Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Is Psychological help the answer ? (Read 39953 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #60 –
And here I was all these years thinking that it was the team with the most points at the end of the GAME that won?   ???
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #61 –
Quote from: blue4life on
The least we can do as supporters is give Malthouse a chance, we gave Ratten over five years after all and it got us nowhere.


You don't get five years......That's when you're sacked.
"The coach is Rubbish" threads usually start after about twelve months. ;)
We're on schedule.

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #62 –
winning quarters, losing quarters - are we scoring footy like tennis??

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #63 –
Quote from: Lods on
"The coach is Rubbish" threads usually start after about twelve months. ;)
We're on schedule.

I venture to say that there were more than a couple of 'Malthouse is rubbish' posts here when Mick was at Collingwood.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #64 –
Quote from: blue4life on
Could've, should've, would've, but the bottom line is that we didn't, and haven't.
Agreed. No matter how close, or far away we may have been, we didn't.

Quote from: thrunthrublu on
winning quarters, losing quarters - are we scoring footy like tennis??
Nope, the normal way....which is...

Quote from: cookie2 on
And here I was all these years thinking that it was the team with the most points at the end of the GAME that won?   ???

It is what matters.

Again, slice it whatever way you want. We didn't win the game. Our best year of late has seen us win 1 finals game, and lose in week 2....thats happened twice. Once with Ratts and once with Mick.

We need to focus on the now and fix things now. Forget about who said what and who thought what and work out what needs to be done, NOW.

Mick is our coach. Give him what he needs to succeed.
If that is a psychologist for the players...possible
If that is a team who didn't have 22 players have surgery in the off-season...more likely
Then do what you need to do to make it happen and work with what we have now, and plan for the future now.
 

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #65 –
Quote from: bratblue on
Quote from: kruddler on
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
Quote from: kruddler on
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
Quote from: kruddler on
In the end, people only remember the 'potential walker free' that could've won us the match.

If you look through the goal by goal, you'll see a different story to us being a contender.

We kicked the first 4 goals of the match, to their 0.1
We kicked the last 3 goals of the match after they had got their game high lead of 21 points, 22 minutes into the last quarter and took the foot of the pedal.

In the middle of the game, they kicked 15 goals to our 6 and clearly had the game on their terms.

Yes, we nearly stole it late, but they were still a class above us.

Kruddler likes to misrepresent the stats, we actually won 3 of the 4 quarters......not to mention their run of goals was aided by some of the most shocking onse sided decisions we've seen in the game.

Carrots likes to make bold statements like 'misrepresent the stats'.

Everytime I, or someone else, puts up a stat that you disagree with, they are 'misrepresenting the stats'.
Fact is they had 15 goals to 6 in the heart of the game.

We cannot forget that.

There are not too many genuine top 4 sides that allow that kind of scoring against.

Fact is, we won 3 of 4 quarters, and you tried to make out they dominated the major part of the game. You most certainly misrepresented the facts, as you tend to do to try and get your point across. The proof is there. We won 3 of 4 quarters. Can't argue with that.

I don't think you understand what a fact is. You continue to try and debate facts, when by definition a fact is known to be true.

FACT is they scored 15 goals to 6 in the middle of the game. This is known to be true, not made up, not twisted. FACT.

I never said we didn't win 3/4 quarters. You are implying that i have been.

For completions sake.
Q1 - 25-9 (Lead by our kicking the first 4 goals)
Q2 - 21-48 (The team that rarely got a lot of goals scored against it, actually got a lot of goals scored against it)
Q3 - 19-17 (Won the quarter, true, but we kicked 3.1 to their 2.5...they had more play and scoring shots)
Q4 - 33-27 (Won the quarter by a goal, again after they took the foot off the pedal and we kicked the last 3 goals of the game)

So your 'good enough for me' comment flies in the face of 2 things you have been harping on about ad nauseum.

1. The team under Ratten was rarely had large lapses in games in which we were scored against heavily. Incorrect.
2. 3 out of 4 quarters is NOT good enough. In fact, you have said previously all you want is a 4 quarter effort from our boys.

I don't want to call you a hypocrite, but if the shoe fits....

Well put Kruddler, you won that debate. The "ad nauseum" is a term that has come to my mind a number of times recently.

Actually thought Carrots belted them off the park but each to their own.

Forgets about  the multiple charities in front of goal the Eagles got in the 2nd qtr including thee double goal. Not to mention how depleted our side was. All that would be missed because it currently doesn't suit people's arguments. Kruds is the  ultimate spin merchant. Expert at making a stat sound anyway he wants to to sound. some of his stats are good, others, when he's trying to spin an argument, I just yawn and go "ho hum".

Too be honest I don't know why some on here bother.. Even when they play well people find ways of putting the club down. Amazing, when you read quotes from the the game at the time how people change their tune to suit their argument when it's convenient. No respect for an opinion there. 

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #66 –
Quote from: blue4life on
Why the focus on one game in 2011?
The team who beat us finished stone motherless last the year before and 10th the year before that, and last week they had their pants pulled down by Geelong who are past their best.
Could've, should've, would've, but the bottom line is that we didn't, and haven't.
The least we can do as supporters is give Malthouse a chance, we gave Ratten over five years after all and it got us nowhere.

Who cares where they finished the year before that was irrelevant to 2011 totally. Meaningless. Why bring it up.

