Sorry jimmae i'll have to disagree. I think most of what you stated is directly influenced by the coach. It's his responsibility for much of what you said to occur under match conditions.

Yet you fail to point out what.

So Denis Pagan, while sitting in the box, is directly responsible for Heath Scotland kicking the ball (into the sun) over the head of Bentick offering a sideways lead across the 50 arc?

This then resulted in a turnover which was further ruined by some of our players camping themselves in a spot while Scotland was taking his kick.

There's one example.

On match day, right there and then... what could Pagan do? Not a bloody thing. You're throwing a lot of blame on the coach.

You do not just blame the coach for poor performances, you do not just blame one player, you blame the team as a unit. You praise situations that deserve praise and you highlight and work to improve for situations cited that do not deserve said praise.

A coaches role is in preparation and reviewing, development, mentoring, and, guiding the players to the correct method in games during breaks by means of positional changes, highlighting relevant statistics and asking for more in certain areas.

A lot of what a coach does is very much pre-game and post-game. On matchday he merely reinforces this and makes changes when necessary/possible.

Tell me as a coach, what Denis did wrong today.

Tell me player to player, what they did wrong today.

Tell me how you think Denis could have better prepared the player, prior to today.

I predict you'll come up with a very short list, then a long list, then a reasonably short list.

Pagan IS responsible for our players coming out of defence and having no one to kick to!

_________________
"You are being watched. The government has a secret system. A machine that spies on you every hour of every day. I know because I built it." - Finch

Pagan was on ABC radio before the game today and basicly admitted they were playing a game plan aimed to restrict the opposition score. Or that is what he thinks. Of course, given the way much of the team gave up the contest after 1/flooding 2 time, you have to wonder how convinced they are that this negative crap is worth carrying on with.

So then if he needs to teach his team a lesson on what is going to help them win games at this point in time, he should show them if they fail to listen, maybe it will give them a wake up call, maybe it will galvanise the team to function under his tutilage.

As for your comment Effes, he is responsible for giving them a structure and ideas with what to do with it. If they don't execute it properly due to poor skills and/or lack of application (ie. running, shepparding, contesting) then that's hardly his fault unless he overlooks a fundamental flaw.

The flaw at the moment is player application, player strength, player conditioning, player skills.

PLAYER, PLAYER, PLAYER.

If all of the above magically improved by 10 to 20% tomorrow, we probably wouldn't flood so much.

jimmae, I'm sorry, but the buck stops with the coach.

Skills, game-plan, attitude. They are all the coach's domain.

The game-plan is fundamentally flawed, and it has a domino effect on everything else. It exposes our poor disposal skills which in turn kills the team morale.

If you think Denis doesn't need to take responsibility for our performance today then you are living in La-la-land.

We had avoided blow-outs until today, what excuse is Denis going to hide behind now?

Sorry mate, the coach is responsible otherwise why have a coach. He is responsible for the development of skills, game plan, match-ups, gameday work etc.. and importantly, to get the players behind him and play for him, which clearly hasn't happened very little over the last 4 years. If you don't have a truly committed team you go no-where. We have played without true passion and committment are for most of the 4 years, with the exception of 2004 and pre-season last year. In reality, we are a rabble, have been in most of that time. The guy has done nothing for us despite his hefty pay-packet. Started last and still last. If there was true development as a team, as distinct from individuals, we'd be improving and showing something by now, a la the Bulldogs, who were worse than us under Peter Rhode in 2003/4. What a difference a decent coach makes. But us, we're still a rabble. So, yes, the buck stops with the coach. Can't believe anyone still defends him but I suppose alot don't like to admit they're wrong either.

Moving on up.

I was there and was shocked and embarrassed in the second half.

We looked amateurish in our skills and decision making.

I thought Scotland appeared to be kicking to Collingwood jumpers as though as he was still a Magpie.

Why can't our players hold marks? .....it's heartbreaking to watch.

I was also disappointed in Carrazzo today......he would not go in for the hard ball and took too many short steps for my liking.

