MM cannot coach us next year.

His contract clearly prohibits that and its clear that is why he is saying he wont coach next year so he has no legal issue and is paid in full next year.

He will have to honour that contract until he can get out of it.

It may be possible that if Collingwood cant offer him something that is consistent with their agreement giving an out.

So the reality is if we want MM we may have to wait. Telling him its 2012 or nothing wont change his current legal problem.

restraint of trade

there is clearly a reason MM hasnt come to terms with anything suitable for 2012. Thats his OUT.

R57 ..care to illustrate what part(s) of the contract your privy to ?

Edited August 26, 201113 yr by belzebub59

Malthouse and Buckley are in bed together. Which side would Eddie get in?

Succession planning works very well, it's just an issue when you put a firm date on it and the outgoing coach is reluctant to step aside at that time.

It worked at Sydney, with Roos and Longmire.

It will work at Collingwood too - they just won't be able to prevent Malthouse from going elsewhere.

Agree to not looking ahead too far, but I worry sometimes that Malthouse is getting too long in the tooth and may not be keen on another 7 year stint at a club.

The difference between the 2 clubs you mentioned and us is that they had reason to put in a SUCCESSion plan. I will not entertain the idea of recruiting any coach with a SUCCESSion plan in mind. I just want the coach that will give us SUCCESS.

MM cannot coach us next year.

His contract clearly prohibits that and its clear that is why he is saying he wont coach next year so he has no legal issue and is paid in full next year.

He will have to honour that contract until he can get out of it.

It may be possible that if Collingwood cant offer him something that is consistent with their agreement giving an out.

So the reality is if we want MM we may have to wait. Telling him its 2012 or nothing wont change his current legal problem.

You really think that after 10 years of service, a premiership, possibly 2, and numerous finals appearances, that Collingwood is going to take the legal stick to Malthouse because he still has a passion to coach, and that was taken away from him at the Pies?

Common sense will prevail, and if he wants to coach next year, he will.

Collingwood could not be that bloody minded.

Edited August 26, 201113 yr by Real Demon

I am sick of this "succession plan" cr@p. Has it worked at Collingwood? All it has done is created unwanted press coverage all year.

Let's worry about getting a decent coach first, then have that coach win us multiple flags (I'm happy for 1, but history shows when we win 1, we win many!). After all that, THEN I might consider who the next coach would be.

At the moment, we got no-one.

Succession plans work, IF they're by agreement of all participants, equally. If spiritually in agreement.

If not, & one is dragged down that road, it will be troublesome, If that person has backbone.

You really think that after 10 years of service, a premiership, possibly 2, and numerous finals appearances, that Collingwood is going to take the legal stick to Malthouse because he still has a passion to coach, and that was taken away from him at the Pies?

Common sense will prevail, and if he wants to coach next year, he will.

Collingwood could not be that bloody minded.

write the following 500 times (no cut and paste)

"I am a very silly boy and will not make stupid statements again"

Well the last time i check this article is written by Mike Shehan, so it's up to us to make our own assumptions.

Edited August 26, 201113 yr by Dees

write the following 500 times (no cut and paste)

"I am a very silly boy and will not make stupid statements again"

Please!

I know we all hate them, and that's all good..........but Eddie isn't an idiot, and won't want to disrespect a probable 2 time premiership coach.

They just want the 2nd flag, and after that I reckon they will let Mick fly to the moon if he wanted to!

I would be highly suprised if in the afterglow of another flag, if Mick said he was leaving and wanted to keep on coaching because that is his passion, there is no way known they are going to enforce that contract.

That's not how you treat premiership coaches, and is just bad business.

Public sentiment would be completely against the Pies, and the media would hang them out to dry, not something you would want when the focus should be on the premiership win.

You really think that after 10 years of service, a premiership, possibly 2, and numerous finals appearances, that Collingwood is going to take the legal stick to Malthouse because he still has a passion to coach, and that was taken away from him at the Pies?

Common sense will prevail, and if he wants to coach next year, he will.

Collingwood could not be that bloody minded.

Collingwood will do what's best for Collingwood, and clearly it's best for Collingwood that Mick doesn't coach one of their opposition teams next year. If Malthouse has signed a contract that waives his own right to coach next year then Collingwood will rightfully do everything in their power to enforce it.

Our only hope is that he hasn't signed such a deal, or he hires a lawyer who can prove (against the CFC lawyers) that it's an unreasonable restraint of trade or something like that. And this is all just assuming that he does actually want to coach and that he does want to coach our team.

I still see it as a very long shot.

When this was announced 2 years ago people knew it wouldnt work but then they managed to win a premiership and not much was said. Now its getting closer and now its being talked about.

