Dumb Football

[rodgerfox]

not sure why ratten enters the conversation. his record ar carlton was good. first year in and took them to their first finals in years. made finals the next year as well, and fifth in his third. no comparison to richo. like others i think ratten was hard done by. i'd have him.
My mention of carlton was under richo as coaching director in 2011-12. Not a good time. Then at Port for under a year, so can hardly judge him on that - though he did have one game as senior coach. they lost of course.

"From 2008 to 2010 he was an assistant coach with Essendon. He joined the Carlton Football Club as an assistant in 2011 but was released at the end of the 2012 season because of the departure of senior coach Brett Ratten who was replaced by Mick Malthouse."


I'm not a huge fan as coach, but we're starting to see plenty of history being rewritten about him already.

[samoht]

The "performance" of a coach (Wins vs Losses) is determined by circumstances (injuries, suspensions, how successful recruiting/trading has gone etc..) and how relatively strong/weak the list is at a given point in time - and we've currently had injuries plus our list is below average right now - and our recruiting has been poor (we haven't recruited enough midfield runners or enough skilled players). So it's a variable.
I think AR is doing the best he can with what he has - and at this juncture.

By the same token, let's not forget that RL is both a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach all wrapped in one due to changing circumstances - and all the above. The Richmond and Bulldog coaches have also gone through this up and down cycle.

We can't have one set of weights and measures for one coach and not the other.
So, given all this, we know that when the circumstances change for the better - AR will be a "better" coach - he'll start getting pleasing results (more wins).

Therefore, patience is the order of the day.

It's easy to blame one person - the coach - but then we'd be overlooking/discounting the shortcomings of our list and the circumstances that have led us to where we're at.

[Teflon]

The "performance" of a coach (Wins vs Losses) is determined by circumstances (injuries, suspensions, how successful recruiting/trading has gone etc..) and how relatively strong/weak the list is at a given point in time - and we've currently had injuries plus our list is below average right now - and our recruiting has been poor (we haven't recruited enough midfield runners or enough skilled players). So it's a variable.
I think AR is doing the best he can with what he has - and at this juncture.

By the same token, let's not forget that RL is both a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach all wrapped in one due to changing circumstances - and all the above. The Richmond and Bulldog coaches have also gone through this up and down cycle.

We can't have one set of weights and measures for one coach and not the other.
So, given all this, we know that when the circumstances change for the better - AR will be a "better" coach - he'll start getting pleasing results (more wins).

Therefore, patience is the order of the day.

It's easy to blame one person - the coach - but then we'd be overlooking/discounting the shortcomings of our list and the circumstances that have led us to where we're at.

That’s all true but it ignores the fact he’s been at the elm 5 years and in any senior coaching career half a decade is a long enough time to assess whether or not he can coach,
I also take into account the comments of Riewoldt ex skipper and club legend and I think he’s telling all that this guy ain’t tough enough and the environment ain’t tough enough to get the best out of the list even if it is not a finals side.

[Teflon]

Again you’re ignoring who is overall accountable for coaching and onfield performance at St Kilda - the head coach is Richardson. Just like the CEO he is accountable for on field performance and a drastic fall in performance like the debacle this season has been has to largely rest with him. Your view also ignores Riches obvious role in agreeing to coaching structures that have been put in place around him (he will have had direct input here), again that decision also needs to be factored in.

I don't know that he is like a CEO.

I was staggered when Geelong for example told Thompson to 'just coach' and restructured the coaching department around him, as up until that point - a coach was like a CEO.They ran the show. But now we suddenly saw that coaches don't do half the stuff they used to, and that we thought they did. Hardwick had his coaching team restructured around him against his will.

What is Danny Sexton's role? Does Richardson actually develop the strategy? Does Richardson have the final say into how the coaching team is structured?

Where does the Head of Football Operations fit in?

If the Head Coach is acting as the equivalent of a CEO in a large business - where do the Director of Coaching and the Head of Football Operations fit in?

Something doesn’t just “go amiss” this year eg the upcoming retirements of some great players wasn’t unexpected and again, Richo as senior coach is absolutely accountable for managing that transition. IF as part of his decision making process Richo has over valued list quality, as he talked it up often, then again he is accountable.

