Horse

[sprite]

Let's say, hypothetically, that Horse is moved on like a lot of people would want. Who would be the gettable/available coach that we would replace him with?

I posed that question in a game thread, no answer. If you are calling for the coach to be replaced then there needs to be a suitable candidate available.

Brendan Bolton could be available at the end of the year...

[Kafka's Ghost]

What do you expect to say? That he's found the magic bullet hiding at the bottom of the kit bag and everything will be different this week?

Spot on, as usual Liz. We have actually been in rebuild mode since 2016, probably should have won the flag that year with a vastly different team to 2012. We now have 10 first choice players out injured, and several players sadly “done” (Kieran Jack), badly out of form after not playing for a long period (Reid, Melican, Mills) or playing injured (Parker, Heeney). The young guys are trying, but they aren’t going to suddenly learn to play against seasoned AFL campaigners in a few weeks. Our usual tactic of introducing youth with an experienced cohort around them is thus not viable at present.
In terms of list management, I would argue the loss of Nankervis is as great as any. Especially given we do not have anyone with “presence” around the packs. Nothing like making the opposition think twice.

[stevoswan]

Hearing JL's presser and him interviewed on the radio today, he sounds hesitant and reading between the lines bereft of answers/solutions.

He is sounding a bit cliched and repetitive these days.....maybe he has no answers but that's where decent 'experienced' assistant coaches would help out. A commodity we don't really have.....

[Markwebbos]

I posed that question in a game thread, no answer. If you are calling for the coach to be replaced then there needs to be a suitable candidate available.

Brendan Bolton could be available at the end of the year...

I'm not actually calling for Horse to be replaced. I'm calling for a full review. And suggesting we may benefit from an injection of fresh ideas via the assistant coaches.

[Ralph Dawg]

I agree with Webbos. I actually want Horse to stay as long as he has the passion to oversee the rebuild. His record is second to none and I get the impression that he is a good people manager, which is a large part of a head coach's role. But a review in the support that is around Horse, especially given the change in our list and overall circumstances, surely would be useful. Do we have the best assistant coaches to mentor young players? Are our medical and rehab staff managing our injured players properly? Do we have the right people in recruitment of players and management of the club? I'm not pre emoting any of the answers to these questions as I don't have even the slightest idea as to how the club runs but if we want to challenge for the flag, we need to have all the holes of the Swiss cheese lined up. That is where a review would be useful if done well.

- - - Updated - - -

Btw, hate the name of this thread. If you want to "bash" horse, just get on the team's FB feed - plenty of that going on there!

[The Big Cat]

Spot on 007.

Hearing JL's presser and him interviewed on the radio today, he sounds hesitant and reading between the lines bereft of answers/solutions.

What station?

[chalbilto]

Don't all clubs have reviews at the end of the season? I am certain that this year there will be a really detailed, and in depth review of the football club.

[Markwebbos]

Don't all clubs have reviews at the end of the season? I am certain that this year there will be a really detailed, and in depth review of the football club.

I honestly don’t know, but I think you are talking about an internal review. I’m proposing an independent, external one.

[MattW]

What do you expect to say? That he's found the magic bullet hiding at the bottom of the kit bag and everything will be different this week?

No.

His explanation of our performances have largely amounted to a description of inability to maintain effort and hardness over four quarters. That has been the theme of pretty much every press conference. But that isn't particularly insightful; all of us can see that. He has not really offered any analytical explanation of what we are doing wrong or things we can improve on, with reference to structures or strategy. He has recounted after games a bunch of statistics that show we aren't doing well, but not really offered an explanation of how they came about. By his account, it is a mindset issue.

So there a few possible explanations for that. One is that there are game change options he is not picking up or talking about at press conferences. Another is that he is right, it is a mindset issue. But addressing that is also his job - motivating players and facilitating their top performance is his responsibility. A third might be a personnel issue. That is probably part of it, but it doesn't explain that uneven or under performance of established players we know have skill - Mills, Heeney, Reid, Parker.

I like John. He is compassionate and thoughtful, and has spoken well on Indigenous, LGBTI and mental health issues. I have always been proud that he is our coach. But I am starting to worry he might have lost the players a little bit. I recall reading in Paul Roos' book that he thought coaches had a finite life cycle with a club and should move on to avoid their message becoming stale. I can't recall exactly how long that was, but I recall thinking it was about where John is at.

