neutral so the factions were all happy to work under the one non aligned leader...
Maxwell grew into the role...not sure Murphy has shown signs of that yet...
ie soft....probably I mean less vocal, not able to step in and sort out other players when they are intimidating your teammates etc..
It wasnt a slight at Murphys ability to put his head over the footy or win the footy in contests.....the facts are he is a little bloke with a baby face and
he has trouble asserting himself when rough stuff starts..
Not saying you have to be a thug and Murphy is capable of inspiring with his acts on the field but if you look at Luke Hodge .he is the complete package...can inspire with his footy skills but can also assert himself when needed and look after his teammates..
So our solution to balance this equation is to get rid of Robbo, knowing we had already lost Duigan!
It's mis-management, it is not Murphy or Gibbs problem!
I'm not pointing the finger at you, but there are posters on here who would have required Craig Bradley to be a battering ram!
we all know why robbo left....
duigan was an absolute gem for mine ...
ie soft....probably I mean less vocal, not able to step in and sort out other players when they are intimidating your teammates etc..
It wasnt a slight at Murphys ability to put his head over the footy or win the footy in contests.....the facts are he is a little bloke with a baby face and
he has trouble asserting himself when rough stuff starts..
Not saying you have to be a thug and Murphy is capable of inspiring with his acts on the field but if you look at Luke Hodge .he is the complete package...can inspire with his footy skills but can also assert himself when needed and look after his teammates..
x1 or x 2 whatever u prefer
Not saying you have to be a thug and Murphy is capable of inspiring with his acts on the field but if you look at Luke Hodge .he is the complete package...can inspire with his footy skills but can also assert himself when needed and look after his teammates..
True, but there are few Hodges and he was well and truly in the shizen with reports, behavior issues, etc., etc., before the Mitchell era bought him time to settle after Vandenberg's departure! In an interview I recall him discussing the possibility he thought he might get the lemon-sars from Hawthorn at one stage, after some dispute with the Prez, coach or CEO, it was never in the press though! He credited Vandenberg, who at that stage had retired but was still mentoring, for setting him right!
Would we have axed him at Carlton? For sure it would have been front page!
People are judging Marc Murphy when he is clearly not fit, the same thing happened last season and by the end he was standing up as well as anybody even having endure that Hodge dog act! This is a kid who had his jaw wired and only missed one round, had multiple games ranking over 140 points(About eight 30 possession games!)
True, but there are few Hodges and he was well and truly in the shizen with reports, behavior issues, etc., etc., before the Mitchell era bought him time to settle after Vandenberg's departure! In an interview I recall him discussing the possibility he thought he might get the lemon-sars from Hawthorn at one stage, after some dispute with the Prez, coach or CEO, it was never in the press though! He credited Vandenberg, who at that stage had retired but was still mentoring, for setting him right!
Would we have axed him at Carlton? For sure it would have been front page!
People are judging Marc Murphy when he is clearly not fit, the same thing happened last season and by the end he was standing up as well as anybody even having endure that Hodge dog act! This is a kid who had his jaw wired and only missed one round, had multiple games ranking over 140 points(About eight 30 possession games!)
I'll put it another way....forgetting about ability, I think if Hodge had been in our team for rnd1 and rnd 2 we would have knocked over Richmond and only lost to WC by
a couple of goals. I take your point about Murphy being injured but it would be fair to say Hodge has carried injuries for a lot of his career and still got the job done.
I would prefer a more robust captain and let Murphy get on with playing footy and winning us games with his skills...I dont think he can do both jobs...
I'll put it another way....forgetting about ability, I think if Hodge had been in our team for rnd1 and rnd 2 we would have knocked over Richmond and only lost to WC by
a couple of goals. I take your point about Murphy being injured but it would be fair to say Hodge has carried injuries for a lot of his career and still got the job done.
I would prefer a more robust captain and let Murphy get on with playing footy and winning us games with his skills...I dont think he can do both jobs...
I accept that is the case but I am not sure you need that type of player to be the captain, but I agree whole heartedly that you need that type of player in your team!
A captain needs brains, communication skills, poise, what Hodge offers and what many good footballers offer doesn't normally come in the one package!
The question I would ask is this, if we had Hodge type players on our list could Murphy pull them into line, could he do a Vandenberg, I think leading by example is not enough.
Having said that, Garlett and Robinson's fate has surely sent a message, we may never know how much the leadership group had to do with it!
Does a leader need to be feared, by his own side as well as opponents?
ie soft....probably I mean less vocal, not able to step in and sort out other players when they are intimidating your teammates etc..
It wasnt a slight at Murphys ability to put his head over the footy or win the footy in contests.....the facts are he is a little bloke with a baby face and
he has trouble asserting himself when rough stuff starts..
Not saying you have to be a thug and Murphy is capable of inspiring with his acts on the field but if you look at Luke Hodge .he is the complete package...can inspire with his footy skills but can also assert himself when needed and look after his teammates..
These are exactly my thoughts eb1.
On a side note, the Cotchin appointment at the Tiggies seems to me a carbon copy of the Murphy appointment
I accept that is the case but I am not sure you need that type of player to be the captain, but I agree whole heartedly that you need that type of player in your team!
A captain needs brains, communication skills, poise, what Hodge offers and what many good footballers offer doesn't normally come in the one package!
The question I would ask is this, if we had Hodge type players on our list could Murphy pull them into line, could he do a Vandenberg, I think leading by example is not enough.
Having said that, Garlett and Robinson's fate has surely sent a message, we may never know how much the leadership group had to do with it!
Does a leader need to be feared, by his own side as well as opponents?
I think a leader needs to be feared ..re: Robbo and Garlett....think thats a leadership group issue where a strong leader also needs some strong deputies to back him up and
you cant get on with everyone but maybe one of your deputies gets on with some players that you dont and can impart the message better..
Who the hell was scared of Garlett?
Long bow?
And as for Robbo, why don't we just go down the pub on a friday night and pick up the last bloke standing and whack a (c) next to his name.
If he could stay on the park for more than 30 seconds, Krooz would be well worth a look as Captain.
Who the hell was scared of Garlett?
Long bow?.
You need to account for mobile phones typing when reading forums nowadays ;)
We should punish limp efforts with the same degree as we do off field stuff. I've gotten far more crap for our heartless performances than for Robbo or Scotto bopping some muppet :))
And as for Malthouse, why don't we just go down the pub on a friday night and pick up the last bloke standing and whack a (coach) next to his name.
Edited for accuracy.
Fair comment, probably get similar results at the moment.
I think a leader needs to be feared ..re: Robbo and Garlett....think thats a leadership group issue where a strong leader also needs some strong deputies to back him up and
you cant get on with everyone but maybe one of your deputies gets on with some players that you dont and can impart the message better..
Agree with Elwood. There is really no point making this discussion scientific it's pretty simple and with all due respect to Murph but going out with him as your captain is a guarantee of being laughed at. He doesn't strike fear into anyone let alone his opponents and he doesn't making anyone stand taller. He is no leader of men plain and simple he is just the popular kid at school that gets made captain.
If he could stay on the park for more than 30 seconds, Krooz would be well worth a look as Captain.
He would set a good example in terms of work rate for sure. You would need Simo as vice, as Krooz would only play a few games per season. Maybe a brain transplant with Murph and Krooz might work. ;D
He would set a good example in terms of work rate for sure. You would need Simo as vice, as Krooz would only play a few games per season. Maybe a brain transplant with Murph and Krooz might work. ;D
Forget captain, forget him doing anything other than getting himself right, SpecialK is the missing piece of the puzzle. When he is fit and playing we have at least a 5 goal swing in our favour as a team!