Is the head coach responsible for list management? Where does the List Manager fit in then?

Finally, his record isn’t that of a high performing CEO - in football terms it’s deplorable and that can’t be ignored. As others point out his record isn’t comparable to Hardwick when he was struggling as he’d at minimum gotten his team into finals. Richo has also failed on that measure in a season where many noted we had a kind draw.

It all depends on what his role actually is.

As a supporter, I don't know what his actual role is. He's the Head Coach - but where do his responsibilities start and stop?

I think it's obvious that the days of a Coach being equivalent of a CEO are well and truly over. They're not like soccer Managers, as GT constantly reminds us. He thinks they should be, and rejects the modern structure of the Coach 'just coaching'. So I think you're off the mark with that analogy.

We saw Ross Lyon throw his assistants under the bus the other year when he blamed Freo's shitness on the fact that his assistants were given too much trust.

So as I said, I'm far from a Richardson fan from what I've seen over the past two years. But I think the old 'sack the coach cause we're losing' approach is outdated. Where is the issue? Find it, and address it.

From afar, I have no way of telling where the problem lies.

In classic Dodgy style you contradict and confuse yourself
On the one hand you are “not a fan of Richardson’s performance” over the past few years....
On the next.....you don’t know what his role is?
How then can you judge him at all by that reasoning?
He is responsible for onfield performance.
In that area he is the CEO for all matters onfield - the buck stops with him
He also does have input into coaching structures and after 5 years has no doubt had ample opportunity to raise issue with what works and what doesn’t
I also think it’s silly to ignore the obvious criticism that Riewoldt has made and not sheet some of that home to Richardson - of course Lethlean cleverly diffused it with “he’s talking bout the younger generation of players...” I’m sorry I don’t buy that
Riewoldt was talking bout the feedback environment at the club that ultimately the senior coach has direct control over
As others have noted: let’s see how meek and mild Clarkson would be if Hawks tied his hand behind his back and let a wet nose football manger dictate terms to him like you seem to be suggesting is happening to Richardson.
I guess the other way to look at this is like this:
What eveidence currently exists to suggest Richardson is a good senior coach??

[chico2001]

"What evidence currently exists to suggest Richardson is a good senior coach??"

Good question and I cant think of anything major that he can hang his hat on. He has got until the end of the year to perform a miracle.

[desertsaint]

not sure why ratten enters the conversation. his record ar carlton was good. first year in and took them to their first finals in years. made finals the next year as well, and fifth in his third. no comparison to richo. like others i think ratten was hard done by. i'd have him.
My mention of carlton was under richo as coaching director in 2011-12. Not a good time. Then at Port for under a year, so can hardly judge him on that - though he did have one game as senior coach. they lost of course.

"From 2008 to 2010 he was an assistant coach with Essendon. He joined the Carlton Football Club as an assistant in 2011 but was released at the end of the 2012 season because of the departure of senior coach Brett Ratten who was replaced by Mick Malthouse."


I'm not a huge fan as coach, but we're starting to see plenty of history being rewritten about him already.

how is history being rewritten about him? I left out Essendon as it wasn't worth bothering to mention as he was starting as an assistant and unlucky to have a big influence - but in his time there Essendon went 12-8-14 (of 16).
At Carlton as Senior Assistant they fell from 5th to 10th. At Port as Director of Coaching just one year, including coaching one game - a loss to a north melbourne team that were equal second last at the time. They came 7th.
So that is his record - how it in any way suggests he is a good senior coach, or even a good development coach i don't know.
His record as a senior coach is one of the poorest in afl/vfl history.
In total at the 4 teams here is his record.
12 - 8 - 14 (of 16), 5 (of 17) - 10, 7, 18 - 14 - 9 - 11 - and looking at 15 to 18 this year.
Again - his record before St Kilda hardly wrote a great CV, his record at St Kilda will see him end up as a name on trivia nights.

