Carlton Supporters Club

For some reason,I have a belief that we will beat the Giants .
I know they played well to beat the Hawks but that was in Sydney.Also they are favorites ,will the pressure get to them .
My 2 main worries are Mumford in the ruck and Cameron in the forward line.Expect an upset .I will be there for the simple reason ,the more you lose the closer you are to a win  so come on Blues get it done    

Ditto to all who are not happy with Graham being dropped.....ridiculous development IMO....if someone can tell me what outstanding work Dick has done
to warrant a game then let me know....
Good to see White, Carrazzo and Menzel back and I guess Tutt deserves another go given he played well in the NB's last week....
Watto gets another go and it will be interesting to see how he is used...lead up, decoy for Casboult or genuine marking target like Levi..

Picking the best side in order to win must be the first principle of selection. The play the kids and develop young players principle must come a distant second.

Want to build a culture of mediocrity? Then losing games will get you there, especially when it come with the excuse of playing young players who need to have a go. The other deficiancy of this approach is when does it stop. When does a club decide to stop being 'developmental' and picking the best side?  Who gets an opportunity and why? It can become very confusing and incoherent very fast.

Malthouse is trying to build a bridge to a culture and attitude that is about winning and believing you can win every game. The straightforward way to this is pick the best side. Otherwise you are half a side going out to win (and knowing that you are unlikely to) and another half who are having a go.  To this i bollocks. This isn't football camp, it's the AFL. Pick the best side and try and win every game. Anything less is folly.

You have failed to grasp the concept of a rebuild.

Picking the best side in order to win must be the first principle of selection. The play the kids and develop young players principle must come a distant second.

Want to build a culture of mediocrity? Then losing games will get you there, especially when it come with the excuse of playing young players who need to have a go. The other deficiancy of this approach is when does it stop. When does a club decide to stop being 'developmental' and picking the best side?  Who gets an opportunity and why? It can become very confusing and incoherent very fast.

Malthouse is trying to build a bridge to a culture and attitude that is about winning and believing you can win every game. The straightforward way to this is pick the best side. Otherwise you are half a side going out to win (and knowing that you are unlikely to) and another half who are having a go.  To this i bollocks. This isn't football camp, it's the AFL. Pick the best side and try and win every game. Anything less is folly.

And any rebuild will be on shaky foundations if some basic principles have not been adhered to through the process. I get what Malthouse is attempting. He is trying to build a team on a set of basic principles that can be understood and therefore maintained by all in the team. It's just that it is hard to do.

The popular understanding of what is ostensively called a rebuild is flawed. Playing youngsters on the crieteria of being young, with potential and requiring experience is flawed if it is the primary basis for selection. When does it stop? And if it does, and a club then decides to suuddenly try and win games, it must change its criteria for selection.

Its a bit like hoping that we get experience in now and hope it works out. It is setting the right goal yet taking the wrong path. Set the goal and start conducting yourself as a team like you want to be now, not in some yet to be determined future time when things are deemed all right. Behaving like losers is a sure way to continue losing.

Malthouse is already building something. It's a selection process based on attempting to win games of football first and foremost  I struggle to understand how anything less can be helpful in building something sustainable and successful.

Once again you have totally failed to grasp the concept of a rebuild. A rebuild is not bout winning games, it's about sacrificing a few wins to get games into kids and accelerate their development. Have a read of LLT's post. Also take a look at GC and then GWS. GWS went with the kids and they are now reaping the rewards, with a great foundation of kids having played games (not wins) to build on. Have a look what Dennis did when he tried to make us competitive by playing and recruiting more hardened senior rejects. He set us back years.

If you think the concept of a rebuild is flawed that's fine, but don't sit there and try to tell me a rebuild is all about winning games first and foremost because that is just plain rubbish.

Pushing all that to the side, you simply cannot argue that malthouse is building towards anything other than a big pile of shight, when the team continues to regress at a rate of knots. If he is in fact trying to do what you say, he is failing dismally and as well as getting the method wrong, he has totally missed the mark. He has to go, and he will go.

The one I feel sorriest for is Whiley - Wile E is clearly not as fast as Carrazzo - he reminded me of Wile E Coyote - the way he chased Pendlebury and Beams all over the field the past 2 weeks - bloody tough ask for the youngster