If he could stay on the park for more than 30 seconds, Krooz would be well worth a look as Captain.
I reckon that might have been the long term plan when we first drafted him...Big Nick, Fitzy, Sticks...having a big bloke as your skipper has worked for us.
Pity he couldnt stay on the park and develop as a player and as a leader...
I reckon that might have been the long term plan when we first drafted him...Big Nick, Fitzy, Sticks...having a big bloke as your skipper has worked for us.
Pity he couldnt stay on the park and develop as a player and as a leader...
I think you're right EB.
I'm an admirer of Kreuzer but we are thinking of naming a bloke nicknamed "Humphrey" as in B Bear, the captain?
I'm an admirer of Kreuzer but we are thinking of naming a bloke nicknamed "Humphrey" as in B Bear, the captain?
Especially remembering how he got that name - he never says anything.
Especially remembering how he got that name - he never says anything.
I thought the exact same thing a few moments ago. Then I remember what I have seen from him on the field blocking and knocking other small mids around at a stoppage. How much more does he have to say, than try this once in a while. The other one about bears in the woods. "Yes they do". ;)
Especially remembering how he got that name - he never says anything.
I don't know how much or how little he talks, but I thought he was called Humphrey because of his face, especially his eyes and mouth ? I'm sure I saw a side by side photo of Krooz and the Bear somewhere, which gave the impression that this is the origin of the name.
At any rate, I believe he also has another nickname - Tractor.
Humphrey was because he wouldn't say anything but he has come out of shell a bit.
Tractor is also right.
If he can get his game back, he is a good combination of grunt and ability. Not sure how keen he would be on the media stuff.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/why-captains-are-an-essential-ingredient-for-afl-success-20150417-1mmdt2.html
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/why-captains-are-an-essential-ingredient-for-afl-success-20150417-1mmdt2.html
The article says we "are being led by former captain Chris Judd". Is this yet another example of how Murphy is not acknowledged/recognised as a worthy captain or am I missing something.
The article says we "are being led by former captain Chris Judd". Is this yet another example of how Murphy is not acknowledged/recognised as a worthy captain or am I missing something.
Well there is a difference between a captain and a spiritual leader, refer the Hodge and Mitchell example at the Hawks.
The other interesting observation was that Juddy lacks that warmth or common touch that make/made others much more successful as captains/leaders. He seems to be more aloof and relies on leading more by example.
Well there is a difference between a captain and a spiritual leader, refer the Hodge and Mitchell example at the Hawks.
The other interesting observation was that Juddy lacks that warmth or common touch that make/made others much more successful as captains/leaders. He seems to be more aloof and relies on leading more by example.
Geez I wish we had a Sam Mitchell problem
Geez I wish we had a Sam Mitchell problem
Wouldn't that be good.
Much better from our blokes this week. Murphy was individually, much more involved in the play without being brilliant or inspirational.
Good to see Jamo get over to Byrne after the debutante made an error And give him a pat on the back.
Gibbs was better this week and I was wrapped when he shoulder barged Goddard.
The article says we "are being led by former captain Chris Judd". Is this yet another example of how Murphy is not acknowledged/recognised as a worthy captain or am I missing something.
I don't think that is correct. Judd may lead by example at times but nowhere near as much as in past seasons. He certainly doesn't take an overt leadership role.
If you watch who does most of the talking in the huddles it is Murphy, Carrazzo and Simpson. Gibbs and Jamison don't seem to have much to say.
I usually see Carrazzo and Simpson doing almost all the talking in the huddles.
I usually see Carrazzo and Simpson doing almost all the talking in the huddles.
x2....previous week it was Carrazzo doing the rev ups in the huddle...not sure that is great for Murphy's image and he should be doing
more of the talking and asserting himself..
Carrazzo just gave Yarran a bake for hitting Chapman Lol. What a bunch of soft c0ck$.
I don't think that is correct. Judd may lead by example at times but nowhere near as much as in past seasons. He certainly doesn't take an overt leadership role.
If you watch who does most of the talking in the huddles it is Murphy, Carrazzo and Simpson. Gibbs and Jamison don't seem to have much to say.
I remember an interview with him early after he stepped down from the captaincy. Some video of him was shown at half time walking into the rooms and giving some words. When showed it and asked to comment, he said it was probably disrepectful to Murphy and he probably shouldn't have done it.
Carrazzo just gave Yarran a bake for hitting Chapman Lol. What a bunch of soft c0ck$.
Should be giving him a pat on the back for standing up for himself.
I suspect Carrazzo is out of touch with the feelings of a great many, if not the majority, of Carlton supporters ;).
He's looking at it from the team point of view, because Yarran missing will hurt our chances in games...... but it would probably have been better to say nothing.
Carrozzo gibbs murph simpson are just not in the same league as Selwood. ...he just saved the game against gold coast...at the last quarter
I suspect Carrazzo is out of touch with the feelings of a great many, if not the majority, of Carlton supporters ;).
He's looking at it from the team point of view, because Yarran missing will hurt our chances in games...... but it would probably have been better to say nothing.
Personally I loved seeing it but in hindsight Chapman won this battle. Yarran was a bit of a non event for most of the game and Chappy kicked two himself.
Perhaps the incident got to him but who knows.
Think back to Judd on Adams. Yep got him lifted kicked 3 goals and was bog in a losing side Getting 30 plus possessions.
He's going to have blokes trying to rough him up because it seems to have thrown him off and Yarran is a much better player than that performance.
Too bad something wasn't done about Melkskam. He was the one deserving a left hook.
I suspect Carrazzo is out of touch with the feelings of a great many, if not the majority, of Carlton supporters ;).
He's looking at it from the team point of view, because Yarran missing will hurt our chances in games...... but it would probably have been better to say nothing.
I think Yarran could have wrestled him to ground and done a little better than a cheap punch to the face. That one will cost him 2 weeks no matter what. I don't say I am unhappy with what he did. Better something than to just bend over and take it up the clacker. Maybe next time he will handle it a little different. Would be interesting to hear what fired him up so much.
Personally I loved seeing it but in hindsight Chapman won this battle. Yarran was a bit of a non event for most of the game and Chappy kicked two himself.
Perhaps the incident got to him but who knows.
Think back to Judd on Adams. Yep got him lifted kicked 3 goals and was bog in a losing side Getting 30 plus possessions.
He's going to have blokes trying to rough him up because it seems to have thrown him off and Yarran is a much better player than that performance.
Too bad something wasn't done about Melkskam. He was the one deserving a left hook.
x2...Agree on Melksham and the lack of attention to his checking of Judd was amazing...I would be ordering certain players to contact Melksham so he didnt have the
ability to chase or stay with Judd.....
I think Yarran could have wrestled him to ground and done a little better than a cheap punch to the face. That one will cost him 2 weeks no matter what. I don't say I am unhappy with what he did. Better something than to just bend over and take it up the clacker. Maybe next time he will handle it a little different. Would be interesting to hear what fired him up so much.
Lets just get one thing straight, there was nothing "cheap" about what Yaz did. They were standing face to face, Yaz was simpler quicker than Mudguts.