For some reason compared on here to Hardwick, Buckley, and even Thompson
Games Coached - Wins - Losses - Draws - Win % - Winning Seasons (current included)
AR 101 - 35 - 64 - 2 - 34.7% - 1/5
DH 195 - 102 - 91 - 2 - 52.3% - 5/9
NB 148 - 78 - 69 - 1 - 52.7% - 3/7
DF 113 - 45 - 68 - 0 - 39.8% - 1/5

Thompson up to 2006 when the review was held
MT 160 - 78 - 79 - 3 - 48.75% - 3/7

DF is Danny Frawley - very similar record, although Danny did get one finals appearance and one win.

[samoht]

The question that needs to be asked is can another coach do any better with our very ordinary list - with no superstars - plus our current injuries. We need outside midfielders ( a "better" coach isn't going to conjure them up from thin air).
What guarantee is there that another coach will do any better?
I mean RL was 0-10 in 2016 (with a list that was arguably stronger than ours and a huge home ground advantage) - and Freo has improved since via some good and targeted recruiting - plus the return of Fyfe, to an already strong midfield. We don't have anyone like Walters, Brad Hill etc... and, if Steven is tagged out of the game, we have no outside run at all.
The reason Freo righted the ship since 2016 was not RL - it was a host of other reasons.

I'm convinced that AFL coaches basically nullify each other - it's a nil all draw - and it's everything else that counts - you need a strong list, have luck with injuries and good recruiting (with a strong, skilled and balanced side in mind). Our recruiting has been random, we have injuries and an ordinary list - and our best player (in my opinion) Roberton is sidelined indefinitely, and we expect a coach to come along and perform a miracle or the miracle. Maybe if Sainta Claus was a coach.

[rodgerfox]

not sure why ratten enters the conversation. his record ar carlton was good. first year in and took them to their first finals in years. made finals the next year as well, and fifth in his third. no comparison to richo. like others i think ratten was hard done by. i'd have him.
My mention of carlton was under richo as coaching director in 2011-12. Not a good time. Then at Port for under a year, so can hardly judge him on that - though he did have one game as senior coach. they lost of course.

"From 2008 to 2010 he was an assistant coach with Essendon. He joined the Carlton Football Club as an assistant in 2011 but was released at the end of the 2012 season because of the departure of senior coach Brett Ratten who was replaced by Mick Malthouse."


I'm not a huge fan as coach, but we're starting to see plenty of history being rewritten about him already.

how is history being rewritten about him? I left out Essendon as it wasn't worth bothering to mention as he was starting as an assistant and unlucky to have a big influence - but in his time there Essendon went 12-8-14 (of 16).
At Carlton as Senior Assistant they fell from 5th to 10th. At Port as Director of Coaching just one year, including coaching one game - a loss to a north melbourne team that were equal second last at the time. They came 7th.
So that is his record - how it in any way suggests he is a good senior coach, or even a good development coach i don't know.
His record as a senior coach is one of the poorest in afl/vfl history.
In total at the 4 teams here is his record.
12 - 8 - 14 (of 16), 5 (of 17) - 10, 7, 18 - 14 - 9 - 11 - and looking at 15 to 18 this year.
Again - his record before St Kilda hardly wrote a great CV, his record at St Kilda will see him end up as a name on trivia nights.

For some reason compared on here to Hardwick, Buckley, and even Thompson
Games Coached - Wins - Losses - Draws - Win % - Winning Seasons (current included)
AR 101 - 35 - 64 - 2 - 34.7% - 1/5
DH 195 - 102 - 91 - 2 - 52.3% - 5/9
NB 148 - 78 - 69 - 1 - 52.7% - 3/7
DF 113 - 45 - 68 - 0 - 39.8% - 1/5

Thompson up to 2006 when the review was held
MT 160 - 78 - 79 - 3 - 48.75% - 3/7

DF is Danny Frawley - very similar record, although Danny did get one finals appearance and one win.

So he was never Director of Coaching at Carlton?

[desertsaint]

not sure why ratten enters the conversation. his record ar carlton was good. first year in and took them to their first finals in years. made finals the next year as well, and fifth in his third. no comparison to richo. like others i think ratten was hard done by. i'd have him.
My mention of carlton was under richo as coaching director in 2011-12. Not a good time. Then at Port for under a year, so can hardly judge him on that - though he did have one game as senior coach. they lost of course.

