The dreaded 'Leadership Group'

[Lucky Knickers]

Tells it like it is too.

Kiss of death then - he'll be traded.

[The Boot]

I think this is a softening up exercise, before he starts wielding the axe.

[ROK Lobster]

Do the Magoos get a say in who plays seniors, do those who nominate for the draft get a say in who gets picked?

Some things should be out of the domain of the players. I have no problem with players who are "untouchable" having a say, but when decision makers are players who should be under scrutiny, or when players are called upon to significantly contribute to decisions, the process becomes flawed.

I am not sure that it is appropriate that players should be called upon to make a decision that will drastically impact on the ability of a mate to make a living. Ryan O'Keefe, for instance, has lost bigger things than a Grand Final. Benny Mathews, I would think, has not lost much more bigger than his job. We have a coach and a club culture that likes to put footy in perspective. Which is more important, a silly trophy at the end of a season (it's only a game remember) or a mate with a couple of young kids losing his job? Under those circumstances it is very easy to give Benny another year, to let him go on his own terms, to give a blood brother the send of he deserves and to justify it on the grounds that he has been a stalwart of the club who has the runs on the board. Selection decisions like that need to be made by ruthless bastards, with no emotional attachment to those that their decision affect, not peers.

[ernie koala]

Do the Magoos get a say in who plays seniors, do those who nominate for the draft get a say in who gets picked?

Some things should be out of the domain of the players. I have no problem with players who are "untouchable" having a say, but when decision makers are players who should be under scrutiny, or when players are called upon to significantly contribute to decisions, the process becomes flawed.

I am not sure that it is appropriate that players should be called upon to make a decision that will drastically impact on the ability of a mate to make a living. Ryan O'Keefe, for instance, has lost bigger things than a Grand Final. Benny Mathews, I would think, has not lost much more bigger than his job. We have a coach and a club culture that likes to put footy in perspective. Which is more important, a silly trophy at the end of a season (it's only a game remember) or a mate with a couple of young kids losing his job? Under those circumstances it is very easy to give Benny another year, to let him go on his own terms, to give a blood brother the send of he deserves and to justify it on the grounds that he has been a stalwart of the club who has the runs on the board. Selection decisions like that need to be made by ruthless bastards, with no emotional attachment to those that their decision affect, not peers.

Beautifully put ROK.

[bennyfrou]

Kiss of death then - he'll be traded.

Lucky he signed a contract for three years this (or last year).

[bennyfrou]

Do the Magoos get a say in who plays seniors, do those who nominate for the draft get a say in who gets picked?

Some things should be out of the domain of the players. I have no problem with players who are "untouchable" having a say, but when decision makers are players who should be under scrutiny, or when players are called upon to significantly contribute to decisions, the process becomes flawed.

I am not sure that it is appropriate that players should be called upon to make a decision that will drastically impact on the ability of a mate to make a living. Ryan O'Keefe, for instance, has lost bigger things than a Grand Final. Benny Mathews, I would think, has not lost much more bigger than his job. We have a coach and a club culture that likes to put footy in perspective. Which is more important, a silly trophy at the end of a season (it's only a game remember) or a mate with a couple of young kids losing his job? Under those circumstances it is very easy to give Benny another year, to let him go on his own terms, to give a blood brother the send of he deserves and to justify it on the grounds that he has been a stalwart of the club who has the runs on the board. Selection decisions like that need to be made by ruthless bastards, with no emotional attachment to those that their decision affect, not peers.

I agree 100% and would like to add that Benny Matthews has never been a superstar, never will be but he does his job and has done an above average job (at his given task) more times than not. Without sounding completely daft - it's almost what Benny doesnt do (or that we don't see) not what he actually does. The one percentage sort of stuff, taggling and tackling. I also believe in 05 or 06 he actually asked to go back to the reserves to find some form so i'm pretty sure he would retire if he though he was hindering the teams progress.

[CureTheSane]

Read, very slowly, the first line of Roos article..he refers to the Bloods brotherhood.

Read, very slowly, this.....

You are a demographic.

As for players having input on one another, or as you are getting at 'bitching' about one another, the Swans seem to be one of the most tight knit groups going around, so there doesn't appear to be any residual detriment to the players facing a few home truths from their peers.