There are a few signs of some dysfunction in the management of the team, a sense that changes are thought bubbles rather than part of a cohesive plan:
- the indication that Thurlow was brought in to release Mills into the midfield
- playing McCartin defence to start the year
- starting the year with Aliir up the ground and as a second ruck
- Clarke, Rowbottom, O'Riordan, Blakey in and out of the team without much logic or apparent planning to their respective promotion and demotion

I feel we are out of ideas a bit. Very happy to be proven wrong. Will still be cheering hard every week and driving up the highway to see us play when I can.

[liz]

No.

His explanation of our performances have largely amounted to a description of inability to maintain effort and hardness over four quarters. That has been the theme of pretty much every press conference. But that isn't particularly insightful; all of us can see that. He has not really offered any analytical explanation of what we are doing wrong or things we can improve on, with reference to structures or strategy. He has recounted after games a bunch of statistics that show we aren't doing well, but not really offered an explanation of how they came about. By his account, it is a mindset issue.

.

1) How often have you heard the coach of a team on a losing streak (and not looking especially competitive in any of those losses) offer up strategic explanations of what is going wrong in their press conferences? If they knew (and it was as simple as just executing a different strategy), surely such a response would just raise the question of why not do it, rather than talk about it in a press conference.

2) How many teams have you seen win games where they didn't maintain effort and hardness for a substantial portion of the game? Or alternatively, do you think our team has been sustaining effort and hardness for substantial portions of each game, but are losing despite this?

[bloodspirit]

Thoughtful post, MattW. I find the examples you give at the end in particular persuasive.

Some possible explanations:

* The coaches are currently dealing with very difficult, maybe insuperable (for the time being) personnel issues with the loss of experienced players (for whatever reason).

* The assistant coaches are not up to snuff and we could use some additions or replacements.

* Horse is tired and stale and we need new blood and a fresh game plan. I'd like to think he would recognise this and act on it if it were the case, including by moving on, but who knows.

Personally I think it's option 1 but I don't exclude the other options. For this reason I am not opposed to Markwebbos call for a review. What do we have lose except the expense?

Some asides:

1. I prefer Horse saying we just need to harder for longer to making other excuses about personnel etc

2. Horse never gives detailed analysis away publicly so I think it's unrealistic to expect this from him in his pressers.

3. Re Liz comments, you're right but sometimes in those cases the problem is the coach and it's not long before they depart.

4. If we were to seek another coach (and I am not advocating that - on the contrary I think we're lucky to have Horse) then I'd do some due diligence on Brett Ratten.

[bloodspirit]

Tell you what though, even though I accept he's a good coach, I'd much rather have Horse than Ross Lyon!

I wonder how Dockers fans feel about him these days? They seem to be headed in the right direction. (Or Saints fans for that matter.)

[waswan]

2 dinosaurs coaching outdated footy

[Roadrunner]

Well said guys. My only issue with Horse is that he can be too defensive. Of course he wants to restrict the opposition scoring, hence the extra man in defence, but time after time the ball comes straight back as our forwards are either well covered or nowhere to be seen. All too often our backs kick the ball not always under pressure, for a turnover. Is this partly a coaching issue or a lack of skill? Lloyd and Mills come to mind. I would rather lose attacking and play attractive football that can build towards a flag in due course than watch these painful errors that end up losing the game anyway. Maybe then the lads can put together 4 quarters, as you build confidence when you are scoring and keeping the ball in our forward line for a change!,

[MattW]

1) How often have you heard the coach of a team on a losing streak (and not looking especially competitive in any of those losses) offer up strategic explanations of what is going wrong in their press conferences? If they knew (and it was as simple as just executing a different strategy), surely such a response would just raise the question of why not do it, rather than talk about it in a press conference.

2) How many teams have you seen win games where they didn't maintain effort and hardness for a substantial portion of the game? Or alternatively, do you think our team has been sustaining effort and hardness for substantial portions of each game, but are losing despite this?

Re 1), I don't think it's that unusual to hear coaches explain plans that didn't work, or aspects of the game where their team was beaten, or things that need to improve. I don't listen to opposing coaches all the much, but I reckon I've heard Brad Scott, Buckley and Clarkson offer that kind of analysis.

I've also been following the Philadelphia 76ers basketball team quite closely, and Brett Brown often gives analytical reasons the team loss and, in particular, things he us responsible for changing.

John did mention on Saturday night that we're getting beaten at the scramble when contesting the first kick we make outside defensive 50, hence the repeat entries. That's interesting and something to watch for this week.

Re 2), as I said, we haven't been maintaining effort, and that's part of it, but it's also his responsibility to address.

Thanks for you post, blood spirit. I think all three of your possible explanations may make some contribution. I also agree with your first aside.