sunsaint wrote:of course there is, and I would say that after round 5 2001 the players caught on that he had zip
he was only in it for the money
GT had passion, for the players & the club
Devilhead wrote:Yes GT did and still has passion for the players and the club but I'm not questioning this.
There has never been a quote from the club or Mr Blight that he was "only it for the money" - these are/were assumptions that supporters have randomly made without justification to support his sacking.
the same would be said of your assumption that he was passionate
Devilhead wrote:
As mentioned Blight (touched upon by several media outlets - back in the day) used extremely unconventional processes to motivate players and I am querying whether was a chance that these were misinterpreted as being non-passionate and disinterested
I dont think you will find an argument from anyone that he did some pretty "out of left field" things. And it was NO surprise to the footy fraternity at the time so it would NOT have been a surprise to the StKilda hierarchy at the time either. The one reference that mostly repeated is attitude
Devilhead wrote:
I am not arguing for or against Blight's sacking I am asking if anyone knows more about his anomalous approach to coaching??
It was interesting to hear GT say that the board made the decision to sack Blight without GT's input because they thought he would talk them out of it - is this to say that GT saw something in Blight that the board didn't and I would be interested to know - whether he decides to give more insight on this subject is his prerogative
yes it would take GT to shed some more light on the subject
but I would "consider" that his opinion would be coloured by the fact that he was football manager at the time. He knew what a mid season sacking would do to the team, whereas the board was weighted more towards the financial position. Better to cut our loses early.