Really, we melted under Ratten, are you sure? :o
As I recall we made the 2011 SF only to lose by 3 points in a Perth SF against West Coast. No doubt we were inconsistent, but melting, hardly!
Furthermore, we had the odds against us in that game with some heavily "influenced" umpiring going down! The ideal circumstances for a meltdown team to meltdown, but we came back!
It appears back then we were a hell of a lot closer to success than we are now! ;)
And all that with a list that was apparently NFG and perhaps even inexperienced at the time! :o
The good old back in 2011 when we nearly won the flag without beating a top team argument lol.
I don't really see the point of arguing over how badly we have failed over the past 20 years and Whois most to blame. We are better off spending our energies on finding the winning formula for the future?
It is a bit pointless.
I guess there's one way to stop the "looking back comparisons"
It's simple really
Start winning football games!
You watch how quickly the past is forgotten with a top 4 finish.
That's all it needs...to go better than we have in the past dozen years.
We'll win this week.
They'll under-rate us ;)
That statement scares me because it's so spot on. Malthouse has taken this team backwards at a rate of knots and there's no relief in sight!
That's what happens when people want to pretend we had a bottom 4 side with no improvement left in it :P
The slide started in 2012 but you just keep pretending 2012 never happened.
Have you got the GPS data?
Just like you keep pretending the injuries didn't happen.
The players that have left the club since then that still had plenty to give are what has cost us. Not to mention an archaic gameplan and a coach that's past his best.
Back in the glory days huh, when a premiership was within our grasp, and we would have gotten away with it to if it wasn't for those pesky umpires.
No doubt our results back then were better.
Fair dinkum, there are a couple of guys on this forum with such hatred of Malthouse that they cling on to anything that remotely reminds them of just how good we had it under Ratten. Please don't let what is happening now blind you to the fact that we were not all that great in those days either. We had better results, but we were far from premiership material. Closer then than now, maybe, but that is a bit like saying Brussel sprouts are delicious... In comparison to durian.
We were lazy then, just as we are lazy now. The same thing we needed back then is the same thing we need now, on field leadership, and a dose of good old fashioned hard work. I dont give a flying feck who coaches the side, without an increase in work rate we will still be screwed.
That would have been important if we'd have had enough improvement left in us to have won the flag but we somehow blew it. I have no illusions - we have not been anywhere close to a flag for years - not even within sniffing distance. We should be focused on how to win the next one - as Lods points out, a few wins would transform the landscape.
Your assertion that when the heat was on we folded in some way, consistently through the Ratten era and still so in the Malthouse era, is incorrect.
The concept of a meltdown imply some collapse under pressure, but in the recent past the hottest games we played in for the last few seasons were the two away finals in 2010 or 2011. There was no sign of capitulation, in fact the exact opposite, we almost made it across the line against adversity! :o
In both we were given zero chance by the pundits, yet we lost two interstate SF by a grand total of 8 points.
Back then the club was miles ahead of it's current position, we are probably more consistent now, but are we consistently better or worse compared to 2010 or 2011?
The problem back in the Ratten period was consistency not a lack of endeavour, I would assert the lack of ability for players like TBird and Russell to take on the game plan cost the club as much as anything else! Many have still not forgiven Ratten for ending TBird's Carlton career, but end it he did and the decision is justified given TBird could not get a game surrounded by beginners! Even Russell managed to get a game at the hardened Collingwood outfit, which seems somewhat ironic for Tbird! :o
Now as a group we look lost, last Thuirsday at "The G", despite seeming to match or outnumber Nthmond fans, Carlton people looked full of dread. Like they were attending a funeral not an AFL game! I don't recall ever feeling that way in the Ratten era. In the Ratten era the game plan was a Rollercoaster, not a wake!
Finally, as I have posted many times, this is not about the coach. I think Malthouse is a great coach who slowly languishes and withers under a faulty game plan! The current game plan is not effective on 2015, and it's hard to imagine some players on the list wouldn't think the same!
Injuries happen to all teams, they happened to us last year and the year before, they happened in the great 2011 that you guys keep crapping on about, they happened to the Hawks last year on the back of losing Buddy and they won the flag. You just have to deal with it. The truth is 2011 was our pinnacle with that group and we finished 5th, if we kept Fevola we may have won it.
What happened to the sides that beat us the following week? They got flogged because they were no where near it and neither were we.
Indeed, we should have been taking steps towards a flag not away from it. The fact we were apparently so far away and we've only moved further away should be the concern.