Bentick looked lost......he was once a real terrier .....what's happened to him?

I'm a Carlton optimist but.........I'm at a loss to explain it.....we did not go in hard enough to get the ball; and when we did get it; we didn't know what to do with it.

Lance Whitnall was magnificent.....I hope his knockers saw his game today.

_________________
No ones listening till you make a mistake.

One thing I noticed having watched the bullants on Saturday, was what , for want of a better word appeared to be the level of heart and team spirit the bullants showed and by comparison a Carlton which lacks this quality.

The Bullants looked like they were playing like men that were possessed, their mental desire to crush the opposition seemed to not stop until the final siren had gone.

Maybe this intangible thing is the result of the fact that the Bullants are the powerful team that they are right now in the afl and they beat the bottom side in Box Hill Hawks, but they sure looks like they have something that the seniors havent got.

Pehaps this negative factor in the seniors is the influence of the coach.

Some coaches are held in such esteem that the player would die for them, but others are held in lower regard.

While a comparative lack of skill is an issue, I think that Denis's influence is a factor in our losses. This is something that can only be changed by having a different coach.

Allegations that I hear about Denis is that he has a history of being a control freak.

Irrestpective of the skill level of a club, people that want to have a high level of control over players are not surprisingly not always liked and when they are coaches of a footy club, the players dont play for the coach in the same way that they would for someone else.

_________________
My Blue Heaven

only heard the game today but it pretty much sounds like it has been all season - too negative in game style

Just a thought - after round one (and probably prior) - 90+% of us would have had our list/team ahead of richmond. If you have a look at richmonds performances and ours - what is the major difference?

I caught the last bit of the dons/richmond game this week and though the skills werent astounding - the game plan/style was a LOT more enjoyable to watch than ours atm - players are prepared to back themselves in and have the blessing of the coach to do so. The last point that was kick - started from a play on/baulk/run around the player in defence and ended up with a similar effort up forward by oakley-nicholls. Personally I'd be prepared to cop a few floggings now and then due to our 'weak list' if our team had and maintained that attitude/effort through the season.

The buck stops with the coach? Who is in la-la land?!

So the players are mindless drones with which Pagan operates by remote control and any failings they have to adhere to his plans are automatically his failings? Any mistakes they make are his mistakes?

I think there's a fundamental flaw here, your assessment.

Let's just throw anyone in our 22 and Pagan should be able to make them win games. That's like going into a retail store, demanding a discount on everything you buy, and wondering why they won't give it to you.

Can anyone on our coaching panel inspire our players?

Seriously after a shithouse thid quarter where the warning signs were ringing louder than the Aurora siren, something had to be said to inspire the passion back in the players, lift the spirits etc.

Is there anything done at training to work on tackling?

Just on that i noticed Waite couldn't mark over head today, tries to take everything on his chest and failed dismally when overhead. Maybe he was taking conditions into account, but looked far more comfortable taking them on his chest.

_________________
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent." Qui-Gon Jinn 15-05-2005

"there’s more chance of me becoming the full forward for the [Western Bulldogs] than there is of any change in the Labor Party." Julia Gillard 18-05-2010

No fundamnetal flaw at all. We're not in a retail store as the club selects the best available footballers at a draft, not Joe Blogs in a retail store. Can't believe you made such a comment. With those players he coaches, he teaches, he plans etc...and if he dosen't get that right, and gain the player's respect, your side goes crap and he gets the boot. If he gets it right we wins games. Sadly we're crap. That's the essence of coaching. If that's not his job, why have a coach. I find that very simple to understand. Have a look at us, how many more excuses can you make for him. You're in la-la land if you think otherwise.

I'll make plenty of excuses for him when players are failing to work for each other and execute basic skills.

How much of it now is Pagan, and how much of it is players doubting themselves and the majority of the playing group. They need to drag themselves out of this rut and work hard how they use the footy and create space for clean use of the footy.

He's giving them instructions I'm sure, he's certainly not the one attempting to execute them.

We go long and direct we fail and the ball comes screaming back.