I think Yarran could have wrestled him to ground and done a little better than a cheap punch to the face. That one will cost him 2 weeks no matter what. I don't say I am unhappy with what he did. Better something than to just bend over and take it up the clacker. Maybe next time he will handle it a little different. Would be interesting to hear what fired him up so much.
Easy to say Mants but we don't really know what that snipe actually said to him and Yazz is obviously not going to say. I'll side with Yazz, even though he might get time off, since I know he's no thug.
An interesting read :
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/afl/afl-news/chris-scott-hails-amazing-joel-selwood-after-cats-break-duck-20150419-1mogsj.html
"I said to him post-game, it feels like I say it all the time, but it was just amazing," Scott said of Selwood, who had an astonishing 23 contested possessions. "I don't reckon he's driven by his own performance as much as he is taking his own teammates with him, the message is more to his teammates. "It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to play with this guy, let's go along for the ride with him, because he's pretty willing to lead."
An interesting read :
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/afl/afl-news/chris-scott-hails-amazing-joel-selwood-after-cats-break-duck-20150419-1mogsj.html
Should have taken him instead of Gibbs.
Is there a new portal delivering guns from another era?
What Yarran did wasn't really leadership....but it was an example to stand up for yourself.
The fact that some of us are seeing it as leadership actually highlights our lack of it at present.
Maybe he is carrying an injury but Murphy seems to lack spark.He still contributes, but there's nothing inspirational in what he does. Others seem to do most of the talking. Contrast that with Judd who during his time as captain did many inspiring things ....Murph seems burdened by the role and it may be that he would be glad to be rid of it.
The problem is our future leaders are hard to find.
I reckon we saw a glimpse of it on the weekend in young Cripps.
He's going to be a beauty, but he's probably about a season and a half off being ready though.
Should have taken him instead of Gibbs.
...and he would've turned out to be nothing but an honest battler with us.
Meanwhile Gibbs would have just won his 2nd Brownlow.
If you think players performances are not a product of their environment, you are mislead.
...and he would've turned out to be nothing but an honest battler with us.
Meanwhile Gibbs would have just won his 2nd Brownlow.
If you think players performances are not a product of their environment, you are mislead.
It's a huge factor
Which is why I fear for the future of our young ones.
Their chief role models are an aging Judd, and two number one draft picks who are a product of a mediocre environment.
It's a huge factor
Which is why I fear for the future of our young ones.
Their chief role models are an aging Judd, and two number one draft picks who are a product of a mediocre environment.
That's exactly why we need some different role models for our future. Not saying we need to discard all of the old ones but we badly need some new ones to take centre stage- it will be very interesting to see how we go about this "rebuild".
It's a huge factor
Which is why I fear for the future of our young ones.
Their chief role models are an aging Judd, and two number one draft picks who are a product of a mediocre environment.
I reckon that might be a driving factor behind recruiting Thomas, who is not a fantastic player in terms of being the best in the comp, but is no slouch and actually can lead on the park.
Still, we have a fair way to go.
I reckon that might be a driving factor behind recruiting Thomas, who is not a fantastic player in terms of being the best in the comp, but is no slouch and actually can lead on the park.
Still, we have a fair way to go.
You're probably right....but we need our leaders to be on the park ;)
...and he would've turned out to be nothing but an honest battler with us.
Meanwhile Gibbs would have just won his 2nd Brownlow.
If you think players performances are not a product of their environment, you are mislead.
Sad but true!
Sad but true!
You only need look at our useless leaders and then who was showing them the way.
One just got binned for hitting a woman.
It's no surprise he did it, but surely our club could have picked the character of our leaders a little better?
I just can't understand how Stevens, Whitnall, Simpson, Carazzo, Murphy, Walker, Gibbs and many others never were traded.
If these guys are so good that we couldn't trade them out, why aren't we any good.
Stuart Maxfield was a major factor in being a role model for the Swans midfield.
Apparently his work ethic was incredible.
We need to find at least 3 players of this calibre.
I reckon that might be a driving factor behind recruiting Thomas, who is not a fantastic player in terms of being the best in the comp, but is no slouch and actually can lead on the park.
Still, we have a fair way to go.
...and that is exactly why i have been a huge fan of his recruitment. He isn't paid 700k to kick a football. He is paid 700k to show our playing list what is required to be an elite footballer. Whether he is now or not, he knows what is required and does his darndest to drag everyone along with him.
...and that is exactly why i have been a huge fan of his recruitment. He isn't paid 700k to kick a football. He is paid 700k to show our playing list what is required to be an elite footballer. Whether he is now or not, he knows what is required and does his darndest to drag everyone along with him.
Daisy can't lead from the stands!
Docherty could be our next captain, he is a defender who can rotate through the forward region and MM loves utility types!
Daisy can't lead from the stands!
...and nobody i know of can predict the future either.
Please point me in the direction where you bought your crystal ball from because mine is clearly broken as it never predicted he'd do his shoulder in the first minute of 2015.
Our on field leadership doesn't look any better than when Daisy started.
...and nobody i know of can predict the future either.
Please point me in the direction where you bought your crystal ball from because mine is clearly broken as it never predicted he'd do his shoulder in the first minute of 2015.
True, nobody can predict the future.
But we don't have to ignore the past! ;)
Our on field leadership doesn't look any better than when Daisy started.
Yup, all we have is a punch from Yarran, so not sure that has worked out.
Daisy can't lead from the stands!
Docherty could be our next captain, he is a defender who can rotate through the forward region and MM loves utility types!
Expecting Daisy to have effected immediate and significant change to our group was a childish expectation. He was brought in for more than his playing but his leadership. Again, patience Grasshopper. Daisy is an important part of our growth.
Expecting Daisy to have effected immediate and significant change to our group was a childish expectation. He was brought in for more than his playing but his leadership. Again, patience Grasshopper. Daisy is an important part of our growth.
Whats that...an ally? :o
Whats that...an ally? :o
Underestimating what this bloke brings to our club is unfair and short-sighted. And those who would defer to his salary miss the bigger picture.
Expecting Daisy to have effected immediate and significant change to our group was a childish expectation. He was brought in for more than his playing but his leadership. Again, patience Grasshopper. Daisy is an important part of our growth.
I too agree. Prefer to think of this as a change management exercise in the context of a salary cap limit and a limited number of players on a list. New folk have to be brought in, but in a complementary way so as not to disrupt things too much. Change has to be undertaken at a pace that can allow many people to grasp and understand what is going on, and then buy in. And in any organisation, this process identifies those resistant and they either change or leave. A corporation of a few thousand people may go through a similar exercise in principle.
Of course results tend to lag the actions, which is why there is a need to communicate change and its purpose. None of this is without risk, and certainly the club has made a big effort to better communicate this process in recent days which was clearly needed.
Leadership is the intangible in any organisation, and despite many efforts to measure and categorise it remains often a subjective quality. I am of the view that bringing Thomas in was a good move as it demonstrated a bit of risk but with a purpose. He is a very good footballer and evidently has some of the qualities that were desired. He is no silver bullet either, which along with injuries have made him a target of criticism. But good leadership is also alot about the conection between people. Those who follow have to have a willingness to listen and consider as well as make a contribution, just like those apparent or annointed leaders. It's a process that is dependent on a feedback loop that if successful functions as a kind of virtuous circle where everyone asks more of each other and everyone is motivated to do better. In reverse it spirals down, replete with blame and finger pointing.
So in that sense Daisy is an epic fail, our leadership and culture are at an all time low. Daisy has ticked neither the performance box nor the leadership box.
