 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Nathan Buckley: what should the club do with him? |
| Sack him now and pay him out |
|
18% |
[ 28 ] |
| Sack him at season's end and pay him out |
|
14% |
[ 22 ] |
| Wait and see until season's end, then review (inclined to sack) |
|
14% |
[ 22 ] |
| Wait and see until season's end, then review (inclined to keep) |
|
17% |
[ 26 ] |
| Keep him until mid-season 2017, then reassess |
|
5% |
[ 9 ] |
| Keep him until end of 2017, then reassess |
|
17% |
[ 27 ] |
| Back him for as long as it takes! All We Can Be with NCB! |
|
9% |
[ 15 ] |
| Other (please outline in the thread) |
|
1% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 151 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Gubby Allen has been employed to find Buckley's replacement. It's the plan B if the club fails to look like making finals by mid year. Gubby is basically an outsider coming back in to make the hard calls that the club cannot as many are too close to Buckley. Buckley is under extreme pressure to get the club to perform and make finals.
Despite those who refuse to accept the free thinkers. I would like to see Buckley depart and I would also like to see him succeed. The main thing I want is the club to perform and be feared again. I am happy the season is over as I can feel positive about 2017 as we haven't played a game yet. |
|
|
|
 |
STOKA35 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Mount Barker. South Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Buckleys is idoomed if you go by history. Look at the favourite sons who have gone on to coach there club they played for they have all failed. Primus, tony shaw, ratten, voss, Leppitsch. Buckley has to defy history |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | | Johnno75 wrote: | | The other thing about the last 2 mins. Howe was our loose back. Was caught in the pack the Hawks formed at about 40m out was not either forward or behind them. After we conceded the goal and then the lead he still stayed loose back and was not deployed to the coalface so we could try and in the game. It seemed a strange tactic. |
I suspect it was just a screw-up. They'd have rehearsed such a scenario, I guess, but the loose back was just too high. It may be a coaching failure, or an execution failure in the heat of the moment. It all happened so fast that I doubt the coaches' message would have even made it out there, so it was probably an execution issue. That's what you have on-field leaders for. Still, if we had won that centre clearance, or one of ours had ripped it out rather than Burgoyne, or someone had been two metres close to Fitzpatrick , probably no-one would have ever noticed. We all (self included) put too much emphasis on isolated moments. |
Hawks knew exactly what to do. |
Funny, they didn't when we kicked four unanswered goals in ten minutes. |
What stupid logic
So every goal kicked is a failure of the set up?
So Muggy this is the case.
2 minutes to go with the only way for the Hawks to win was all out attack.
They set up that way.
You don't set up that way the whole time, only in specific situations.
We set up with the usual way even had Crisp as the tagger.
After the Hawks goal they set up completely different ...they were happy to get a draw.
What KM is saying and what I am saying is that coaching like football is a game of centimetres.
It is the 1% that make the difference.
Bucks is being out coached on the game day on the tactics and on the strategy.
That last 2 minutes set up was a prime example
With our list I reckon a good coach should have been 13-9 not 9-13 this year.
MM had an special relationship with a number of players.
Bux doesn't have the same rapport like MM.
There is a lot of criticism going around in cricket, rugby union and swimming/athletic circles that the so called high performance culture is having a bad effect on the results.
It looks like Bux has gone down this high performance path with leading teams and a host of other things like training loads etc...
It may be worth a separate thread to discuss it's value..
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest.
Last edited by thompsoc on Wed Aug 31, 2016 9:05 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| STOKA35 wrote: | | Buckleys is idoomed if you go by history. Look at the favourite sons who have gone on to coach there club they played for they have all failed. Primus, tony shaw, ratten, voss, Leppitsch. Buckley has to defy history |
You need to go into the bigger picture as to why those coaches failed, rather than make a blanket assumption that it doesn't work out with favourite sons:
Primus - Underprepared, took the decision to dump senior players and regenerate the list. By undermining the senior players the confidence of the playing group suffered with the predicted result of losing games. Wasn't given time to fulfil his plans before being dumped.
