-
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.
Leadership groups and mateship. We're going to repeat the same mistakes...
- Thread starter The_General
- Start date
Broadsword95 said:
Think history might concur with this statement. There is no doubt in my mind that he is innovative and a capable tactician. But his win/loss record is worse than the worst coach we've had - Danny Frawley. They do say that you rise to your level of incompentence. :shhh
Roos is the perfect example of a good senior coach. He's not afraid to pick people that could be better than him in certain areas. Then gives them the space and authority to implement what has been discussed and agreed. That is why he will remain an ideal fit for as long as he wants to coach.
I like your analysis General, but I do think for a football club it gets a bit simplistic. These guys work long hours with each other, travel with each other, drink and eat with each other - so short of creating a Pagan / Mitchell situation, there will nearly always be, or should be some cameraderie among these people - perhaps an Army, Navy, Police Force person could expand - but I suspect how you bond the team is more important than how you build the team............. Building it with a sense of trust and obligation to begin with should accelerate the outcome though I would think.
Fabulous thread folks. I don't have the bona fides to match it with some of those contributing here but I am enjoying the thoughtful banter.
Look it will always come back to culture.
I look back at Australia 2 winning the America's Cup in 1983. Sure we had a boat with a winged keel that gave us the vital edge in the water, BUT the crew were the best, from the A2 skipper John Bertram thru to the riggers that could be found.
They also had a challenge that no one had ever done before, namely beat the New York Yacht Club at their own cheating game, so motivation was not an issue.
Nor was money, thanks to Bondie who after that win became a national hero for a while.
But Alan Bond was smart enough to let his boat crew get on with winning yacht races whilst he fought the New York Yacht Club in the courts etc and thru the media.
Richmond need to find people from top to bottom that come from a winning culture, no more no less. They don't have to be AFL, but they do have to be successful in their chosen fields. End of the day, its the culture at Richmond that second best, she'll be right somebody else will get the ball attitude that needs to be changed.
Can the current RFC Board do this? Only time will tell.
I look back at Australia 2 winning the America's Cup in 1983. Sure we had a boat with a winged keel that gave us the vital edge in the water, BUT the crew were the best, from the A2 skipper John Bertram thru to the riggers that could be found.
They also had a challenge that no one had ever done before, namely beat the New York Yacht Club at their own cheating game, so motivation was not an issue.
Nor was money, thanks to Bondie who after that win became a national hero for a while.
But Alan Bond was smart enough to let his boat crew get on with winning yacht races whilst he fought the New York Yacht Club in the courts etc and thru the media.
Richmond need to find people from top to bottom that come from a winning culture, no more no less. They don't have to be AFL, but they do have to be successful in their chosen fields. End of the day, its the culture at Richmond that second best, she'll be right somebody else will get the ball attitude that needs to be changed.
Can the current RFC Board do this? Only time will tell.
pharace said:
I'm not saying that people shouldn't get along, and if it's come across that way, I probably didn't word it right. What I'm really trying to say is, we need to ensure that the group we put together, can challenge each other without being afraid of repercussions.
At my work, my boss is quite happy for us to disagree, as he knows he won't think of every angle in a debate or strategy, so long as at the end of the day, if there is no consensus - he has the casting vote. It's amazing the way things have come together, when people just don't accept whats put before them. We've actually saved ourselves from making some big mistakes, because an idea that was held as "acceptable thinking" has been challenged and had it's flaws pointed out. We then refine it and make it better. I don't think Terry's group, and in general the footy dept with Miller, did that enough.
The_General said:
Agree that this is the key. One of my best mates both at and outside of work felt more than free to challenge myself and vice versa. Feedback done properly is a gift, and as long as you are big enough to put your ego in your pocket can only help you improve. If people are not emotionally mature enough to give and receive constructive criticism, then much needed truths will be left unsaid, unresolved and not acted upon, leaving things to deteriorate. The key to this item is the response of the person in the power position to any feedback, as a negative response can suppress this in many people, and the courage of the challenger in providing it.