So in that sense Daisy is an epic fail, our leadership and culture are at an all time low. Daisy has ticked neither the performance box nor the leadership box.
IYO.
Daisy was top 10 in the B+F and is clearly a leader on and off the field.
I can't speak for the inner sanctum stuff but Daisy must count as an epic on field fail at this stage, compounded by the loss of a compensation pick for Betts.
Top 10 B&F, pffft, he should be top 5 on the coin he accepted.
IYO.
Daisy was top 10 in the B+F and is clearly a leader on and off the field.
Who votes on that?
Given Micks enthusiasm for all things Daisy, it probably doesn't amount to much if he's putting pen to paper.
Gibbs' great year was evident to all, I'm not sure any of us thought Daisy's year was anything but below average.
Collectively at CSC, below average would be very kind:
3831 - Gibbs, Bryce (124)
3055 - Murphy, Marc (0)
2503 - Simpson, Kade (54)
2035 - Judd, Chris (440)
1667 - Yarran, Chris (0)
1396 - Rowe, Sam (163)
949 - Curnow, Edward (3)
902 - Waite, Jarrad (12)
847 - Henderson, Lachie (0)
825 - Everitt, Andrejs (0)
743 - Menzel, Troy (0)
726 - Carrazzo, Andrew (27)
612 - Docherty, Sam (18)
589 - Robinson, Mitch (0)
569 - McLean, Brock (239)
562 - Casboult, Levi (0)
533 - Warnock, Robert (0)
531 - Jamison, Michael (3)
469 - Buckley, Dylan (0)
456 - Thomas, Dale (0)
433 - White, Simon (0)
430 - Walker, Andrew (0)
344 - Bell, Tom (3)
293 - Ellard, David (0)
210 - Watson, Matthew (210)
165 - Garlett, Jeff (0)
121 - Wood, Cameron (3)
105 - Tuohy, Zach (21)
39 - Lucas, Kane (0)
37 - Armfield, Dennis (0)
29 - Sheehan, Ciaran (12)
17 - Scotland, Heath (0)
9 - Graham, Nick (0)
Who votes on that?
Given Micks enthusiasm for all things Daisy, it probably doesn't amount to much if he's putting pen to paper.
Gibbs' great year was evident to all, I'm not sure any of us thought Daisy's year was anything but below average.
There would be 5 people voting on every game, 1 would include Mick.
Mick alone could not get him into the top 10 if thats what you are suggesting.
A lot of people had higher expectations of Daisy and marked him harshly. Others disliked him because he is seen to be 'Micks boy' and that rubbed them the wrong way. Ultimately i think it was the fact that his role changed regularly and only the MC knew what was expected of him and if he performed it or not.
There would be 5 people voting on every game, 1 would include Mick.
Mick alone could not get him into the top 10 if thats what you are suggesting.
A lot of people had higher expectations of Daisy and marked him harshly. Others disliked him because he is seen to be 'Micks boy' and that rubbed them the wrong way. Ultimately i think it was the fact that his role changed regularly and only the MC knew what was expected of him and if he performed it or not.
Must have been watching a different Daisy.
Played 4 average games and one good one at most.
His efforts against a few sides were embarrassing.
$700k a year should be considered top 3 player, not an overweight try hard going through rehab.
How many free agents have been signed to be a role player at there club?
How many free agents have been signed to be a role player at there club?
Technically they all have.
We seem to be the only club in the AFL foreign to the concept of role players, and just expect to push blokes out there, play their best and we shall win somehow because they are worth a million bucks a year. If Tom Boyd was at Carlton he would be being absolutely smashed right now, because the bloke has misfired spectacularly thus far.
How many free agents have been signed to be a role player at there club?
The concept of "role" is a bit ambiguous, and surely trades and de-listings count, but with some limited scope on the idea of "a role" and not the "all players have a role" approach;
Does Everitt qualify?
How about Laidler, technically a de-listing but it seems to fit!
Betts in the Adelaide FP!
How many free agents have been signed to be a role player at there club?
How many have not?
There would be 5 people voting on every game, 1 would include Mick.
Mick alone could not get him into the top 10 if thats what you are suggesting.
A lot of people had higher expectations of Daisy and marked him harshly. Others disliked him because he is seen to be 'Micks boy' and that rubbed them the wrong way. Ultimately i think it was the fact that his role changed regularly and only the MC knew what was expected of him and if he performed it or not.
His on 700K a year. This figure is what any successful entity would base his performance on.....therefore finishing 10th in a B&F is a fail regardless of which way you choose to spin it.
I like Daisy as he shows true grit with his pressure acts and at his best he would be a consistent top 3 B&F finisher but it clear he is no where near what he was and IMO very unlikely to get even close to it.
Considering the hefty price we paid looks very much like another Blues trading failure as he is not getting any younger.
Hope I'm wrong but all signs point to me being correct. ;D
I think we need to move on from the notion That wages are anything but what you pay to get a player to switch clubs.
I.e. Shaun Grigg got 450k a season to switch to Richmond.
At the time that was way overs.
That's what it took to get him over.
Tom Boyd is on a massive contract based on potential and former draft pick status. He is not worth that money (yet).
We paid Thomas, what will be an average b grade midfielder wage to get him.
Finish. It doesn't mean he needs to be our best performing player nor does he being injured make it money wasted.
I think we need to move on from the notion That wages are anything but what you pay to get a player to switch clubs.
I.e. Shaun Grigg got 450k a season to switch to Richmond.
At the time that was way overs.
That's what it took to get him over.
Tom Boyd is on a massive contract based on potential and former draft pick status. He is not worth that money (yet).
We paid Thomas, what will be an average b grade midfielder wage to get him.
Finish. It doesn't mean he needs to be our best performing player nor does he being injured make it money wasted.
Are you being serious? our expectations at CFC are seriously crap if you believe that
I think we need to move on from the notion That wages are anything but what you pay to get a player to switch clubs.
I.e. Shaun Grigg got 450k a season to switch to Richmond.
At the time that was way overs.
That's what it took to get him over.
Tom Boyd is on a massive contract based on potential and former draft pick status. He is not worth that money (yet).
We paid Thomas, what will be an average b grade midfielder wage to get him.
Finish. It doesn't mean he needs to be our best performing player nor does he being injured make it money wasted.
Actually Grigg went over for around 300k not sure where you pulled 450k for. You cannot be serious suggesting 700k is a B-grade midfielder's wage.
Actually Grigg went over for around 300k not sure where you pulled 450k for. You cannot be serious suggesting 700k is a B-grade midfielder's wage.
It will be next season. Watch.
450k is what we offered him to stay and he went anyway.
Are you being serious? our expectations at CFC are seriously crap if you believe that
I am being serious. There is some stupid money being thrown around to get players to shift clubs, and we are taking exception about wages, when the club have made a call.
Some will pay off others will not.
Welcome to modern football. You won't get every draft pick right, you will lose free agents some you don't want, and players will get traded.
Favourite players will get axed, you will lose games, you will not enjoy it like you used to and the unthinkable will happen frequently.
You can get annoyed about it, or accept that this is the way things go.
It will be next season. Watch.
450k is what we offered him to stay and he went anyway.
I think from memory the main reason Grigg left was because he wouldn't be a certainty to be in our starting 22. he would have to earn his spot. Richmond assured him he would almost always be a starter in the squad. They made him feel carried, I mean loved.