[ernie koala]

Read, very slowly, this.....

You are a demographic.

As for players having input on one another, or as you are getting at 'bitching' about one another, the Swans seem to be one of the most tight knit groups going around, so there doesn't appear to be any residual detriment to the players facing a few home truths from their peers.

Are you a Scotty Russell fan ??
Or perhaps Scotty Waters ??

[CureTheSane]

I think of myself more as an air conditioner.

ROTFLMFAO lots and lots.

Well, response is in line with the question

[Nico]

It says input and guidance. I think it's pretty normal in an organisation to ask your "line management" to review their "staff" - just like any performance review process. The leadership group should be reviewing the junior players and providing their input IMO.

It also says they will vote on the leadership group.

How can you judge players if you haven't seen them play. The coaches and any list management person should have the say.

It is like a board of a corporation saying to upper management that they are going to cut staff but they are safe, just tell us the ones who we should let go. I just hope it is as it says, input and guidance but not decisions.

Fancy if you were Thornton, Moore, Brabazon etc reading that article, it is a fair chance you would be straight onto your manager looking for another home. As if Mathews will vote himself off let alone the arrogance of Leo Barry when he says the younger players will have to prove themselves.

All I say is come 2008 that when the seasons settles down for a few weeks that people get played on form, because heaven help us if the Super League team runs out carrying injuries week in week out.

[Nico]

Do the Magoos get a say in who plays seniors, do those who nominate for the draft get a say in who gets picked?

Some things should be out of the domain of the players. I have no problem with players who are "untouchable" having a say, but when decision makers are players who should be under scrutiny, or when players are called upon to significantly contribute to decisions, the process becomes flawed.

I am not sure that it is appropriate that players should be called upon to make a decision that will drastically impact on the ability of a mate to make a living. Ryan O'Keefe, for instance, has lost bigger things than a Grand Final. Benny Mathews, I would think, has not lost much more bigger than his job. We have a coach and a club culture that likes to put footy in perspective. Which is more important, a silly trophy at the end of a season (it's only a game remember) or a mate with a couple of young kids losing his job? Under those circumstances it is very easy to give Benny another year, to let him go on his own terms, to give a blood brother the send of he deserves and to justify it on the grounds that he has been a stalwart of the club who has the runs on the board. Selection decisions like that need to be made by ruthless bastards, with no emotional attachment to those that their decision affect, not peers.

My sentiments entirely.

[Nico]

I agree 100% and would like to add that Benny Matthews has never been a superstar, never will be but he does his job and has done an above average job (at his given task) more times than not. Without sounding completely daft - it's almost what Benny doesnt do (or that we don't see) not what he actually does. The one percentage sort of stuff, taggling and tackling. I also believe in 05 or 06 he actually asked to go back to the reserves to find some form so i'm pretty sure he would retire if he though he was hindering the teams progress.

Above average!!!! No, he is slow unaccountable and a turnover extrordinaire.

He has been serviceable this year at best which is about his top level, but in a year when he has been serviceable other so called name players have been well below par.

[Nico]

Read, very slowly, this.....

You are a demographic.

As for players having input on one another, or as you are getting at 'bitching' about one another, the Swans seem to be one of the most tight knit groups going around, so there doesn't appear to be any residual detriment to the players facing a few home truths from their peers.

But they still wont tell any of their mates they are gorn. What about one of Johnny H's secret ballots or is that not in their AWA.

[CureTheSane]

But they still wont tell any of their mates they are gorn.

Nor should they.
I don't think there's much dispute that the senior players should not be selecting the team.
Only a fool thinks that Hall, Kirk, Barry, etc are going to sit down and tell Roos who is in the team next year.
That's what some here seem to think is going to happen.

What will happen is the senior players will give Roos their opinions - plain and simple.

[swantastic]

Nor should they.
I don't think there's much dispute that the senior players should not be selecting the team.
Only a fool thinks that Hall, Kirk, Barry, etc are going to sit down and tell Roos who is in the team next year.
That's what some here seem to think is going to happen.

What will happen is the senior players will give Roos their opinions - plain and simple.

Half true CTS but if the players dont think Roosy is listening there could be a mutiny and we all know what happens after that.