Seriously, how do you think that is relevant or evidence of a Carlton meltdown?
And check your facts, Sydney lost the next 2010 final by 5 points!
Geelong flogged West Coast in 2011 at "The G", but then Geelong flogged everybody in the finals that year! Also during the season the team that you assert, we were no where near, defeated us by 2 points! I suppose that was another meltdown! Goal for goal for four quarters at Etihad with the ultimate premiers!
See the problem here is folk are just guessing.
2011 and the 2012 decline isn't the issue.
It can't be...because once Ratten was sent on his way it just became a guess.
No-one knows whether 2013 would have been a bounce-back year.
No-one knows whether Ratten would have learned a few things from 2012 that saw the side improve in 2013 and continue to improve in 14/15
Our drafting/ and trading strategy would have been different.
Our ladder positions would have been different
Coaches learn. They're learning all the time....I bet Mick is still learning. And with knowledge comes growth
The assumption is Ratten would have just gone on in a stubborn, merry way without developing his own skills and knowledge as a coach.
It's why it is pointless to compare coaches and what would have happened...because it's just a guess.
It's why we should probably put it behind us...both Ratten supporters and critics.....but I'm guessing we won't.
Show me your evidence where you claim we do all this running for no reward?
I should have checked my facts as I just went on memory for that Dogs Sydney game, I forgot the dogs were behind and ran over them after half time.
i never really thought we would get the ultimate success with MM at the helm, although I did want some consistent improvement.
What I liked more about the appointment of MM at Carlton was the hope that he would get all our structures in the footy dept right. Bringing the knowledge of the Filth's footy dept which seems to be up there with the best, I wanted MM to make changes to the behind the scenes area so it all runs like an oily machine...the Match Committee included.
This doesn't seem to be the case.
At the time of his hiring I expected him to be here for a 3 year contract (due to age) but I was more interested in the affect he would have on the footy dept, so when he left his legacy would still be felt (positive I hope).
With the Match Committee, how many games have we looked at the side selected and gone :o ?
It reminds me of those committee meeting you go to and late at night you are voting on something and someone has put forward a good argument so you all vote for it. Then in the morning you think 'What were we thinking'????
Someone on the MC must have a louder voice than most ::)
I just want to see improvement not being teased all the time >:(
Yes it's bizarre how teams that don't finish top lose to the teams above them, why do they keep doing that don't they get it? ;)
I've split this discussion from the Match thread.
We'd drifted a fair bit off track ;)
As we tend to do once this comes up. :D
Very true Lods. We can never know what might have happened if . . .
There's really not much point in comparing the current team's performances with those of 2010, 2011, 2012, etc. The critical issue is how we compare with the other 17 teams this season.
This.
I argued long and hard at the time about winning a flag now vs Sustained Cultural success and development in losing Fev and Gaining Henderson and Lucas... Well here we are.
2015 compared to 2011?
2011 obviously was a better side for the time, we finished 5th that year and won a final. We probably won't finish top 10 this year due to the rebuild.
However due to the evolution of the game I would still pick our current side to easily account for the 2011 one.
I maintain 2011 was a fluke and an aberration
That may happen with the players, but I don't think that would happen with our current game plan. Our current game plan doesn't let us easily account for anybody!
So I presume you think 2010 was just lucky as well? Geez, dead lucky for two straight years! :o
There's no luck but there are flukes? Nice one.
For the benefit of the uneducated. ..luck can be used in a descriptive sense of having a religious or moral influence and something out of ones control. ...
a fluke can be something based upon an improbable occurance
Then there's chance and probability which can be expressed mathematically.
Or we can go with:
noun
An unlikely chance occurrence, especially a surprising piece of
luck:their victory was a bit of a fluke
verb
Achieve (something) by
luck rather than skill.
But since I am uneducated, I'm not sure if I read that correctly. What is Oxford anyway?
i would rather go with my interpretation and context...
class over? :P
OK....go and have your play-lunch ;D
Not sure how it was a fluke? We were the 5th best team and we finished 5th.
There are a few arguments that are consistently used that are sometimes contradictory and other times flat out crystal balling.
1. If we had Fev we would have gone on to win the whole thing.
ISSUE - Lachie Henderson held up our key position defense for about half the season when Jamo was missing. You cant have Hendo without missing Fev. Hendo was part of that trade therefore, 2011 may not have been as good as it was, without trading Fev away.