I think from memory the main reason Grigg left was because he wouldn't be a certainty to be in our starting 22. he would have to earn his spot. Richmond assured him he would almost always be a starter in the squad. They made him feel carried, I mean loved.
I remember too that he briefly feigned some interest in staying with us and managed to screw a few extra shekels out of the Tigers. I think he may have been o/s at the time so maybe it was his manager
/
It will be next season. Watch.
450k is what we offered him to stay and he went anyway.
700k will Not be a b-grade midfielder salary next year Thry, and no one offered Grigg 450k a year.
700k will Not be a b-grade midfielder salary next year Thry, and no one offered Grigg 450k a year.
How much does Tom Scully make?
Was Daisy being chased by multiple clubs? I don't recall that he was.
Yes, some people are getting paid overs to join clubs, but if you seriously believe that if there was someone other than MM and Swan in charge of our club they would have taken Thomas, then you are deluded.
He was overrated by both Swan and MM due to their personal relationship. It happens all the time in business - it's called nepotism.
So enough with the bullcrap of what Daisy brings to this club, because he's brought and brings nothing but takes a huge wage and the spot of a beloved and proven player in Eddie Betts!
Was Daisy being chased by multiple clubs? I don't recall that he was.
Yes, some people are getting paid overs to join clubs, but if you seriously believe that if there was someone other than MM and Swan in charge of our club they would have taken Thomas, then you are deluded.
He was overrated by both Swan and MM due to their personal relationship. It happens all the time in business - it's called nepotism.
So enough with the bullcrap of what Daisy brings to this club, because he's brought and brings nothing but takes a huge wage and the spot of a beloved and proven player in Eddie Betts!
1. Betts was leaving before Daisy was coming.
2. Was anyone else chasing Betts? Free Agency basically means the player goes where he wants to go.
3. So enough with the bullcrap. ;)
1. Betts was leaving before Daisy was coming.
2. Was anyone else chasing Betts? Free Agency basically means the player goes where he wants to go.
3. So enough with the bullcrap. ;)
1. Really? Why then did Thomas play the 'no contract negotiations until the end of the season' game?
2. Unrestricted free agents can go to their club of choice. Restricted free agents go to the highest bidder. We declined to match Adelaide's bid and Collingwood declined to match ours. I think Collingwood got that right.
3. Agreed ;)
Its probably safe to say Collingwood won in the Daisy deal along with Adelaide in the Betts deal. We appear to have lost with both at the moment. Times might tell a different story in the future, but at the moment we are at a loss with both players. Lets hope the footy gods give us a break somewhere down the line at some stage.
Its probably safe to say Collingwood won in the Daisy deal along with Adelaide in the Betts deal. We appear to have lost with both at the moment. Times might tell a different story in the future, but at the moment we are at a loss with both players. Lets hope the footy gods give us a break somewhere down the line at some stage.
Surely good fortune has to smile on us soon Mantis! :-\
How much does Tom Scully make?
Scully was an error, just like ours, but at least GWS are getting something for their 600k per year. Scully was still young and has probably not even reached anywhere near his peak yet. Thomas was already passed it. I you can't see the difference.....
Anyway, enough with the Daisy crap, anyone trying to say it was a worthy successful deal that we would've gone for regardless of Mick and Swann being at the club is just pushing sh1t uphill.
Scully is only on 600k? What a game?
He was on a mil+ initially...and has gotten worse since then.
Scully is only on 600k? What a game?
He was on a mil+ initially...and has gotten worse since then.
That's not the point I was trying to make. GWS mistakes do not absolve us of ours
1. Really? Why then did Thomas play the 'no contract negotiations until the end of the season' game?
2. Unrestricted free agents can go to their club of choice. Restricted free agents go to the highest bidder. We declined to match Adelaide's bid and Collingwood declined to match ours. I think Collingwood got that right.
3. Agreed ;)
Yep.
The admin knew they only had so much money in the bank. Old Powder Balls had probably already offered Daisy the big coin so we knew there was no money left.
I heard Dermie the other day saying Carlton were right not to offer Betts the $450k he reportedly wanted .
His reasoning is that no small forward is worth that. He then shot himself in the foot by saying " unless it's Cyril Rioli" .
I started a thread some time ago showing the output of both Rioli and Betts and Eddie had Cyril covered in every aspect of the game. The only argument is that Cyril is a "big game player" , but I'd argue that the Hawks are a big game side which means he just performs at the level of those around him. That's not unusual for small forwards.
So I don't see it as beyond the realms of possibility that we could or should have held onto him.
We also now know Cyril is on $450k or better.
Yep.
The admin knew they only had so much money in the bank. Old Powder Balls had probably already offered Daisy the big coin so we knew there was no money left.
I heard Dermie the other day saying Carlton were right not to offer Betts the $450k he reportedly wanted .
His reasoning is that no small forward is worth that. He then shot himself in the foot by saying " unless it's Cyril Rioli" .
I started a thread some time ago showing the output of both Rioli and Betts and Eddie had Cyril covered in every aspect of the game. The only argument is that Cyril is a "big game player" , but I'd argue that the Hawks are a big game side which means he just performs at the level of those around him. That's not unusual for small forwards.
So I don't see it as beyond the realms of possibility that we could or should have held onto him.
We also now know Cyril is on $450k or better.
Age factor with Betts maybe?
That's not the point I was trying to make. GWS mistakes do not absolve us of ours
Correct, and we should learn from the mistakes of others not follow them!
CIMM, Cyril is an interesting one in that he has won games off his own boot... but he's also played a lot of average games and I reckon that the glimpses of brilliance blind people to the long where he donesn't do much. I watched him closely in a game last year (one of the finals from memory) and his efforts when he didn't get the ball were excremental. He looked a very lazy one way runner.... great cream player and finisher but you wonder why he hasn't graduated to roles higher up the ground by now.
CIMM, Cyril is an interesting one in that he has won games off his own boot.
Cyril is over-rated, if you put Betts in the forward line Rioli has mostly played in surrounded by Franklin and Roughead while getting delivery off blokes like Mitchell and Lewis, all the time with Hodge standing guard over him, and Betts would eclipse Rioli.
FFS, Magda Szubanski could kick goals in that setup! ;)
Cyril is over-rated, if you put Betts in the forward line Rioli has mostly played in surrounded by Franklin and Roughead while getting delivery off blokes like Mitchell and Lewis, all the time with Hodge standing guard over him, and Betts would eclipse Rioli.
FFS, Magda Szubanski could kick goals in that setup! ;)
x 2. Even Garlett (in his hey day) had Rioli covered statisitically. So overrated its sickening. Wouldnt mind having a crack at him though.
x 2. Even Garlett (in his hey day) had Rioli covered statisitically. So overrated its sickening. Wouldnt mind having a crack at him though.
Of course, Rioli would be a great stop gap until Clem Smith comes good, then we could trade Rioli to a spud club for a 2nd rounder!
CIMM, Cyril is an interesting one in that he has won games off his own boot... but he's also played a lot of average games and I reckon that the glimpses of brilliance blind people to the long where he donesn't do much. I watched him closely in a game last year (one of the finals from memory) and his efforts when he didn't get the ball were excremental. He looked a very lazy one way runner.... great cream player and finisher but you wonder why he hasn't graduated to roles higher up the ground by now.
Hamstrings and tank.
Both very average.
Hamstrings and tank.
Both very average.
His only inside skill is the Chicken Wing tackle!
Not sure how close you were watching but Rioli's defensive pressure is off the chart.
