-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
When will Bernie go !!
- Thread starter Tigaman
- Start date
olice:
E
easy_tiger
Guest
Come on, you routinely take positions that aren't your own. I prefer a little more conviction, but each to their own.antman said:
Sintiger said:
Good post Sin, but the highlighted part is where we part ways and where you appear not to accept reality.
It was the REVIEW not Hardwick that led to upheaval with coaches, development , recruiting etc. Gale is on record that Balmey is appointed to implement the FINDINGS of the REVIEW. All the Hardwick 'neutrals' or apologists keep conveniently forgetting this. Also while the review was being implemented through restructure of most football positions at the club Hardwick was sent off on a long holiday. So let's get this clear the changes were imposed on Hardwick.
Now your point that Hardwick is embracing the change may be valid. First it's clear that he hasn't got much choice so why not. Look at his "Let's play' interview. In accepting he will release the brakes on the players he uses WTTE that Jack jumping for marks will annoy him and 'hopefully' being 'child like' will work. The non committal and perjorative words describing 'his' own change of plan tells you how emotionally and intellectual committed he is to the idea. In his mind he is already fashioning the response to his masters. " I knew it wouldn't work!
Finally there is a difference between intent and competence. Sure at times Dimma might have flirted with a more expansive game plan but he was suspicious of it and more importantly he didn't know how to properly implement it.
Exposed form over 7 years was that Hardwick didn't or couldn't change his ways. We have played a conservative riskless way for virtually all his time here.
Sure he was nudged last year and even the year before because cracks in his game plan were obvious. The key game last year was rd 3 Adelaide "the half step back game". The team picked was great and they took the game on but there was still little system involved.
And then he started walking back his comments straight after he said them and within weeks Shorty and other kids were out of the side and Hunt who was dropped comes straight back in next game.
We dabbled with speed in the bulldogs game and then that style vanished for the rest of the year.
Implementing an expansive game plan requires belief and 'competence'. It also means no mixed messages and sticking to the plan.
The great thing about this year is that we have an 'observable offensive pattern of ball movement:. We have played the same style for 4 weeks straight and we have been consistent in its execution with the same groups of players playing (mostly) in the correct positions.
Preseasons past have been a dog's breakfast of styles and personnel and not surprisingly we started most years disjointed.
Dimma knows where he stands. He can sulk or he can buy in. The first option he loses his job for sure. The second he might salvage it.
Hardwick is a process coach. And he learnt the process from Clarkson. In reality, he helped to implement it at Hawthorn in his five years there as a senior assistant and, truth be told, he had a strong influence on the philosophy behind it.
That process worked a treat at Hawthorn, but not so much at Richmond. The usual reason trotted out to explain this divergence is that Richmond’s players don’t have the skill level to hit targets and Hawthorn’s do. I don’t buy that. In my opinion, Clarkson has been able to sell the sizzle to his players much more convincingly and he has been able to get total buy-in, especially from his senior players, Hodge, Mitchell, Burgoyne, Roughead, Lewis, Smith etc. Listen to them talk in the media, they sound like Clarkson. They totally believe that if they do X, Y and Z every time, good things will happen. Mainly because they did happen.
Hardwick does not have the same level of buy-in at Richmond. The players love him, no doubt. They talk like him, especially inside their four walls and look, they obviously admire him. But do they think that if they follow the game-plan to the letter, it will all happen? I don’t think so. Others may disagree but I am stating my own opinion here.
Therein is the problem. Has it failed because it doesn’t work or has it failed due to execution? Either way, it has failed and changes need to be made.
For whatever reason, most likely being that the media trapped Benny Gale and Peggy into guaranteeing Hardwick’s next two years in the interest of lowering the pressure on their man, the club is stuck with him for a while and was unable to make a clean break at the end of 2016. That would have been ideal. Not to be, sadly. Lucky fella.
The next best thing has been to bring in fresh ideas. Enter Caracella. A premiership player with Hardwick at Essendon before their paths diverged. Hardwick went to Port Adelaide and followed Clarkson to Hawthorn, Caracella went to the Lions and then turned up at Geelong.
Cross-pollination of ideas. Changes in game style. Emphasis in new areas. Things are being done differently. Players still appear to love their man. So far, so good.
Will Hardwick embrace change or fight it? So far, he is embracing. The real question is, for how long will he embrace it? I would suggest that if winning becomes a habit, he will embrace the living daylights out of it and save his career. If not, he is goneski soon.