The thing is Mick isnt a coaching director. Its not what he ever wanted to be. Sernior coaching is what he is good at. Also can you imagine Eddie coming to you saying that you will coach for the next 2 years then Nathan will take over. How does that sound. Of course Mick says yes. Can you imagine Mick saying no to that to Eddies face.

Also its funny how we havent heard Nthan come out and actually say he wants Mick there next year.

Collingwood will do what's best for Collingwood, and clearly it's best for Collingwood that Mick doesn't coach one of their opposition teams next year. If Malthouse has signed a contract that waives his own right to coach next year then Collingwood will rightfully do everything in their power to enforce it.

Our only hope is that he hasn't signed such a deal, or he hires a lawyer who can prove (against the CFC lawyers) that it's an unreasonable restraint of trade or something like that. And this is all just assuming that he does actually want to coach and that he does want to coach our team.

I still see it as a very long shot.

Sorry, I don't agree.

They have tried to engineer an outcome that suits them, but if Mick changes his mind, they are not going to go into a legal battle to stop him coaching.

Do really think Eddie will disrespect one of the AFL's greatest coaches by locking him out of a job with another club?

Eddie is a lot of things, but what he does have is a good sense of the greater good of the game, and I just cannot see him locking Mick out of AFL football, and his passion to suit the Pies.

I am sure common sense will prevail.

Whether Mick actually wants to coach us is a different matter all togther!

MM cannot coach us next year.

His contract clearly prohibits that and its clear that is why he is saying he wont coach next year so he has no legal issue and is paid in full next year.

He will have to honour that contract until he can get out of it.

It may be possible that if Collingwood cant offer him something that is consistent with their agreement giving an out.

So the reality is if we want MM we may have to wait. Telling him its 2012 or nothing wont change his current legal problem.

Mick also had a contract to coach West Coast in 2000, Bomber Thompson had a contract to coach the Cats in 2011. Talk will change after the pies season is finished

put it this way, if we were a team vying for a GF next year, say Hawthorn, Carlton, and these teams wanted MM... OK lets assume Carlton go out in straight sets in 2011 and Rattens given his marching orders, then Eddie will do everything in its power to keep MM and restrict him from coaching elsewhere.

But what is in his contract is that he would be a director of coaching, which is a far cry from actually coaching and that the reason for MM wanting to leave is to fufil his ambition of a different career path to one that has been chosen for him.

he wants a career change where his DoC career hasnt actually taken off, what a cacophony of [censored]

he will be coaching the might of the demon next yr, and all IP and trademark moves and everything else we love but hate bout the pies will be exported straight over to China (MFC) for refabrication and a flag in 3

Mick also had a contract to coach West Coast in 2000, Bomber Thompson had a contract to coach the Cats in 2011. Talk will change after the pies season is finished

To clarify, of course I dont know what is in the contract other thatn it extends into next year if you take the public pronoucements at face value.

My main point is this: MM cannot do anything that would put himself in a tricky legal situation at this stage. Yes he could go to Eddie and say "look i am bound to you but I want to coach the Dees and will do that in 2012 how about we talk about my current contract and a way out of it."

And sure eddie could say 'Yep lets tear it up".

But until then MM is no going to spoil his chances of a deal like that by doing anything prior to the GF this year nor is he going to put himself in a position where he might be said to be in breach of the current contract. To do so would be p*@sing it up against a wall.

I agree nothing will happen until after the season. One thing is sure Buckley doesn't want him anywhere near the palce next year.

To clarify, of course I dont know what is in the contract other thatn it extends into next year if you take the public pronoucements at face value.

My main point is this: MM cannot do anything that would put himself in a tricky legal situation at this stage. Yes he could go to Eddie and say "look i am bound to you but I want to coach the Dees and will do that in 2012 how about we talk about my current contract and a way out of it."

And sure eddie could say 'Yep lets tear it up".

But until then MM is no going to spoil his chances of a deal like that by doing anything prior to the GF this year nor is he going to put himself in a position where he might be said to be in breach of the current contract. To do so would be p*@sing it up against a wall.

I agree nothing will happen until after the season. One thing is sure Buckley doesn't want him anywhere near the palce next year.

Mick can just say a couple days after the GF - "I am taking a break from footy."

Two weeks later we are arranging a press conference.

It's how it was done when he went from WCE to Coll.

And he was in the middle of a contract, not at the start of some Director of Caoching role that has a stipulation that - Mick has to agree to the role or it is voided.

He can easily get out of the contract.

If he wants to coach the Dees, there is nothing stopping him.

But it is 2012 or never.