Tony Shaw - inherited a poor list and didn't do any coaching apprenticeship
Brett Ratten - coached well and improved the ladder position of the side each year before the admin panicked and elected to go with a name coach
Voss - also coached well until he made the fatal decision to recruit Fevola at which point the admin panicked and sacked him, a decision they are now regretting
Leppitsch - only got the job because the admin panicked over Voss. Underprepared and given too little time to develop the list
If you want to look at a favourite son who succeeded as a coach you can't go past Norm Smith. Four premierships as a player and coached Melbourne to a further six premierships. Then dumped one year after winning a premiership.
The common thread in all these coaches. Admins who panick. |
|
|
|
|
Deja Vu
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Favourite sons coaching premiership teams (recent):
Roos
Worsfold
You might say Mark Williams at Port also
_________________
http://youtu.be/hvtdbfI1sqQ |
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC 
Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | | Hawks knew exactly what to do. |
Oh I would be most interested in your analysis with regard to your comment.
Here's my take.
Ball bounced in the centre (it was a good bounce!). Grundy really well positioned gets to the fall of the ball first and turned his back to the opposing ruckman to block (fantastic play by the way he is facing towards the majority of his mids). Pendles and Treloar well placed to rove on the defensive side, Crisp was forward. hawthorn's mids were all on the defensive? wtf? If fitzpatrick wins the tap he would have had one main option and tap it behind or at the best to the side, he would have been pretty much blindsided to where his mids were.
Grundy's tap goes to Pendles feet, he was standing on the edge of the centre circle. Got a bad bounce and had to deal with rioli coming at him to tackle (here I think you could argue that Pendles may have been taken high). You could suggest (not argue) that Treloar could have dealt with rioli but in the scheme of things the bounce of the ball could have gone anywhere.
Crisp and rioli grapple for the ball on the ground and Grundy backs up for good measure too (again brilliant - he's roving his own tap!). So we have Crisp and Grundy at the ball, and and Treloar circling, vying to hold the ball in or get a hold of it. hawthorn have burgoyne and rioli at the ball. fitzpatrick looks clueless at this point to me, mitchell is on the defensive side watching. Either rioil read that really well in a fraction of time in which case he is a genuine freak or he got really lucky.
burgoyne somehow fishes it out (have to admit it was a great effort) to fitzpatrick. He then takes the ball and runs his full measure and kicks the ball long from 60m out no less (at least) at full tilt (a great kick admittedly), although I would suggest (no affirm) he was just bombing it, it certainly wasn't to a target. We have 7 players behind, hawthorn have 6 (or 7 also if you include the umpire, I'm sure they did).
The defenders and hawthorn's forwards have pushed up (not sure how far but probably around 35-45m out) and no doubt start running back towards goal when they see fitzpatrick coming. Again, shit it was a great kick! Howe and Brown did a great job at almost getting to the fall of the ball (it would have been as good as heath's smother of the century).
If it had been an attempt at a pass to a leading forward we would have been well placed to defend by weight of numbers if the ball was not marked cleanly.
I'm not sure what could have been done to prevent it happening.
Just a cheap shot, but hey I'll take it. Clearly the hawks also knew what to do when Treloar kicked for the lead. clarkson had a WTF moment in the box.
In the end it was pure luck, i.e the bounce of the ball.
Edit: see you have now posted an analysis ^, umm pretty vague "all out attack, they setup this way".
_________________
Go Pies! |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The Hawks had 3 men behind their ruckman ready to run straight towards their goal. That is attacking football. They also had a man running hard into the centre from behind.
The next bounce contest was different completely.
It matters not one iota the bounce of the ball or whether grundy turned his back or whatever.
The Hawks rolled the dice at the 2 minute to go bounce.
It was their best shot at getting a quick goal.
It may well have been a take away by us.
But it was obvious they had practised for this particular situation.
Including who was to be inside the square.
Is it just ALL luck that they win all the close ones?
I personally think the Hawks are finished.
They are just hanging by their fingertips.
But they are well drilled and coached and it made the
1% difference on Sunday.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC
Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I concede, you win.
_________________
Go Pies! |
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC
Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Oh, just one more thing...
So I also checked the 'centre bounce before'. I encourage you, the 26:00 min mark, 2:50 left on the clock.
So let's see the setup, wow it's completely.... the same.