I guess we are speculating on what conversations take place, but we see a theme of a higher percentage of 'outside' type players being recruited, a reluctance to drop poorly performing high draft pick players, low team 'frontal pressure' execution (I was very excited to see Rance's runs to shepherd) and skill errors that occur in both low and high pressure situations - recruitment of athletes vs less athletic highly skilled footballers. On the flip side when we get it right, the team is breathtaking and has done very well in winning contested possessions. My guess is that the challenges do take place, as having spoken with Terry briefly a few times he seems a great listener but may also be quite stubborn / strong believer (depending on your viewpoint) of the processes / values he has with regards to list structure and game style and therefore until recently be the one with the 'casting vote'.
tigger4eva said:
You're missing the point Tigger, I agree Bondy is a crook, however you cannot deny that the Australia 2 win, was an extremely well run operation from top to bottom, the best boat and crew won out. They also damaged Dennis Connors psychologically, something he readily admits in his biography, he still has nightmares about A2 doing him in.
Richmond need to specifically address the issue of implementing a "WINNING" culture and ATTITUDE throughout the club be they a player, coach or staff member, the only thing that anyone of them should be thinking is okay how are we going to do this and win better each time. Until they get those sort of people into whatever positions are at Punt Road (should be a bloody lot of vacancy signs for employment there shortly), then we are going to keep on seeing the same inept and woeful performances we've seen in the past 4 matches, plus the Captain will just rollout the same ole "relax" is only the 21st pathetic game of the season, we can still win round 22.
PATHETIC!!!!!!! is that simple and IT SHOULD NO LONGER BE TOLERATED.
Broadsword95 said:
It is interesting the different styles or personas that coaches take on according to their job.
I would consider that the Senior coach is like a father figure within the club – sets the style of play, what roles are required to perform this style and also establishes the team rules. The senior coach must also be consistent even rigid in his approach to players. He is responsible for the strategy of the team over the season.
Assistant coaches are like the classic mother figure who is continually supportive and must implement the game plan or style of play, selecting who will perform the various roles within that plan. He must be flexible and constantly is forced to compromise between the players’ abilities and the senior coach’s demands. He is responsible for the tactics on game day.
It would seem from the outside that by necessity the larger the team, the more distanced the interaction between senior coach and player. The gridiron coach with a large roster of players is generally seen as more aloof and more demanding that players fit within their roles. A basketball coach must shrewdly switch between the different personas as required but seems to be a sort of teacher who is trying to help the individual player to help the team. It is interesting to note the success of someone like Brian Gordjian with the Dragons and then compare a lack of success with the Boomers. Is this because he cannot establish the required relationship in such a short time with the team or is it because he has assistants at the representative level who are similar “senior coach” personalities? The most interesting person is Hiddink who really changed the way the Socceroos played as individuals and as team members.
My opinion is that of the current coaches, Craig, Wallace and Bailey are failing to define their own role. Voss, Clarkson, Ratten and Roos have come to terms with what they must do while Thompson, Harvey, Worsfold, Eade, Knights, Lyons and Laidley are struggling at various stages of finding their persona as senior coaches. Williams, Malthouse and Roos have probably never had many doubts and slipped easily into their own method.
An interesting debate about coaching requirements and probably long overdue at Richmond where we have tended to a single coaching philosophy with very hands-on senior coaches and low-key assistants.
geoffryprettyboy said:
Part of Richmond's cultural problems is the fact that the presidents and boards of the past have listened to the supporters too much. At the end of the day they are politicians and let's face it - we can be a bit of a feral bunch and sceaming of blood comes very natural to us all. If Richmond is going to be a success in years to come and sort out the culture of the club, March and the board have to do what's best for the club without listening to the vocal whingers in the supporter base and wait for the midseason review or even the end of the year. That's what would take balls.
Good points here General. I wrote last year when things were looking a bit grim that the club should start looking not only at Wallace, but extend that to his assistants, especially, Royal, as he was perceived as Terry's right hand man and that may have become a problem as I didn't think he challenged Wallace any longer. Terry was comfortable with him, which can be good, but no longer threatened by him as a potential replacement so there was no longer any healthy rivalry and they appeared to no longer challenge each other.
I agree you all have to be able to work together in a harmonious relationship, but that doen't mean you shouldn't be challenged by your support staff. As General said many great ideas come from Challenge. I think the nieche term is brainstorming these days isn't it.