"From 2008 to 2010 he was an assistant coach with Essendon. He joined the Carlton Football Club as an assistant in 2011 but was released at the end of the 2012 season because of the departure of senior coach Brett Ratten who was replaced by Mick Malthouse."


I'm not a huge fan as coach, but we're starting to see plenty of history being rewritten about him already.

how is history being rewritten about him? I left out Essendon as it wasn't worth bothering to mention as he was starting as an assistant and unlucky to have a big influence - but in his time there Essendon went 12-8-14 (of 16).
At Carlton as Senior Assistant they fell from 5th to 10th. At Port as Director of Coaching just one year, including coaching one game - a loss to a north melbourne team that were equal second last at the time. They came 7th.
So that is his record - how it in any way suggests he is a good senior coach, or even a good development coach i don't know.
His record as a senior coach is one of the poorest in afl/vfl history.
In total at the 4 teams here is his record.
12 - 8 - 14 (of 16), 5 (of 17) - 10, 7, 18 - 14 - 9 - 11 - and looking at 15 to 18 this year.
Again - his record before St Kilda hardly wrote a great CV, his record at St Kilda will see him end up as a name on trivia nights.

For some reason compared on here to Hardwick, Buckley, and even Thompson
Games Coached - Wins - Losses - Draws - Win % - Winning Seasons (current included)
AR 101 - 35 - 64 - 2 - 34.7% - 1/5
DH 195 - 102 - 91 - 2 - 52.3% - 5/9
NB 148 - 78 - 69 - 1 - 52.7% - 3/7
DF 113 - 45 - 68 - 0 - 39.8% - 1/5

Thompson up to 2006 when the review was held
MT 160 - 78 - 79 - 3 - 48.75% - 3/7

DF is Danny Frawley - very similar record, although Danny did get one finals appearance and one win.

So he was never Director of Coaching at Carlton?

oh i see. one little accidental straw loose. not good enough roger.

[chico2001]

So are you saying fox that Richardson held the title of Director of coaching at Carlton?

[rodgerfox]

not sure why ratten enters the conversation. his record ar carlton was good. first year in and took them to their first finals in years. made finals the next year as well, and fifth in his third. no comparison to richo. like others i think ratten was hard done by. i'd have him.
My mention of carlton was under richo as coaching director in 2011-12. Not a good time. Then at Port for under a year, so can hardly judge him on that - though he did have one game as senior coach. they lost of course.

"From 2008 to 2010 he was an assistant coach with Essendon. He joined the Carlton Football Club as an assistant in 2011 but was released at the end of the 2012 season because of the departure of senior coach Brett Ratten who was replaced by Mick Malthouse."


I'm not a huge fan as coach, but we're starting to see plenty of history being rewritten about him already.

how is history being rewritten about him? I left out Essendon as it wasn't worth bothering to mention as he was starting as an assistant and unlucky to have a big influence - but in his time there Essendon went 12-8-14 (of 16).
At Carlton as Senior Assistant they fell from 5th to 10th. At Port as Director of Coaching just one year, including coaching one game - a loss to a north melbourne team that were equal second last at the time. They came 7th.
So that is his record - how it in any way suggests he is a good senior coach, or even a good development coach i don't know.
His record as a senior coach is one of the poorest in afl/vfl history.
In total at the 4 teams here is his record.
12 - 8 - 14 (of 16), 5 (of 17) - 10, 7, 18 - 14 - 9 - 11 - and looking at 15 to 18 this year.
Again - his record before St Kilda hardly wrote a great CV, his record at St Kilda will see him end up as a name on trivia nights.

For some reason compared on here to Hardwick, Buckley, and even Thompson
Games Coached - Wins - Losses - Draws - Win % - Winning Seasons (current included)
AR 101 - 35 - 64 - 2 - 34.7% - 1/5
DH 195 - 102 - 91 - 2 - 52.3% - 5/9
NB 148 - 78 - 69 - 1 - 52.7% - 3/7
DF 113 - 45 - 68 - 0 - 39.8% - 1/5

Thompson up to 2006 when the review was held
MT 160 - 78 - 79 - 3 - 48.75% - 3/7

DF is Danny Frawley - very similar record, although Danny did get one finals appearance and one win.