2. The umpires cost us dearly in that final against West Coast.
ISSUE - Not as much as we cost ourselves. We lost by 3 points. That particular incident Glass vs Walker, was an incident you see paid some ways and not the other, weekly. Sometimes it goes your way, sometimes it doesnt. You want to write to the letter of the law, sure, its a free. You pay that every week, and everyone will complain about the game not being what it used to be. We made numerous issues in much the same vein we do now. Errant kicking, turnovers, not playing the percentages well enough, and I seem to recall an incident where we gave Jack Darling a double goal by pushing and shoving (Marcus Davies the culprit).
3. Who knows what we would have done a week later.
ISSUE - statistically, the team that doesnt finish top 4 and wins that first final, doesnt go on to make the grand final. History is not on our side in that regard. Statistically speaking we were more likely to lose the following week, and miss the grand final. The actuality means that you never know until it happens, but as intimated already by LP, Geelong were relatively untouchable that season. Odds are not in our favour to have progressed any further. Getting to that preliminary final would have been huge for us, and we cannot know what could have occurred, but we were starting to run out of fit bodies by then anyway.
4. 2012 injuries killed us.
ISSUE - They did, but not as much as our inability to win the contested ball. We looked good for 3 rounds, until the Bombers killed us. Since that day, Chris Judd has been a cut above the rest weekly. we have lived and died by his form ever since, and now even good form from him cant do it, because he is not the beast that he was. We have been bullied out of the game more often than not, and have gone meekly. This is endemic cultural problem at our footy club that I link back to our cap breaches and our club just going along quietly wanting to reinvent itself as nothing but complicit.
5. Luck has nothing to do with it.
ISSUE - even the best sides get lucky some times. Hawthorn would be minus one flag had Geelong kicked straight in 2008. They worked their tails off, but they are lucky that Mooney couldnt hit the side of a barn from 5 metres away, and that Ottens running into an open goal stuffed his kick. These incidents all led to Geelong dropping off.
Luck has a lot to do with everything. I dont believe we were unlucky in 2011, I think we were unlucky and have been probably every season since, particularly in the sub area. We have used our sub in the first quarter so frequently it has ceased being entertaining. Statistically, the earlier you use the sub, the more frequently you lose. Its not the sole reason we have lost a lot of winnable games, but it showed its face again on Thursday.
6. we couldnt have won a flag with Ratten.
ISSUE - Any coach can win a flag. You give them enough time, and the right support and odds are if they have a football brain, they will get there eventually. You put a bloke like Scott in charge of a list like Geelongs, and you have yourself a premiership coach.
Is he a good coach? Maybe, but referencing luck, had Podsiadly not gotten injured in the Grand Final to force a sub that actually worked in Geelong's favour (Hawkins went permantly forward, whilst West rucked out the rest of the match) and resulted in them winning the game, we could be looking at a Collingwood premiership in 2011 instead.
The reality is, half of these arguments are circular. You could argue either perspective and be right/wrong accordingly.
Until our football club sticks to its convictions, none of our coaches will achieve anything. You dont back your man and he wont deliver, and that is the only guarantee in football.
These debates are pointless, posters flip like weathervanes.
At club level;
The club kiboshed Ratten and appointed Malthouse, at the time it was implied they needed to make the best of the list and they expected success under Malthouse. It's safe to assume then that one of the reasons Ratten got the chop was because he did not make the best of a list the club thought could do better.
Then the team starts to slide, the club axes the recruiters, rebuilds the list, but not officially and now we are told the same club is playing the long term game but quoting, "It can happen very quickly!" Really!!! Add to that we appear to be giving under-done or injured players games which seems to be a contradiction to the long term planning!
So in summary that list that the club thought could do better, the 2010/11 list that list that caused the under-performing coach to get the chop, was apparently NFG and needed rebuilding!
On the supporter side;
Some claim we were NBG back in 2010/11 when we made finals two years running, back then when we mostly defeated sides below us and lost to sides above us.
Now some of the same supporters claim we are better when we lose to sides above us and also get beaten by sides that were below us back in 2010/11!
Further they claim we have a much better and far more capable coach right now, who has a better list after rebuilding the 2010/11 NBG list, yet our results look set to slide!
And all the while they still imply the bloke that made finals twice, and did so with a list that was supposedly NGB, is a dud coach!