Was wondering when MBB would show up to support his lovechild. :P
Not sure how close you were watching but Rioli's defensive pressure is off the chart.
Eddie was excellent at keeping the ball in as well. Eddie has been running people down inside the forward 50 for a decade.
Eddie was excellent at keeping the ball in as well. Eddie has been running people down inside the forward 50 for a decade.
Eddie could make a goal out of a nothing play....Tutt, Ellard etc are struggling to make a goal out of a joe the goose play...
Not sure how close you were watching but Rioli's defensive pressure is off the chart.
I think his game evolved (or devolved, depending on your POV) to the point where his defensive work is superior to his offensive work, and I think the latter has suffered as a result.
I do wonder whether Rioli is a little on the outer at the Dawks, and whether he will be the next "buy low, sell high" player to be traded. It is my contention that Poopy-Lo does what Rioli does, less skillfully, but certainly cheaper and arguably better.
Betts had good defensive pressure but Rioli is much quicker and lays a better tackle. Garlett actually was our best for inside 50 pressure acts.
Eddie could make a goal out of a nothing play....Tutt, Ellard etc are struggling to make a goal out of a joe the goose play...
True.
Also, how often did we see Eddie as our leading option? Probably too many, but he was still a go to man. I used to laugh when people said he didn't do enough as half the time he was leading from the goal area with two 196cm defenders on his hammer. They almost always caught him because the ball was bombed on his head.
Was wondering when MBB would show up to support his lovechild. :P
Delicious
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/afl/carlton-captain-marc-murphy-aims-for-next-afl-flag-20150424-1ms9sg.html
Marc Murphy says his Carlton teammates don't concern themselves with notions of rebuilding, and betrayed that he thinks any restoration of the Blues' list can be done rapidly by saying he wants to be the club's next premiership captain.
Might not be reading the tea-leaves at the moment.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/afl/carlton-captain-marc-murphy-aims-for-next-afl-flag-20150424-1ms9sg.html
Might not be reading the tea-leaves at the moment.
The first part of that sentence doesn't make any sense at all. ???
Marc Murphy says his Carlton teammates don't concern themselves with notions of rebuilding, and betrayed that he thinks any restoration of the Blues' list can be done rapidly by saying he wants to be the club's next premiership captain.
Some would argue the second part doesn't either ;) :D
The first part of that sentence doesn't make any sense at all. ???
Some would argue the second part doesn't either ;) :D
It is very badly worded. I think he is saying that the players don't appreciate the inference that there needs to be a major rebuild i.e that most of them could be out on their ear in the next season or two. Rather that the list needs some fine tuning and topping up. States his desire to be the next CFC premiership captain, which given his age, means he would like to think we can jag No17 in the next 4-5 years.
Believe it or not.
It is very badly worded. I think he is saying that the players don't appreciate the inference that there needs to be a major rebuild i.e that most of them could be out on their ear in the next season or two. Rather that the list needs some fine tuning and topping up. States his desire to be the next CFC premiership captain, which given his age, means he would like to think we can jag No17 in the next 4-5 years.
Believe it or not.
Yeah easy....oh look, a pink pig just flew by my window.
(http://forums.justcommodores.com.au/attachments/vb-vk-holden-commodore-1978-1985/127062d1318239844-nice-original-vk-tell-him-hes-dreamin.jpg)
Sad really that our captain speaks and we all laugh.
Either I'm drunk or the guy who wrote this was. WTF?
Interesting observation from Wayne Carey tonight. He said that Richmond and Carlton supporters were noteworthy for the way in which they unfairly blame Cotchin and Murphy when the team performs poorly.
I'm not that familiar with Cotchin's treatment by Richmond supporters but I reckon Carey has a point when it comes to Murphy.
Interesting observation from Wayne Carey tonight. He said that Richmond and Carlton supporters were noteworthy for the way in which they unfairly blame Cotchin and Murphy when the team performs poorly.
I'm not that familiar with Cotchin's treatment by Richmond supporters but I reckon Carey has a point when it comes to Murphy.
I'd agree with that.....I think Hodge and Selwood in particular have set the bar very high for inspirational captains and both Cotchin and Murphy are judged against that level of player/captain...
I think Murphy is being judged against the type of Captain the club needs, rather than the type of captain he is.
ATM we need someone in the tough nut, rev em up and rip em a new one mould, whereas he is the silent, follow my lead type. He would be very effective in a different environment, but I don't think he is doing himself justice here.
Having said that, he is not to blame for that issue. We don't really have the type of player that fits the bill right now, so by default he is put in to the captain role as probably our best player. It is made all the more stark at present by a lack of form on his part, but form is temporary and his class will shine through.
Interesting observation from Wayne Carey tonight. He said that Richmond and Carlton supporters were noteworthy for the way in which they unfairly blame Cotchin and Murphy when the team performs poorly.
I'm not that familiar with Cotchin's treatment by Richmond supporters but I reckon Carey has a point when it comes to Murphy.
Tiger fans really give it to Cotchin far more than we give it to Murph. Apparently he's a turnover merchant that racks up a lot of unnecessary stats by running behind players and demanding the ball.
I was watching Melbs Nathan Jones go about it last night and was thinking I wish our captain played aggressive like that. Actually I wish any of our players played aggressive like that. ::)
You know Robbo is a very similar player, possibly a little less polished.
I was watching Melbs Nathan Jones go about it last night and was thinking I wish our captain played aggressive like that. Actually I wish any of our players played aggressive like that. ::)
Cripps and Bell dont mind a bit of the rough stuff, but we really need more enforcers like Lewis and Hodge that can still get heaps of the footy
I was watching Melbs Nathan Jones go about it last night and was thinking I wish our captain played aggressive like that. Actually I wish any of our players played aggressive like that. ::)
Jones gave Murphy a bath last year. Very underrated player, would be a star in a good team.
Jones gave Murphy a bath last year. Very underrated player, would be a star in a good team.
Very much agree. Been a fan for a couple of seasons now. Apart from the toughness, has a bit of silk as well.
I was watching Melbs Nathan Jones go about it last night and was thinking I wish our captain played aggressive like that. Actually I wish any of our players played aggressive like that. ::)
It wasn't just in the game either.
Before it he was stalking the rooms, pumping up the players.
It wasn't just in the game either.
Before it he was stalking the rooms, pumping up the players.
Actually getting him on board would be great for us as he has been through the bad times with the Dees and has not been bowed by the experience. Fat chance unfortunately, but he is just the type we badly need.
Actually getting him on board would be great for us as he has been through the bad times with the Dees and has not been bowed by the experience. Fat chance unfortunately, but he is just the type we badly need.
We have a culture of gun players getting the job done for the team, our captain has almost always been our best player and match winner who can also get all the boys down to the pub - which is probably why Murph is getting criticism - he's not winning games for us (unfair as it might be). The hard task is shifting the mindset to our leaders getting others to perform at their best rather than trying to do even more themselves.
I'd like to see 2 or 3 kids given spots on the leadership next year and look at giving them pretty strong leadership mentoring.
We have a culture of gun players getting the job done for the team, our captain has almost always been our best player and match winner who can also get all the boys down to the pub - which is probably why Murph is getting criticism - he's not winning games for us (unfair as it might be). The hard task is shifting the mindset to our leaders getting others to perform at their best rather than trying to do even more themselves.
I'd like to see 2 or 3 kids given spots on the leadership next year and look at giving them pretty strong leadership mentoring.