So he was never Director of Coaching at Carlton?

oh i see. one little accidental straw loose. not good enough roger.

?

Fairly significant I would have thought?

[desertsaint]

no you know it isn't. you can play with straw or you can address the argument.
up to you.

[rodgerfox]

no you know it isn't. you can play with straw or you can address the argument.
up to you.

It's the only thing I've raised.

That is the only argument I've raised.

[desertsaint]

no you know it isn't. you can play with straw or you can address the argument.
up to you.

It's the only thing I've raised.

That is the only argument I've raised.

okay. stay in your comfort zone.

[rodgerfox]

no you know it isn't. you can play with straw or you can address the argument.
up to you.

It's the only thing I've raised.

That is the only argument I've raised.

okay. stay in your comfort zone.

I have no issue with Richardson getting sacked. It would at least I don't have to smash my head against the wall every time I hear him speak.

But...as the angst grows, so do the myths. Each day the Richardson tale seems to get rewritten slightly.

Nothing wrong with disliking him and not rating him as a coach, but surely you need to get your facts straight and not get huffy if you get called out on fake news?

[desertsaint]

no you know it isn't. you can play with straw or you can address the argument.
up to you.

It's the only thing I've raised.

That is the only argument I've raised.

okay. stay in your comfort zone.

I have no issue with Richardson getting sacked. It would at least I don't have to smash my head against the wall every time I hear him speak.

But...as the angst grows, so do the myths. Each day the Richardson tale seems to get rewritten slightly.

Nothing wrong with disliking him and not rating him as a coach, but surely you need to get your facts straight and not get huffy if you get called out on fake news?

no roger it's a strawman as anyone reading will know. as you know.
it's as relevant as if i focused on your downgrading of richo from senior assistant to just an assistant. 'each day the Richardson tale seems to get rewritten slightly.' yeah right.
some people live on picking up the flotsam and jetsum from arguments. it's your game, not mine.

[Teflon]

no you know it isn't. you can play with straw or you can address the argument.
up to you.

It's the only thing I've raised.

That is the only argument I've raised.

okay. stay in your comfort zone.

I have no issue with Richardson getting sacked. It would at least I don't have to smash my head against the wall every time I hear him speak.

But...as the angst grows, so do the myths. Each day the Richardson tale seems to get rewritten slightly.

Nothing wrong with disliking him and not rating him as a coach, but surely you need to get your facts straight and not get huffy if you get called out on fake news?

no roger it's a strawman as anyone reading will know. as you know.
it's as relevant as if i focused on your downgrading of richo from senior assistant to just an assistant. 'each day the Richardson tale seems to get rewritten slightly.' yeah right.
some people live on picking up the flotsam and jetsum from arguments. it's your game, not mine.

The point is secondary; irrelevant almost desertsaint....it is a game argued without conviction and when cornered it goes to semantics and side argument.....shame really...

[chico2001]

agree.....

Talks shite ......also known as a dogmatist.

<warning for baiting>

[rodgerfox]

The point is secondary; irrelevant almost desertsaint....it is a game argued without conviction and when cornered it goes to semantics and side argument.....shame really...

Secondary?

My response was that history is starting be rewritten as the angst grows. And I highlighted a clear and blatant example of it.

Secondary? It was my only point.

[rodgerfox]

no you know it isn't. you can play with straw or you can address the argument.
up to you.

It's the only thing I've raised.

That is the only argument I've raised.

okay. stay in your comfort zone.

I have no issue with Richardson getting sacked. It would at least I don't have to smash my head against the wall every time I hear him speak.

But...as the angst grows, so do the myths. Each day the Richardson tale seems to get rewritten slightly.