As each season passes it is becoming embarrassing because Ratten, you know the guy Brett "The Fluke" Ratten, is looking like some sort of AFL genius or overachiever! ;)
Back up your sweeping statements with facts LP, my history is there to see.
Yes, you're paranoid we know! :D
and you talk a load of crap that you can't back up.
I learn quickly from you! ;)
I think it would have been pretty hard to back up after the 2011 final in Perth.
09 & 10 are the real "what if" games for me... 09 we had Judd & Fev, 10 we had Judd, we lost two close interstate finals. I think we could have made a prelim in one of those years if we had of won (we would have played the doggies the following week in both years). 2010 in particular.
Luck does play a massive part... 2009 to 2011 were dominated by victorian teams, yet we ended up playing 3 out of 4 finals interstate. I reckon that is a bit stiff. Yes, you control your own destiny, but where other teams finish around you is beyond your control.
Why have we gotten worse relative to the rest of the comp though? Our group still had improvement in it, age wise. The 2013 team was supposedly entering its premiership window.
If we had the age profile of our 2001 side, fine but our list should still be on the up. So how did we get jumped?
Mate you know you have officially lost it when you write a post like this. The Walker free was fifty fifty no doubt but you seem to be forgetting the other twenty odd free kicks we were screwed with. Even non Carlton people have told me they remember that game and how hard we were screwed. Hell check out MBB (the anti-Christ Ratten)'s commentary in the after game thread. If you're glossing over stuff like that I guess you need to ask yourself the question as to whether you're arguing for a legitimate reason, or just looking to stand your ground and be stubborn.
Sweeping non factual statements? Like 'we peaked in 2011'?
Remember smashing the Pies in Round 3 and being Premiership Favourites the next year..
That one turned out well.
Not bad for a side that peaked the previous year.
We didn't peak for very long. It was a slow rise from being crap to playing finals. Once we got there, we dropped off pretty quickly.
Do you remember what happened rd 4?
Some may even argue we were yet to peak and that's just an excuse used by the propagandists.
Geelong, Collingwood and West Coast have got worse as well.
But they were all old sides. You should actually read the post properly.
Is it that lack of player development again, I think it keeps biting us on the ar5e? :o
All I know, is that the premiership window opened, but got slammed shut pretty quickly. Club is looking at opening another window, but they are stuck in the basement. A long way off
When is the last time we loaded up on draft picks? All we do is give them away.
What does age have to do with it? A prime Chris Judd carried the team back then and unfortunately none of the young guns from then have come close to filling his shoes.
It's a player development problem, we've had kids who have stagnated but we can't keep blaming the kids because virtually none have reached their "potential"
We seem to have a club/coaching issue that has pervaded several senior coaches and administrations.
Yep, its called making coaches coach in self preservation mode the entire time they are here.
Sets them up to ignore nurturing young talent at the expense of a few wins in order to create a better learning environment.
Have a look at the fallout of having Smith as the sub. If you listen to the common opinion, it should have been any one of 5 other players, all of which have played more than a season worth of senior footy rather than 1 debutant.
Most player development happens at the VFL level.
After that game we went looking for the "special Essendon diet" :D
I know last year I had to apologise to Adrian "Bear" Gleeson for giving him a mouthful in "The G" carpark as we left the ground after that Rnd 4 match! :-[
I apologise again "Bear" I couldn't have known our apparent lack of effort was due to competing against some juiced up cheating kents!
Reality is that we've made up the numbers for 14 years. Few bright spots (Pratt, Juddy, 2011, Fev), overall... dark.
An absolute litany of errors and disappointments since Elliott (the %&*@^^!) handed the poisoned chalice to Pagan.
We'll come good, the question is when.
i just believe what the club keeps telling me.
That we're improving, we're getting better, that we cant see ourselves losing etc.
I m just waiting for the pills to come in the mail so we can all take them at once
You go first thrunthrublu... the rest of us will follow, honest.
All too well, we lost key players and were beaten by a side using an unfair advantage.
We then beat Freo in Perth and were 5 and 1.
Carrazzo and Laidler went down in the first quarter, we were effectively two short for the remainder of the game and still had the audacity to lead a team high on juice at half time.
I fairness according to Hird and Dank's texts they didn't get on the good stuff till after our match before the Pies game.
No, it started in the pre-season.
The good stuff was just a top-up to help with the short break.
Yeah I know, I was joking but they're not guilty, just remember that.
@MM
There's a verdict, I think in Scotland, of "not proven" which better fits the Bummer findings. Leaves it open to future question.