I have been critical of Murphy as a leader but if he can back up week in week our what he did today I would complain.
He was in hard at every single contest when the game was drifting away from us early. He got hammered by the opposition but still ran his heart out and was pivotal in 'leading' us back into the game. Played a Selwood type game today.
Was the closest I have seen from him to the pre shoulder injury days.
Hats off to him today challenge now is to back it up next week.
I have been critical of Murphy as a leader but if he can back up week in week our what he did today I would complain.
He was in hard at every single contest when the game was drifting away from us early. He got hammered by the opposition but still ran his heart out and was pivotal in 'leading' us back into the game. Played a Selwood type game today.
Was the closest I have seen from him to the pre shoulder injury days.
Hats off to him today challenge now is to back it up next week.
Malthouse spoke very well about Murphy's leadership in his press conference today. While I don't always agree with what he has to say, I reckon he's a lot better at judging Murphy's leadership than most of the armchair critics ::)
Malthouse spoke very well about Murphy's leadership in his press conference today. While I don't always agree with what he has to say, I reckon he's a lot better at judging Murphy's leadership than most of the armchair critics ::)
I thought Murphy was pretty good today in terms of his onfield example, which is all I can see really.
Give it a few seasons and Cripps will be captain or at least be in the leadership group. I can't say too many bad things about Murphy on todays game.
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/video/2015-04-28/cripps-thankful-for-nomination
Watching this interview with young Cripps from earlier in the week, he has captaincy written all over him.
Well spoken, down to earth & was the VC for the WA U/18 team, he will be our next captain for sure, you can bookmark that one right now.
http://www.carltonfc.com.au/video/2015-04-28/cripps-thankful-for-nomination
Watching this interview with young Cripps from earlier in the week, he has captaincy written all over him.
Well spoken, down to earth & was the VC for the WA U/18 team, he will be our next captain for sure, you can bookmark that one right now.
Henderson if he stays..otherwise yes
I'd have Cripps ahead of Hendo, even if they had to make that decision today. Don't really understand why folks want Hendo as captain TBH.
I'd have Cripps ahead of Hendo, even if they had to make that decision today. Don't really understand why folks want Hendo as captain TBH.
+1.
Hendo strikes me as a major introvert - not to mention his inability to perform consistently onfield....
+1.
Hendo strikes me as a major introvert - not to mention his inability to perform consistently onfield....
Only seems to perform well as a forward against St Kilda.
I'd have Cripps ahead of Hendo, even if they had to make that decision today. Don't really understand why folks want Hendo as captain TBH.
x3
I think Cripps is a future captain.
I also think he's going to be a terrific player for us.
....but we need to let him have a year or two concentrating on nothing other than playing good consistent football and establishing himself as a regular member of the side.
( I doubt he'll ever be out of the side after the first two games of this season but we'll need to wait and see ;))
I think Cripps is a future captain.
I also think he's going to be a terrific player for us.
....but we need to let him have a year or two concentrating on nothing other than playing good consistent football and establishing himself as a regular member of the side.
( I doubt he'll ever be out of the side after the first two games of this season but we'll need to wait and see ;))
I just hope we can hang onto him and the WA clubs dont start knocking on his door....
I just hope we can hang onto him and the WA clubs dont start knocking on his door....
I think they as well as others will knock on his door EB, we just have to make sure we are a more attractive club to play for.
I think Cripps is a future captain.
I also think he's going to be a terrific player for us.
....but we need to let him have a year or two concentrating on nothing other than playing good consistent football and establishing himself as a regular member of the side.
( I doubt he'll ever be out of the side after the first two games of this season but we'll need to wait and see ;))
This year and next to cement his spot
Leadership group the following year
2 year apprenticeship
Then take the reigns from Murphy
Not to put pressure on him or anything ;D
Not to put too much
x3
X4
Very overrated so far.
I'd have Cripps ahead of Hendo, even if they had to make that decision today. Don't really understand why folks want Hendo as captain TBH.
Broken record I know, Hendo to CHB. He plays much better there and will develop better as a leader in that role IMHO. Taking nothing away from Cripps I hasten to add.
Where the hell has Marc Murphy been in any of this?
Where the hell has Marc Murphy been in any of this?
I think it's best he stays out of the media for now.
He isn't good at It.
Another love child if Micks.
Glad he's keeping quiet.
I think it's best he stays out of the media for now.
He isn't good at It.
Agree....Judd seems to have taken over the media work in the last week...
Judd had leadership in his actions on the field. He did what needed to be done, but none ever followed his lead. If they did it was only here and there, and he was expected to carry the load. The way he talks lately makes me think he should work in a position where he can address the media more often. He knows where to praise, and where he needs to say minimal. He doesn't need to say we need to lift as players as that puts the problem straight back on the playing group. He offers KISS. Keep It Short and Sweet. Then shut up. ;)
Changes to be made
MM gone
Cripps captain
Called for Cripps to be Captain and MM gone earlier :P
Where the hell has Marc Murphy been in any of this?
Wouldn't talk to the media after the loss, no word since MM got boned.
I'd say he's been told, in his capacity as captain, to let the crap settle before he starts doing media again.
I think Judd's media was unofficial, a door stop.
We'll hear from him again before Friday I would think.
Where the hell has Marc Murphy been in any of this?
After the train wreck which was the footy show the day after Ratten was sacked, they've probably locked him away until this blows over.
Where the hell has Marc Murphy been in any of this?
Where indeed. Wonder if this is part of a plan to gradually lower his media profile and gently ease him out of the captaincy?
Where indeed. Wonder if this is part of a plan to gradually lower his media profile and gently ease him out of the captaincy?
Like Malthouse, he has effectively sacked himself.
Like Malthouse, he has effectively sacked himself.
New coach is the time to move Murphy out of the captaincy with the least amount of fuss but pretty sure Murphy is keen to keep it.
For whatever reasons he has obviously decided he doesn't want to front the media.
Give the guy a break guys he works his guts out every week and gets slammed relentlessly both on the field and off. We ask for loyalty and then talk about Cripps being made captain - he hasn't even played a full season ffs. How about showing Murph some respect?!
Murphy comes out and tears the Swans a new one... the ultimate finger to all and sundry.
Actions speak louder than words.
Would love a strong captain to come out and speak.
Murphy and Gibbs are not strong characters or captains/leaders IMHO.
Murphy comes out and tears the Swans a new one... the ultimate finger to all and sundry.
Actions speak louder than words.
Would love nothing more than that.
Come on Murph!!
Yup, just bring it Murph.
For whatever reasons he has obviously decided he doesn't want to front the media.
Give the guy a break guys he works his guts out every week and gets slammed relentlessly both on the field and off. We ask for loyalty and then talk about Cripps being made captain - he hasn't even played a full season ffs. How about showing Murph some respect?!
I love Murph... he has been battered from day 1 as a small skinny kid trying to carry the hopes of a Team in the Pagan years.
He has his limitations as captain and you only had to look at last week and watch Simmo play to see who the spiritual leader was. But I understand why he was made captain.
I don't expect Murph to do a press conference, but he hasnt even been sighted. Not commented, not seen, not heard from, was late to the flight to Sydney in an obvious ploy to keep him out of the spotlight.
I wasn't passing comment on my thoughts of Murph, I was genuinely curious to how absent the Captain of our Football club is?
FFS give the Murphy hero talks a rest.
He has done SFA lately.
He can't even contribute to the tackle count.
Don't start thinking the evil lord is gone and everything will now be fine.