Nothing wrong with disliking him and not rating him as a coach, but surely you need to get your facts straight and not get huffy if you get called out on fake news?

no roger it's a strawman as anyone reading will know. as you know.
it's as relevant as if i focused on your downgrading of richo from senior assistant to just an assistant. 'each day the Richardson tale seems to get rewritten slightly.' yeah right.
some people live on picking up the flotsam and jetsum from arguments. it's your game, not mine.

If you're going to make a statement about Richardson's career and attempt to link him to Carlton's poor performance and suggest a level of accountability rests with him - stating that he was Director of Coaching (ie. he's the boss and the Head Coach reports to him) rather than him being an Assistant Coach (ie. he reports to the Head Coach) is a significant error.

It's entirely relevant.

It directly changes his involvement and responsibility for Carlton's performance, which was a key to your argument when assessing his performance over his career. It's not flotsam and jetsam at all.

To say "My mention of carlton was under richo as coaching director in 2011-12. Not a good time." is vastly different from the actual fact that he was an Assistant Coach under Ratten, who was under the Coaching Director. You've stated that Carlton was "under Richo" for 2 years - which is simply false and overstates his role and responsibility in their performance enormously.

[rodgerfox]

In classic Dodgy style you contradict and confuse yourself
On the one hand you are “not a fan of Richardson’s performance” over the past few years....
On the next.....you don’t know what his role is?
How then can you judge him at all by that reasoning?
He is responsible for onfield performance.

I'm not confused at all.

You've misquoted me. Literally used quotation marks on something I never said.

I never said I'm "not a fan of Richardson's performance". That's simply not true.

He s***s me, and I haven't seen anything to really give me an indication that he's any good. But in terms of his actual performance, I don't feel I can really judge it as there are many factors that have clearly contributed over the past few years.

I said back in 2013 that we would struggle for about 5 years until our list balanced out and we had a good senior crop. It was clear back then that due to the Lyon era's list management - we'd have a huge hole in our list for quite a while. I stand by that. Well frankly, it's proven to be 100% correct.
And as a result, I never expected we'd be much different to what we are now. So for mine, the current 'win\loss' is not unexpected. I think the win\loss over the previous 2 seasons were somewhat of a false economy given Riewoldt's form and our great injury run.

A coach in any sport should not be judged on win/loss. Because as I've said, there are way too many factors that influence that - many of which the coach actually has no control over.

As others have noted: let’s see how meek and mild Clarkson would be if Hawks tied his hand behind his back and let a wet nose football manger dictate terms to him like you seem to be suggesting is happening to Richardson.

He's no Alastair Clarkson. Who on earth would think that? And who would expect it?

And I don't where you came up with that I'm suggesting he's being dictated to by the Football Manager? I've simply posed the question, and actually sought clarification as to how much control each of these roles has over the coaching department. It's incredibly relevant when seeking answers for the performance this year I'd have thought. We know at Geelong, Thompson was dictated to. We also know that Hardwick had control taken off him too. So maybe that's the same for us? I have no idea.


We were one win off finals with a s*** list for two years. This year, we're absolute rubbish.

Would he have been sacked after last year? No. The year before? No.

So something has happened between now and then. If he wasn't sackable last year, it's possible that he's not the problem.

Kingsley took on a new role in the box. Who promoted him? Who developed that coaching structure? Who created the Transition Coach role? I have no idea.
Playfair came on board with a new defensive strategy.

These are significant and coincide with a massive drop in form. It can't be discounted that these changes are the main reason for it. Does sacking Richardson change it?

And of course, the other change is that we've had a really bad run with injuries this year. Maybe it's as simple as personnel?

Or maybe Richardson is s*** and Riewoldt's form masked major problems?


I think the whole 'his win/loss is bad so he needs to be sacked' thing is simplistic and short sighted. That's all.

[rodgerfox]

The question that needs to be asked is can another coach do any better with our very ordinary list - with no superstars - plus our current injuries. We need outside midfielders ( a "better" coach isn't going to conjure them up from thin air).
What guarantee is there that another coach will do any better?
I mean RL was 0-10 in 2016 (with a list that was arguably stronger than ours and a huge home ground advantage) - and Freo has improved since via some good and targeted recruiting - plus the return of Fyfe, to an already strong midfield. We don't have anyone like Walters, Brad Hill etc... and, if Steven is tagged out of the game, we have no outside run at all.
The reason Freo righted the ship since 2016 was not RL - it was a host of other reasons.