Just my opinion. Not too dissimilar from Lamby's by the way.
That process worked a treat at Hawthorn, but not so much at Richmond. The usual reason trotted out to explain this divergence is that Richmond’s players don’t have the skill level to hit targets and Hawthorn’s do. I don’t buy that. In my opinion, Clarkson has been able to sell the sizzle to his players much more convincingly and he has been able to get total buy-in, especially from his senior players, Hodge, Mitchell, Burgoyne, Roughead, Lewis, Smith etc. Listen to them talk in the media, they sound like Clarkson. They totally believe that if they do X, Y and Z every time, good things will happen. Mainly because they did happen.
Hardwick does not have the same level of buy-in at Richmond. The players love him, no doubt. They talk like him, especially inside their four walls and look, they obviously admire him. But do they think that if they follow the game-plan to the letter, it will all happen? I don’t think so. Others may disagree but I am stating my own opinion here.
Therein is the problem. Has it failed because it doesn’t work or has it failed due to execution? Either way, it has failed and changes need to be made.
For whatever reason, most likely being that the media trapped Benny Gale and Peggy into guaranteeing Hardwick’s next two years in the interest of lowering the pressure on their man, the club is stuck with him for a while and was unable to make a clean break at the end of 2016. That would have been ideal. Not to be, sadly. Lucky fella.
The next best thing has been to bring in fresh ideas. Enter Caracella. A premiership player with Hardwick at Essendon before their paths diverged. Hardwick went to Port Adelaide and followed Clarkson to Hawthorn, Caracella went to the Lions and then turned up at Geelong.
Cross-pollination of ideas. Changes in game style. Emphasis in new areas. Things are being done differently. Players still appear to love their man. So far, so good.
Will Hardwick embrace change or fight it? So far, he is embracing. The real question is, for how long will he embrace it? I would suggest that if winning becomes a habit, he will embrace the living daylights out of it and save his career. If not, he is goneski soon.
Just my opinion. Not too dissimilar from Lamby's by the way.
Baron Samedi said:
Wrong, I'm 100% committed to my assertion that you saying "Blake did this, Leppa is responsible for that" is total speculation.
I find your awkward fence sitting about whether you are supporting Richmond or Collingwood tonight amusing in the context of conviction though.
BTW, I'm supporting Richmond tonight. 100%.
antman said:
Meh, I want a flag. If we had to sack Hardwick tomorrow morning I wouldn't lose sleep.
Your expectations are too blinkered, rigid and short-sighted.
But you definitely try hard :hihi
antman said:
I'll be at the ground and will probably get caught up in the atmosphere.
Head says we need a new coach.
Heart says I like to win. Especially against Collingwood.
TOT70 said:
Good post. Jack's public misgivings about the game plan supports this idea. Jack certainly wasn't sure about it, and you can bet he wasn't quiet about it at the club. It's entirely possible that his ideas had a bit of traction within the group or perhaps he was giving voice to a general zeitgeist. Inside The Four Walls, Jack's act was tantamount to mutiny and I strongly suspect this was the catalyst behind his exile from formal leadership, but perhaps there was team-wide mutineering, subconscious or otherwise.
Smoking Aces said:
TOT I agree with, well argued, reasonable, gives Dimma some credit, while saying that he should be gone (I can see that and have said it), could have beeen gone (yeah), and will be gone if we don't produce this year (I think that is unanimous). Lamby & Co's extreme dogma no. They go to extraordinary lengths to explain away any positive as not being down to Dimma. He has never done anything right and will not ever do anything right. I hate dogma.
I don't want a head coach informed and guided by his assistant coaches. I want a head coach with a blueprint for success who can delegate to a talented group of line coaches.
Even if we find success in the home and away season, the current situation isnt optimal.
Even if we find success in the home and away season, the current situation isnt optimal.
E
easy_tiger
Guest
Baron Samedi said:
thats pretty much how modern, successful organisations work.
if that whats happening at tigerland.
loving this big if button.
lamb22 said:
this pillar of the argument is wrong. Went conservative first half '10. released the shackles and went freewheeling, to different degrees, second half '10, 11, 12, 13. Back to conservative 14, 15, 16. Early day but looks to be back to fast moving freewheeling 17
That is't virtually all his time, its around half his time. Also shows he has changed and can change. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not convinced yet on how good his latest strategy is, we'll see. Just clearing up the dogmatic rewriting of history.