I think that this is part of the problem with Terry in that he has become too comfortable with his allies. Maybe this is part of what I believe is a loss of the fire in the belly in Terrys case. He has become just a tad complacent and lost that ruthlessness because everyone around him tells him what a great guy he is.
I agree you all have to be able to work together in a harmonious relationship, but that doen't mean you shouldn't be challenged by your support staff. As General said many great ideas come from Challenge. I think the nieche term is brainstorming these days isn't it.
I think that this is part of the problem with Terry in that he has become too comfortable with his allies. Maybe this is part of what I believe is a loss of the fire in the belly in Terrys case. He has become just a tad complacent and lost that ruthlessness because everyone around him tells him what a great guy he is.
Consider the playing group in this regard:
Brown - a selfish flair player who is favoured by the coach
McMahon - a small and soft flanker....and a talker, just like Terry. A 'yes man'.
Brown - a selfish flair player who is favoured by the coach
McMahon - a small and soft flanker....and a talker, just like Terry. A 'yes man'.
I had a thought about our leadership groups over recent years and the possible correlation between their attitudes and our player development.
There is little doubting that a leadership group runs the show, so to say. At training, they can build kids up or knock 'em down. If our leadership group is as selfish as everyone says, and considering our losing culture and innate ability to suck the talent out of many youngsters, then perhaps their attitudes are of bigger concern than anything else at the club. Let me go further... we have a good history with late draft picks and a terrible record with early picks. Why is this? How is this possible?
Here's one theory. The senior playing group feels threatened by high draft picks. They freeze them out and offer their most positive feedback to the less talented, less threatening pick 60+ who will make them look better. They don't make themselves as available to the higher draft picks for advice and give glowing reports of players who aren't as threatening when talking to the coach, maybe without being concious of it.
The power needs to shift.
The senior players, bar Richo and Cousins, must go.
Trent Cotchin and other talented youngsters must lead the way. Newman seems to be bringing back an 'everyone is equal' culture, so he's doing his bit. But we need the kids to stand up and tell the seniors 'we run this club now, you follow by our rules or get out'.
The culture must evolve, quickly.
There is little doubting that a leadership group runs the show, so to say. At training, they can build kids up or knock 'em down. If our leadership group is as selfish as everyone says, and considering our losing culture and innate ability to suck the talent out of many youngsters, then perhaps their attitudes are of bigger concern than anything else at the club. Let me go further... we have a good history with late draft picks and a terrible record with early picks. Why is this? How is this possible?
Here's one theory. The senior playing group feels threatened by high draft picks. They freeze them out and offer their most positive feedback to the less talented, less threatening pick 60+ who will make them look better. They don't make themselves as available to the higher draft picks for advice and give glowing reports of players who aren't as threatening when talking to the coach, maybe without being concious of it.
The power needs to shift.
The senior players, bar Richo and Cousins, must go.
Trent Cotchin and other talented youngsters must lead the way. Newman seems to be bringing back an 'everyone is equal' culture, so he's doing his bit. But we need the kids to stand up and tell the seniors 'we run this club now, you follow by our rules or get out'.
The culture must evolve, quickly.
benny_furs said:
Can't agree with this. The senior players get along well with the kids at our club from what I see regularly.
Personally I think a big part of the problem when people talk about lacking culture is honesty and discipline.
If anything it's the opposite to your theory. I think everyone is a bit too chummy and not hard enough on each other, not pushing each other enough as a team. I'm talking on a deeper level than your "good trainers". A lot of that comes from the values the coaching department fosters and allows.
Having the discipline and work ethic to sheperd team mates and block for them, fill gaps and sacrifice their personal game for a team link one.
The best leadership is leading by example and not compromising on team values for any individual/s.
Look at Malthouse who you could give a entire list of players you don't recognise and them all a new jumper, and you would STILL know what team he is coaching, simply because every side he coaches epitomises discipline and working for each other.
The players certainly have their share of blame, I am not absolving them, but to fix something you have to start at the core. If the seeds are planted right and you have a healthy tree, the pruning is the easy part.