I'm convinced that AFL coaches basically nullify each other - it's a nil all draw - and it's everything else that counts - you need a strong list, have luck with injuries and good recruiting (with a strong, skilled and balanced side in mind). Our recruiting has been random, we have injuries and an ordinary list - and our best player (in my opinion) Roberton is sidelined indefinitely, and we expect a coach to come along and perform a miracle or the miracle. Maybe if Sainta Claus was a coach.

I agree with this.

I hate the concept of voting out a government. It makes no sense to me. I think a new government should be voted in. Meaning - unless you know or are confident that someone else will do a better job, don't kick people out. Coaches are the same.

If we have an experienced coach lined up to take over that the club believes will be better - then go for it.

But sacking a guy then bringing in a rookie has the hail Mary's about it most of the time.

[Teflon]

In classic Dodgy style you contradict and confuse yourself
On the one hand you are “not a fan of Richardson’s performance” over the past few years....
On the next.....you don’t know what his role is?
How then can you judge him at all by that reasoning?
He is responsible for onfield performance.

I'm not confused at all.

You've misquoted me. Literally used quotation marks on something I never said.

I never said I'm "not a fan of Richardson's performance". That's simply not true.

He s***s me, and I haven't seen anything to really give me an indication that he's any good. But in terms of his actual performance, I don't feel I can really judge it as there are many factors that have clearly contributed over the past few years.

I said back in 2013 that we would struggle for about 5 years until our list balanced out and we had a good senior crop. It was clear back then that due to the Lyon era's list management - we'd have a huge hole in our list for quite a while. I stand by that. Well frankly, it's proven to be 100% correct.
And as a result, I never expected we'd be much different to what we are now. So for mine, the current 'win\loss' is not unexpected. I think the win\loss over the previous 2 seasons were somewhat of a false economy given Riewoldt's form and our great injury run.

A coach in any sport should not be judged on win/loss. Because as I've said, there are way too many factors that influence that - many of which the coach actually has no control over.

As others have noted: let’s see how meek and mild Clarkson would be if Hawks tied his hand behind his back and let a wet nose football manger dictate terms to him like you seem to be suggesting is happening to Richardson.

He's no Alastair Clarkson. Who on earth would think that? And who would expect it?

And I don't where you came up with that I'm suggesting he's being dictated to by the Football Manager? I've simply posed the question, and actually sought clarification as to how much control each of these roles has over the coaching department. It's incredibly relevant when seeking answers for the performance this year I'd have thought. We know at Geelong, Thompson was dictated to. We also know that Hardwick had control taken off him too. So maybe that's the same for us? I have no idea.


We were one win off finals with a s*** list for two years. This year, we're absolute rubbish.

Would he have been sacked after last year? No. The year before? No.

So something has happened between now and then. If he wasn't sackable last year, it's possible that he's not the problem.

Kingsley took on a new role in the box. Who promoted him? Who developed that coaching structure? Who created the Transition Coach role? I have no idea.
Playfair came on board with a new defensive strategy.

These are significant and coincide with a massive drop in form. It can't be discounted that these changes are the main reason for it. Does sacking Richardson change it?

And of course, the other change is that we've had a really bad run with injuries this year. Maybe it's as simple as personnel?

Or maybe Richardson is s*** and Riewoldt's form masked major problems?


I think the whole 'his win/loss is bad so he needs to be sacked' thing is simplistic and short sighted. That's all.