Fact is many have blamed Ratts when essentially nothing has changed other than we've got worse. Ratts achieved every goal he was asked to do  until the last year when injuries cruelled him. We got the gun coach and nothing has changed except we've got worse (not that i'm ready to write off MM at all yet, just defend Ratts) so it couldn't  have been the coach. right about now there's a few anti-Ratts people who look stupid right now as is often seen of these pages. Ratts is happy, he has a nice cushy job with the premiers now.

You were always quick to write off Ratten but happy to defend a bloke who's done worse.

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #67 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Mick is our coach. Give him what he needs to succeed.
If that is a psychologist for the players...possible
If that is a team who didn't have 22 players have surgery in the off-season...more likely
Then do what you need to do to make it happen and work with what we have now, and plan for the future now.

Better late than never ;)

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #68 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Mick is our coach. Give him what he needs to succeed.

Agree but we can't do that... we don't have the resources to have the best funded footy department in the business and people to keep the wolves at bay for him.

We either find someone who can work in those situations (clearly Mick can't) or we find a new administration and a hell of a lot more cash.

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #69 –
Quote from: laj on
You were always quick to write off Ratten but happy to defend a bloke who's done worse.

Point to any post of mine defending Malthouse, feel free.
What I've said is that Malthouse has the runs on the board, he's done it twice at separate clubs and at Collingwood he took them from near bottom.
Whether or not he succeeds at Carlton time will tell but I'm prepared to give him a break.
Malthouse has done worse than Ratten?
He's coached us for one season and won a final, he's showing faith in kids and second stringers and he doesn't play favourites.
I'm not going to be panicked by a few losses.
The only thing in this world worth more than a hill of beans is the Carlton Football Club.

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #70 –
Quote from: blue4life on
Quote from: laj on
You were always quick to write off Ratten but happy to defend a bloke who's done worse.

Point to any post of mine defending Malthouse, feel free.
What I've said is that Malthouse has the runs on the board, he's done it twice at separate clubs and at Collingwood he took them from near bottom.
Whether or not he succeeds at Carlton time will tell but I'm prepared to give him a break.
Malthouse has done worse than Ratten?
He's coached us for one season and won a final, he's showing faith in kids and second stringers and he doesn't play favourites.
I'm not going to be panicked by a few losses.

That's a pretty strong defence  ;)

One thing that has marked Malthouse's career is the fact that he does play favourites.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #71 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Quote from: blue4life on
Could've, should've, would've, but the bottom line is that we didn't, and haven't.
Agreed. No matter how close, or far away we may have been, we didn't.

Quote from: thrunthrublu on
winning quarters, losing quarters - are we scoring footy like tennis??
Nope, the normal way....which is...

Quote from: cookie2 on
And here I was all these years thinking that it was the team with the most points at the end of the GAME that won?   ???

It is what matters.

Again, slice it whatever way you want. We didn't win the game. Our best year of late has seen us win 1 finals game, and lose in week 2....thats happened twice. Once with Ratts and once with Mick.

We need to focus on the now and fix things now. Forget about who said what and who thought what and work out what needs to be done, NOW.

Mick is our coach. Give him what he needs to succeed.
If that is a psychologist for the players...possible
If that is a team who didn't have 22 players having surgery in the off-season...more likely
Then do what you need to do to make it happen and work with what we have now, and plan for the future now.

Nothing beats distilling circumstances into reality.

The best brains/experience in the footy community endorse MM - good enough for me. As KRUDDNESS writes... give him what he needs. If he's right, we succeed... if he aint, we'll know and he's gone.

Sports psychologist... hope not. Way more d1ckheads and self-important clowns out there (in this field) than cats who really know what they're doing.

Funny how 22 blokes have off-season surgery which seriously hampers their preparation is not a reason for season 2014 failure thus far for the MM critics... yet Ratts' injury list in 2012 is a reason for failure.  :o  :o This is an imperative comparison which KRUDDNESS introduced - top stuff.

And when the club gets on the front foot and acknowledges unacceptable failure... and the reasons (like not since 1990) negative Nelllies still call for MMs head on a stick.

Too many powders have gone off way too soon this year. A success experienced Senior Coach has informed our Board/club (thank all the gods) of our inadequacies - recruiting has already undergone important changes. More should follow.

(as an aside, I wonder if Ratts also informed the Board of such inadequacies and was ignored due to his 'junior' coach status?).

Powder dry till mid season will help us accurately assess so much more.

I take the attitude (for santity sake ) that we cannot lose. If we get our shizen together and make the 8 (or threaten and finish just outside), great. If we bottom out and fail badly... bye, bye Gibbs and bring on 2 consecutive picks in the top 10. Personally, I hope we get our shizen together. And I believe we will.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #72 –
Quote from: Baggers on
Funny how 22 blokes have off-season surgery which seriously hampers their preparation is not a reason for season 2014 failure thus far for the MM critics... yet Ratts' injury list in 2012 is a reason for failure.  :o  :o This is an imperative comparison which KRUDDNESS introduced - top stuff.

Ratten was sacked and you were leading the charge numbnuts.

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #73 –
Quote from: Baggers on


Funny how 22 blokes have off-season surgery which seriously hampers their preparation is not a reason for season 2014 failure thus far for the MM critics...


It is of greater comedic value that supporters were given an assessment of the list that contradicts the reality.
IN WADA WE TRUST

Re: Is Psychological help the answer ?

Reply #74 –
@thrunthru and cookie

I never said we won, read the debate from the start and you'll see it was kruddler that wanted to break the game down, not me. I just say we should have won, and that everyone agreed we should have won so to say we weren't competitive and were dominated for the major part of the game is just BS. Big difference.
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!