Change is a good thing when your side is going backwards. It's not a good thing when your side is improving see Ratten, Voss and Mckenna.
Again I must disagree.
Change can be dangerous when it's change for making changes sake.
In a football club, continuity is king.
Teams get better when they approach 100 games playing footy together.
Teams execute plans better when they play together more often. That means not five games of playing footy together and writing blokes off or changing tactics frequently or moving players backwards and forwards on the field.
I think our football department needs to be left to work their way through this, just like it should have been back in 2012, but, at least we are structured in our inability to perform. There is elements of a formation I can see in our play, which tells me that the blokes are trying something but it's not working... Yet.
What happens if we ask the question and get an almost 50/50 split Thry
Then you need to make a decision based upon what Mick is capable of doing, acknowledging who said yay and nay.
Voss got sacked to Brisbanes detriment. They have lost a few talented blokes for not much compensation and all in one hit. Despite having recruited well, it appears as though they are going to struggle for a while.
I actually think that the only way forward is to back in the coach actually. It will make a statement of you are with us or gone.
But I don't know the full story.
My gut says that we need to come through something like this and come out the other side relatively unscathed with people all buying in and the only way to get there is to truly act united as it sends the message that you are in, with us or not.
I can't see how you can spruik the United message, then sack the coach because of what appears to be disunity. United means together through thick and thin.
You could equally cut the coach loose and hire a new bloke, but you would have to search rigorously, put a five year contract on the table with no ifs buts or maybes and never resort to.sacking that coach in order to make the same statement.
I'd rather extend Malthouse for two than the alternative. We have very poor judgement at selecting the right person for this sort of job, and I can't see a five year contract ending well.
...and thats why we need to change the culture of the place. Everyone is too focused on themselves and not enough on the team.
Juddy said, and i agree, that we signs of that towards the end of last year. So much so that it played a part in him agreeing to play on.
What has changed? Why did it change? When can we get it back...and improve it further? How do you get it back and improve it?
I know the answer and it won't be popular.
The players will only disintigrate further whilst the future is uncertain.
You would have to speak candidly one on one with the playing group, and find out where they are at in regards to the coach, their future and their teamates.
You will never get 44 blokes to all get along, but they need to start acting like they are a family.
That means setting the head of the household right. If the majority are behind Malthouse then you would have to make a statement and sign him up immediately sending the message you are either with him or you are out.
Vice versa, if the majority are against him you can placate them all again one on one and simply state that they will need to put their best foot forward to impress the next bloke coming in, or even to ensure their future at Carlton.
You can't really put them on notice they will simply play for themselves and the environment seems miserable enough already.
As a side plot I think we need to encourage the guys to do some team building with the fans. If we can't perform on the pitch mamaybe they can kick some goals off it, by working with some under privileged parts of our society. They might appreciate what they have that little bit more for it.
The club keeps using buzzwords like loyalty, us, United, believe, but stumble ever so slightly and they are ready to replace you as quickly as possible.
Despite what we think of Malthouse and where we were at or where we have been, the knives have been out from the start and it's got to do with how we cut Ratten short, and what process was followed to bring him in.
We talk a good game, but currently I see no reason why anyone should take any of the United crap seriously until we start showing we are serious about evolving.
No quick fixes at the latest AGM according to mozzie but, sure enough we will take that route as soon as it presents itself.
The two situations don't compare, Brisbane were traveling well when they got rid of Voss. If Mick had us thereabouts then it would be a fair argument to mount. If you want a comparison, look at where a coach has been failing dismally and been replaced.
Brisbane have stalled spectacular both during and post Voss and have been haemoraging talent ever since. Elliot Yeo, Sam Docherty to name a few, and even a relatively new acquisition like Aish is about to walk out the door.
Isn't Leppitsch one of those coaches that supposed to be young hip and up to it?
Change is not always a good thing, particularly when our club is unsettled.
Would Richmond allow Toby Mitchell into the coaches box if he was the highest bidder at a club auction? It's all about the brand and protecting our brand. We were a laughing stock amongst other supporters last Friday due to both our on field and off field exploits.