We need to keep progressing and changing captains very soon is a good move.
Actions talk louder than words and we need some action from Murphy and Gibbs
Playing devils advocate, we had a discussion about a split in our playing group and them not playing for each other. If this is true, with the departure of a senior coach, there would be a change in the balance of power and some of the fallout will see us have a few malcontents.
These situations will result in polarised opinions, sides being taken and various other issues through our team.
I would hazard at a guess, that we will be showing similar form as we have, except we might get an invigorated performance out of a few, and a few playing limp.
Murphy may simply be suffering from "Carlton fatigue". Too high a pressure environment, combined with too many coaches going.
Whether we like it or not, these guys have lost a mentor. Sheik advised as much based on a discussion with Armfield and Menzel.
There will be some fallout from this, and we wont know about what that entails for a little while, and it might not become clear until the end of season 2016.
Any fallout would still be miles better than where we were headed.
Any fallout would still be miles better than where we were headed.
Maybe, maybe not.
I seem to recall similar was said about the time Ratten departed regarding anything else being something better and wasting one more year of his contract wouldnt be worth it, as it might set us back further.
Look how that turned out.
We can never know what would have occurred. we can likewise not know for sure where our future was going under Malthouse.
Playing devils advocate, we had a discussion about a split in our playing group and them not playing for each other. If this is true, with the departure of a senior coach, there would be a change in the balance of power and some of the fallout will see us have a few malcontents.
These situations will result in polarised opinions, sides being taken and various other issues through our team.
I would hazard at a guess, that we will be showing similar form as we have, except we might get an invigorated performance out of a few, and a few playing limp.
Murphy may simply be suffering from "Carlton fatigue". Too high a pressure environment, combined with too many coaches going.
Whether we like it or not, these guys have lost a mentor. Sheik advised as much based on a discussion with Armfield and Menzel.
There will be some fallout from this, and we wont know about what that entails for a little while, and it might not become clear until the end of season 2016.
if true, so be it.
highly paid individuals under a poor culture driven by a board that allows flamboyant medical entrepreneurs to pay for a privilege and sit in a coaches box during match day says it all....
Interestingly Barker mentioned one of his primary tasks is "sorting out the list". This has obviously been spelled out to him by the hierarchy and will mesh closely with what SOS is doing. Methodical list management is just as important these days as the senior coaching functions - in fact it is the foundation on which everything is built and hopefully we now giving it appropriate attention.
Interestingly Barker mentioned one of his primary tasks is "sorting out the list". This has obviously been spelled out to him by the hierarchy and will mesh closely with what SOS is doing. Methodical list management is just as important these days as the senior coaching functions - in fact it is the foundation on which everything is built and hopefully we now giving it appropriate attention.
off course cookie, great, but mate - what the hell have we been doing over the last 20 years ?
Simple solution from 2016
New coach comes in.
Should put Simmo as Captain Bob Murphy style. (Simmo is the heart and soul of our side and leads by example as seen Friday night)
Coach tells Murph he wants him to just concentrate of playing footy and getting back to the type of form that made him AA.
Groom Cripps and Doc as the next Captain/Vice Captain combo.
off course cookie, great, but mate - what the hell have we been doing over the last 20 years ?
Well, feckin' it up I guess. I'm hoping we have changed our approach under Trigg and The Judge and the actions will match the words going forward. We'll soon begin to see, one way or the other.
Simple solution from 2016
New coach comes in.
Should put Simmo as Captain Bob Murphy style. (Simmo is the heart and soul of our side and leads by example as seen Friday night)
Coach tells Murph he wants him to just concentrate of playing footy and getting back to the type of form that made him AA.
Groom Cripps and Doc and the next Captain/Vice Captain combo.
Agree.
Maybe, maybe not.
I seem to recall similar was said about the time Ratten departed regarding anything else being something better and wasting one more year of his contract wouldnt be worth it, as it might set us back further.
Look how that turned out.
We can never know what would have occurred. we can likewise not know for sure where our future was going under Malthouse.
Mate don't know how many times it needs to be said, the two situations are entirely different. With Ratts we were mid table, with Malthouse things were spiraling out of control.
Mate don't know how many times it needs to be said, the two situations are entirely different. With Ratts we were mid table, with Malthouse things were spiraling out of control.
It doesnt matter how different the situations are.
You stated you don't like hypotheticals, and I find it amusing that you believe that in this case you can hypothesize differently and dismiss all situations for all parties.
We could just as easily have gone backwards in 2013 and 14 under Ratten as we could have propelled into top 4.
The point is, we can't know.
Id argue we may have ended up in a very similar position, but again we cannot know for sure.
It doesnt matter how different the situations are.
You stated you don't like hypotheticals, and I find it amusing that you believe that in this case you can hypothesize differently and dismiss all situations for all parties.
We could just as easily have gone backwards in 2013 and 14 under Ratten as we could have propelled into top 4.
The point is, we can't know.
Id argue we may have ended up in a very similar position, but again we cannot know for sure.
Huh? Do you deliberately go off on different tangents in an attempt to confuse, or are you confused?
You are comparing the Ratten and Malthouse situations when they are poles apart. Look at the wins and losses. I was not hypothesizing on which way the two situations could go, I was saying the two simply don't compare.
Simple solution from 2016
New coach comes in.
Should put Simmo as Captain Bob Murphy style. (Simmo is the heart and soul of our side and leads by example as seen Friday night)
Coach tells Murph he wants him to just concentrate of playing footy and getting back to the type of form that made him AA.
Groom Cripps and Doc as the next Captain/Vice Captain combo.
I could perhaps debate the Cripps and Doc part, although it's far from a terrible idea.
The rest is spot on.
Huh? Do you deliberately go off on different tangents in an attempt to confuse, or are you confused?
You are comparing the Ratten and Malthouse situations when they are poles apart. Look at the wins and losses. I was not hypothesizing on which way the two situations could go, I was saying the two simply don't compare.
Mate don't know how many times it needs to be said, the two situations are entirely different. With Ratts we were mid table, with Malthouse things were spiraling out of control.
Yep, Im confused.
You are saying the situations can't be compared, and then you are comparing them.
Yep, Im confused.
You are saying the situations can't be compared, and then you are comparing them.
You are seriously taking the pi55 now. Can't be compared in likeness ie they
don't compare, you know, like a figure of speech. Not
can't be compared. Not rocket science mate and I seem to be saying that a lot to you of late.
You are seriously taking the pi55 now. Can't be compared in likeness ie they don't compare, you know, like a figure of speech. Not can't be compared. Not rocket science mate and I seem to be saying that a lot to you of late.
Maybe, but either way we can only speculate on what would have happened which was LODS point about Ratten's tenure. The second it's over the chapter is closed, and that's all there is.
Have you figured that bit out yet?
That's what my point was.
You've completely lost me. :))
Barker thinks Murphy is doing a pretty good job as skipper:
Barker also praised midfielder and skipper Marc Murphy who will notch his 200-game milestone against the Hawks.
"Marc Murphy is an outstanding Carlton person. I can do nothing but congratulate him on such an outstanding achievement," Barker said.
"His leadership over the last six or seven weeks, since I've taken over, has been outstanding. His want to drive this place to a better standard has been nothing but first class."
I was surprised that no-one commented on Murphy's leadership after the Richmond game when he was 'miked-up' before the game. I was very impressed with the way he went about his work. It was apparent that he has the respect of the players and is very much a natural leader.