MORE: Malthouse Meltdowns: Tale of Mick
Guy Hand - Sportal and formerly at AAP
Mick Malthouse is a difficult media conference subject, no question. I spent 10 years writing AFL for Australian Associated Press (AAP) and spent plenty of time at Collingwood and Carlton media conferences asking questions and listening to his answers. Malthouse pressers, especially post-match pressers - win, lose or draw - were difficult. I never enjoyed doing them. Not many in the media did, or do.
But I don't subscribe to the theory that Malthouse needs to be nice to the media. Malthouse's job isn't to keep the media happy. His job is to coach winning footy teams. As a journalist, you need to be able to deal with all types. Those who want to talk, those who don't want to talk. Those who are pleasant or unpleasant. Don’t like the variety? Don't get involved in the media. We criticise. So on occasion, you have to expect a whack back.
Truth is Malthouse was no different in demeanour when Collingwood won a flag in 2010. No one said anything then because his team was winning, and perhaps because there wasn't as much TV footage of Mick threatening to internally combust in the coaches' box.
It is only as Carlton struggle that Malthouse's media manners have become an issue. In reality, the only issue should be why his team isn't winning many games of footy, and whether he's the problem. That's nothing to do with whether or not he's bullying the media.
As with all coaches, Malthouse's record should speak for itself. And that should say a lot more about whether he keeps his job at Carlton than how he handles himself at a media conference.
Angus Morgan – Formerly at Sportal
My impression of Malthouse is it’s more the general tone and attitude that’s the problem. It’s when it suits him when it comes to answering a question. He can be very abrupt with the media, very dismissive and very rude. It’s a bit of a power thing. He uses that tone, especially in post-match media conferences.
Press conferences have changed a lot now because many are televised in one form or another and most of them are now available, if not live on Channel 7 or Fox, then certainly in replay form on the AFL website. There’s a lot more scrutiny now and I think generally they’re much more professionally run and coaches are conscious of that exposure. But up until two or three years ago, they weren’t routinely televised and I think coaches, especially Malthouse, could get away with a lot more than they do now.
And, that’s when he was especially rude and dismissive. He was very quick to show that he had no respects for some people. He would pick out certain journalists and give perhaps two or three word answers and you’d be left hanging and you’d have to start fishing and probing and he’d become more and more dismissive. It tended to leave you nowhere to go. A statement would get the same response. A statement is a prompt and it’s a proper part of discourse and everyone takes it that way except when it suits Malthouse. And, if you put a proposition as a prompt, if it suits him, he’ll elect not to take it and say, ‘what’s the question?’
I think it’s fair to say, he was a master at it, though, and that was an approach he could adopt and he would do it more often and more effectively than any other coach.
Paul Barbieri – Sportal
Mick Malthouse press conferences aren’t usually a Bomber Thompson giggle fest. It’s fair to say that. In fact most press conferences with a losing coach are pretty sombre affairs while even a winning coach can sometimes be pretty subdued. But that’s the nature of footy. It’s an emotional game and after such a rollercoaster, people react in different ways.
For Malthouse, the feeling I get is that the contest isn’t over until after the press conference is done. For him, these journos – many of whom have never played or coached at the highest level - are coming for him with questions and criticisms of his coaching performance and suddenly they become an opponent. That sort of contest, combined with a rollercoaster of emotions from the game itself, keeps his competitive juices flowing. He would never give an inch as a player and doesn’t give an inch to this new opposition. He liked burying opponents, showing who was in control and had the upper hand. This isn’t any different. And, there probably is an ulterior motive too, for in the end, how many real issues with his football side are discussed in any detail?
But that’s his make-up. It is who he is and Malthouse has every right to be that way. We all react to things in different ways and that’s his. It makes him one of the AFL’s great characters and this game needs its characters now more than ever as things get increasingly corporate and sterile. With press conferences available for everyone to see, maybe Malthouse needs to be more a salesman and deliver a message to his supporters, particularly with his Carlton side careering towards a major rebuild. But I hope he doesn’t change too much. Grumpy old Mick is part of the AFL landscape, he’s a character that fits into a broader narrative and while it’s a pain in the arse to cop one of his infamous stares, the characters make this the game we love and it’s our love for the game that made us footy journos in the first place.