We play uncontested footy and chip and the ball comes screaming back.

Two completely different game plans yet the opposition still find themselves in space with numbers and none of our blokes in sight.

THIS IS NOT THE COACH'S FAULT. This is called not thinking beyond streaming forward and putting your hand up for the ball. The players are not themselves at the moment, they're afraid of what might go wrong.

Pagan's only responsibilities are that the areas of their game that need to be developed are developed, that they have as suitable a gameplan as possible for them to stay competitive, that what they need to be polished up on is polished up as much as time can allow and that they are mentally focused on the task at hand.

If Pagan fails to have his players prepared to play whether they be scared of mistakes they might make or uninspired by his methods WHEN our 22 is ready to push for finals, then I will be on the anti-Pagan side.

Until then he does the best he can with what he has and he errs on the side of protecting players when the need is there and developing what needs to be developed, whether that be marking, kicking, decision making, postional play, whatever.

The coach is not the sole perpretator of a losing game of football, that is how you are portraiting it.

I can't agree that it is the coach's fault that we are being beaten on ball. We simply don't have enough skill and class on ball and with the draft our penalties and bad recruiting prior to his arrival it's not a situation that can be turned around overnight.

Given we were penalised out of two drafts I think you could say he couldn't re-start until last year. We have problems on nearly every line and gradually we are replenishing and the team is taking shape Not as fast as we would like but it's a different game these days and the AFL has determined that all clubs must re-build over time.

The coach has persisted with Bentick Betts and Carrazzo and given Murphy Russell Kennedy and Setanta a chance to show their ability. He has also developed Walker and Simpson in a variety of roles and tried most of the players on our list to no avail. Bannister and Wiggins showed form in the Bullants and were given their opportunity showing that the coach and MC reward consistent good form. I also have no doubt that Blackwell and Raso will also be given their opportunity in the near future.

Knowing we had a weakness down back and needed a bid body we have drafted Bower and Hartlett and traded a late pick for Saddington. We needed a mobile young ruck option to support Barnaby and tried DeLuca and Bryan and now have McLaren as well as two rookie ruck options.

The major problem is that players who are recognised as being the backbone in our team would be on the periphery at the stronger clubs and we need another probably 6 top class players in our team. Doesn't matter how good a coach you are you can't win when the game is about rotations and leg speed and you don't have the equipment to compete. We need more speed and class on ball and in the side and there is little of that in the reserves.

Players were ordinary and Pagan probably made more moves than usual but the buck does stop with the coach and I reckon the way that Mitchell has the Bullants firing would be putting extra pressure on Pagan....I dont see Smorgan and the board wearing too many more bad losses or a season that has us looking forward to the draft again...they will want a fall guy and it will be Pagan....

_________________
"When you have the attitude of a champion, you see adversity as your
training partner."
- Conor Gillen

If the coach doesn't have ultimate responsibility for the performance of the team, who does jimmae?

Pagan isn't from the Parkin school of player empowerment. For the most part he stripped the players of their individuality to make sure they get the basics right - but 4 years later they still don't!

The game plan doesn't play to our strengths, he insists on flooding which requires a high level of fitness, but we don't rotate our midfield to the bench therefore they run out of steam. Our forward line is our strength and yet they are pushed too far up the ground or grossly outnumbered.

Why should Denis be absolved of all responsibility?

Our list isn't the greatest, but it's not as bad as the show we put up today. We have a couple of first round picks in there, we have some highly skilled players there who've shown that they can play. Stevens was a great player at Port, Houlihan has shown what he's capable of, Fevola - we know about him, ditto Lappin.

Why the heck are they completely unaccountable, why are they completely disinterested?

You are in la-la land. It's part of the coach's responsibility to motivate his players. If they couldn't get motivated by a game versus Collingwood, then we're really in deep sh*t. If you want to completely absolve the coach of any responsibility, then I suppose you have no idea what the word 'accountability' or the word 'responsibility' means.

_________________
"A good composer does not initiate. He steals."

- Igor Stravinsky