Love him or hate him, Eddie would not let it happen at COLLINGWOOD!!
Sorry mate, I saw Edelston and yawned as I really dont care about that sort of detail particularly when we are on the receiving end of a 75 point clinical pasting.
Toby Mitchell and him dont even compare as being a similar level of delinquent either.
All these things add up. This clown was also present for the team photos. If the club is seen as a club for shady old codgers to gather, looking for a bit of a massage for their ageing egos, that detracts from us professionally and does not portray us as a hard edged and focused outfit. The players, and others, no doubt pick up that message. I don't think the prospect of having their photo taken with the Doc would entice many FAs to want to join us either.
If we want his money, keep him out of sight somewhere in a coterie group and p155 in his pocket there, well away from the front line action!
I want to be clear, I have no opinion on him being there being a major issue, or anything, but surely having a bloke like him around, and his proffesional network of people might assist us get players into circles of business that they couldnt otherwise get an influence in?
Sure this guy is no great assistance to our football, but I think we are condemning a man who probably means as well as any of us, for simply being present.
If we are distracted by a guy in a coaches box, we are in all sorts.
Kruddler said we should learn off the better clubs..ok ...ie .Hawks replaced Mitchell with Hodge and went from good to great, I think Murphy should step down with some grace and we appoint a new captain and let Murphy concentrate on his football and get back to being an A grade player....its hasnt worked and no one will think anything less of Murphy if he abdicates the role.
Our problem is, that if we had Mitchell, he would be head and shoulders a better leader than Murphy.
Our next issue is, that there may very well be daylight between Murphy and our next best option.
I have no qualms with replacing Murphy, but sometimes a Captain has to create a legacy, rather than simply get in, and do the job, and unfortunately our lack of developement of people has left us with few options aside from Murphy. Few that can get on the park and do a job week in and week out anyway.
Refer to my original post, the question is, considering Marc Murphy isn't leadership material, should he be influencing decisions at the club?
One of these days the club will learn that we have appointed a person into a role, and that person will do the role to the best of their ability, and not allowing them to do it will simply result in setting people up to fail, rather than succeeding under their own steam or failing on the back of whatever poor decision they make.
We also prevent Murphy from learning from an error he may have made, and therefore stunt his developement as a leader.
Making mistakes in order to learn a lesson is okay. Repeatedly making the same mistakes and failing to learn your lesson is not.
Our club is guilty of this, and I fear is doomed to continue making mistakes until it learns that replacing people is not the only way to improve.
Leadership group wanted him gone. Murphy is the captain. He publicly endorsed the decision. How hard is it to comprehend? It seems your selective memory is in full swing again.
Sure, Im with you that the leadership group endorsed the decision, and whether or not private or public, the reason he is gone, is because of the actions or inaction he took on that fateful night out.
Robinson is 100% responsible for WHY he is not there.
Responsibility lies with Robinson.
Murphy and the leadership group will own the decision. It was something that they chose to do in order to achieve a specific team goal that we would not be privy to. A difficult decision I might add and one I don't necessarily agree with either, but my opinion isnt important here, and neither is that of any of our fans, given our club ticked it off, the team ticked it off, and they are the ones who have all the information required to make a tough call.
We need to accept it and move on. Hell, its possible that members of our playing group are likewise split about this decision, and hence why we see so much disunity at the club, and even so, I still blame Robinson for his actions, and not the decision to move him on. We talk about holding people accountable for their actions, but we are not the first team to decide about removing certain charachters from their team for the greater good, its just that it doesnt seem to have helped us a great deal at the moment, which is why its annoying.
I don't know how everyone else missed it but Wood played second ruck/forward and Jagged two goals there whilst knockers did most of the first ruck duties.
The tactic was floated prior to the game and Wood gave us about what Casboult would have except he actually hit the scoreboard.
Warnock gave us less around the ground and more in the ruck though.
Frankly I'd play Warnock all season hoping someone wants a tap ruckman given we have written off the year whilst wood and Casboult alternative second ruck duties.