He better hope Carlton implodes in 2012...

How good would it be, Collingwood lose the GF, all the supporters go over to the after match function, Micky Maltshake grabs the mike, "sorry about today the boys tried their best, I certainly look forward to coaching against you on Queens Birthday, go the dees"

HAHA yes that would be totally sweet

If Malthouse does indeed sit out next year, he will be the target of Richmond, as Hardwicks contract expires end 2012 and I can't see the Tigers having a break out year similar to WCE's this year.

If Melbourne cannot secure him under a mentoring role for next year with view to commencing in 2013 he will be lost to the Tigers - where he has stated his heart still remains.

To clarify, of course I dont know what is in the contract other thatn it extends into next year if you take the public pronoucements at face value.

My main point is this: MM cannot do anything that would put himself in a tricky legal situation at this stage. Yes he could go to Eddie and say "look i am bound to you but I want to coach the Dees and will do that in 2012 how about we talk about my current contract and a way out of it."

And sure eddie could say 'Yep lets tear it up".

But until then MM is no going to spoil his chances of a deal like that by doing anything prior to the GF this year nor is he going to put himself in a position where he might be said to be in breach of the current contract. To do so would be p*@sing it up against a wall.

I agree nothing will happen until after the season. One thing is sure Buckley doesn't want him anywhere near the palce next year.

If Mick is unhappy with the situation he will go with Eddies semi blessing - for club stability you couldn't have Buckley and MM locking horns - destabilising. I think the compromise Eddie might ask is for him to step away from coaching for year.

I dont think he will be at Pies either. Buckleys very domineering personality would not allow for a MM looking over his shoulder.

Why would Mick sit out ...if he doesnt need to. Hes already stated a year out is almost too long . Hes not silly. He wont sign anything thats limiting and he he wont position himself on the bench. Malthouse is an all in type of bloke.

I imagine the scenario RPFC paints is quite close to the mark. Mick finishes his coaching commitements to Collingwood come 5 oclock or there about come Oct 1 .

then ...it all changes.

Eddie knows this

Mick knows this

all suitors know this

Buckley's counting on this

Why would Mick sit out ...if he doesnt need to. Hes already stated a year out is almost too long . Hes not silly. He wont sign anything thats limiting and he he wont position himself on the bench. Malthouse is an all in type of bloke.

I imagine the scenario RPFC paints is quite close to the mark. Mick finishes his coaching commitements to Collingwood come 5 oclock or there about come Oct 1 .

then ...it all changes.

Eddie knows this

Mick knows this

all suitors know this

Buckley's counting on this

I think Mick holds the aces because no one wants a really unhappy camper - but Eddie may say - you have a contract - sit out for a year and all is good - go and coach somewhere else then we get ugly.

I just think that Eddie would not see a year sit out as a big slap like jumping and coaching straight away

Thats my gut feel.

Edited August 26, 201113 yr by nutbean

youre rig tMick holds the cards.. He has trumps..Eddie has trumps.. Mick however holds the Joker.. Ediie knows this. Eddie knows he can attempt a rout but will be beaten in time..and wil lcost the club money..for all costs. and for what ??

Mick will go when Mick wants to. Its not a franchise. He cant be made to not work. He walks on the filth. He simply isnt paid anymore. Eddie efffectively knows hes got an unenforcable bit of paper, one with so many "outs" they ought to be called Collanderwood !!!

I would be dead set against holding a seat vacant for Malthouse during 2012. The season would end up shyte like 2011 and it would be start from square 1 again.

We need to sort out the coaching appointment and get rid of those who aren't pulling together for the common good. We have to put 2011 behind us asap and get on with life.

youre rig tMick holds the cards.. He has trumps..Eddie has trumps.. Mick however holds the Joker.. Ediie knows this. Eddie knows he can attempt a rout but will be beaten in time..and wil lcost the club money..for all costs. and for what ??

Mick will go when Mick wants to. Its not a franchise. He cant be made to not work. He walks on the filth. He simply isnt paid anymore. Eddie efffectively knows hes got an unenforcable bit of paper, one with so many "outs" they ought to be called Collanderwood !!!

Yup - just depends if Mick worries about Eddies saber rattling which i would think not

Edited August 26, 201113 yr by nutbean

Malthouse won't sit out the year. When you are out of footy you quickly become irrelevant and outdated. He won't do it to himself.

I also think that a big part of Collingwood wants him gone, to wipe the slate clean to avoid issues with Buckley and instability within the footy department.

It would not surprise me if Malthouse is at Melbourne next year. He wants to coach and he should be allowed to coach. It was Collingwood's choice to let him go, so he should be able to move on and coach elsewhere.