Now now Dodgy don’t get knickers twisted....
Yes you’ve posed continuous questions - you’re good at that
You’ve also said you wouldn’t be upset if Richardson was axed (go edit your posts); how can you not have enough evidence that he is or isn’t a good coach but be OK if he departs....? Odd comment from a man who hasn’t had his questions answered
Again I ask - what evidence after 5 years do you have that Alan is a good coach?
To suggest AFL coaches don’t live by win /loss ultimately is nonsense. Of course they do.
You mention the year we just missed finals - a year when many noted the Saints draw was very kind......variables work 2 ways both against and in support at times.....some might say Alan was assisted to overachieve?
Does something need to “have happened” between just making finals or could we simply have overachieved to a nice draw, some lingering form from seasoned campaigners in Roo and Joey.....and what we see now is really just how good we aren’t?coukd it be that simple?
Does it always need to be so convoluted?
Could Alan and the club simply overstated where we are at? (after all they backed the “this sides playing below itself and we are genuine top 4 candidates...” we ain’t)

Anyhoo, we won’t truly ever know from 1;000 miles away from the core of the club so I think questions are useless somewhat
But ask away I like your game

[Teflon]

The question that needs to be asked is can another coach do any better with our very ordinary list - with no superstars - plus our current injuries. We need outside midfielders ( a "better" coach isn't going to conjure them up from thin air).
What guarantee is there that another coach will do any better?
I mean RL was 0-10 in 2016 (with a list that was arguably stronger than ours and a huge home ground advantage) - and Freo has improved since via some good and targeted recruiting - plus the return of Fyfe, to an already strong midfield. We don't have anyone like Walters, Brad Hill etc... and, if Steven is tagged out of the game, we have no outside run at all.
The reason Freo righted the ship since 2016 was not RL - it was a host of other reasons.

I'm convinced that AFL coaches basically nullify each other - it's a nil all draw - and it's everything else that counts - you need a strong list, have luck with injuries and good recruiting (with a strong, skilled and balanced side in mind). Our recruiting has been random, we have injuries and an ordinary list - and our best player (in my opinion) Roberton is sidelined indefinitely, and we expect a coach to come along and perform a miracle or the miracle. Maybe if Sainta Claus was a coach.

I agree with this.

I hate the concept of voting out a government. It makes no sense to me. I think a new government should be voted in. Meaning - unless you know or are confident that someone else will do a better job, don't kick people out. Coaches are the same.

If we have an experienced coach lined up to take over that the club believes will be better - then go for it.

But sacking a guy then bringing in a rookie has the hail Mary's about it most of the time.

This is silly
So on this logic unless an experienced candidate can be found we should keep the existing coach even if performances continue to decline like we are seeing?.
People are interviewed for jobs all the time , selected because they seem to be the best candidate and fail often - point is no one can guarantee the new person will be a success?
New Governments too promise the world to get elected (see Bill Shorten he’s currently ponying up to every cause); they get elected but often don’t do better than previous ones
It’s not an exact science it never will be
So you base decisions on what you can measure and evidence and after 5 years I’d be dissapointed if our club still can’t wo4k out if Alan c@n coa h or not
If that’s the case (very possible) then we h@v e an incredibly incompetent admin in charge (also very likely)
Bottom line to not change out an underperformer is bad for culture and bad for business
Such poor logic - it’s akin to saying ‘I’m not getting out of bed tomorrow till I can be guaranteed it’s going to be better than today.......”
Who the eff knows that?...

[rodgerfox]

I agree with this.

I hate the concept of voting out a government. It makes no sense to me. I think a new government should be voted in. Meaning - unless you know or are confident that someone else will do a better job, don't kick people out. Coaches are the same.

If we have an experienced coach lined up to take over that the club believes will be better - then go for it.

But sacking a guy then bringing in a rookie has the hail Mary's about it most of the time.

This is silly
So on this logic unless an experienced candidate can be found we should keep the existing coach even if performances continue to decline like we are seeing?.

Well not really. As I clearly stated...."unless you know or are confident that someone else will do a better job"

There might be an Assistant coach out there, even sitting in the box next to the current coach that the club is confident could do a better job.

So you base decisions on what you can measure and evidence and after 5 years I’d be dissapointed if our club still can’t wo4k out if Alan c@n coa h or not
If that’s the case (very possible) then we h@v e an incredibly incompetent admin in charge (also very likely)

You're assuming they can't. Fans definitely can't, as we don't know what happens internally. But I'd expect that the club would know.

Bottom line to not change out an underperformer is bad for culture and bad for business

Well you would change them if they're underperforming, and there is a candidate that you are confident would do better.