Not sure what I make of that, I mean it seems (not accusing you just want to be clear on that), that you're making it all up.
_________________
Go Pies! |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AnthonyC wrote: | Oh, just one more thing...
So I also checked the 'centre bounce before'. I encourage you, the 26:00 min mark, 2:50 left on the clock.
So let's see the setup, wow it's completely.... the same.
Not sure what I make of that, I mean it seems (not accusing you just want to be clear on that), that you're making it all up. |
At the 2-50 mark they had 2 men behind their ruck and at the 2 minute mark they had 3 men behind their ruckman.
Didn't seem to be the same to me.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| courtza wrote: | | Fair enough Mugwump, I agree with you, I find it hard to understand how someone could so passionately hate a guy who is a legend of the club you support, disagree and question decisions etc. but hate like he killed your mum surely says mental problem. |
THATS what I don't get, by all means express an opinion one way or the other on Bucks, but the hate and bile directed at him on here by the same old culprits is quite disturbing at times. They wont let up until hes gone, even if he took us into the Finals next season, they will still bang on and on with their insults, suelled on by a certain poster who tries to take some kind of middle ground with warped attempts at snide humourm,but actually delights in the sledging Bucks gets, no names, figure it out. 
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
AnthonyC
Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | | AnthonyC wrote: | Oh, just one more thing...
So I also checked the 'centre bounce before'. I encourage you, the 26:00 min mark, 2:50 left on the clock.
So let's see the setup, wow it's completely.... the same.
Not sure what I make of that, I mean it seems (not accusing you just want to be clear on that), that you're making it all up. |
At the 2-50 mark they had 2 men behind their ruck and at the 2 minute mark they had 3 men behind their ruckman.
Didn't seem to be the same to me. |
No. With 2:50 left on the clock in the LAST quarter, there are 3 hawthorn players on the defensive side at the bounce. I stand by my last comment.
I'll leave the discussion now, I know you are now making it up.
_________________
Go Pies! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Piesnchess wrote: | | courtza wrote: | | Fair enough Mugwump, I agree with you, I find it hard to understand how someone could so passionately hate a guy who is a legend of the club you support, disagree and question decisions etc. but hate like he killed your mum surely says mental problem. |
THATS what I don't get, by all means express an opinion one way or the other on Bucks, but the hate and bile directed at him on here by the same old culprits is quite disturbing at times. They wont let up until hes gone, even if he took us into the Finals next season, they will still bang on and on with their insults, suelled on by a certain poster who tries to take some kind of middle ground with warped attempts at snide humourm,but actually delights in the sledging Bucks gets, no names, figure it out. |
It's an example of a very modern phenomenon, PNC - the chance to sit behind a keyboard and pretend to know more than a man who has achieved most of the highest honours the game can offer. The internet has normalised that behaviour. They revel in every miss we make, feed on every failure and dismiss every success because it makes them feel vindicated that they could coach better than Buckley and fantasise about a stature that he has and they do not.
That is not the same as legitimate questions and challenges (and even honest despair) expressed by people who are open minded as to the answers and know that they could be wrong, of course. You can tell the coodabeen coaches by their complete certainty that they are right. It's the acid test.
I am pretty confident, though, that next year will sweep the coodabeen coaches away. We have taken the right but hard road since 2014, and as in life, so in football - rewards come to those who earn them by patiently building, not those who think they are entitled to everything now, all the time, because they could do it better than those who are actually qualified.
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AnthonyC wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | | AnthonyC wrote: | Oh, just one more thing...
So I also checked the 'centre bounce before'. I encourage you, the 26:00 min mark, 2:50 left on the clock.
So let's see the setup, wow it's completely.... the same.
Not sure what I make of that, I mean it seems (not accusing you just want to be clear on that), that you're making it all up. |
At the 2-50 mark they had 2 men behind their ruck and at the 2 minute mark they had 3 men behind their ruckman.
Didn't seem to be the same to me. |
No. With 2:50 left on the clock in the LAST quarter, there are 3 hawthorn players on the defensive side at the bounce. I stand by my last comment.
I'll leave the discussion now, I know you are now making it up. |
I stand by my comments completely.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Yes, wasn't very professional of Bux.
Normally he has very good personal control ( except in the box ).
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
