Teflon wrote: ↑Thu 21 Jun 2018 10:56pm
In classic Dodgy style you contradict and confuse yourself
On the one hand you are “not a fan of Richardson’s performance” over the past few years....
On the next.....you don’t know what his role is?
How then can you judge him at all by that reasoning?
He is responsible for onfield performance.
I'm not confused at all.
You've misquoted me. Literally used quotation marks on something I never said.
I never said I'm "not a fan of Richardson's performance". That's simply not true.
He s***s me, and I haven't seen anything to really give me an indication that he's any good. But in terms of his actual performance, I don't feel I can really judge it as there are many factors that have clearly contributed over the past few years.
I said back in 2013 that we would struggle for about 5 years until our list balanced out and we had a good senior crop. It was clear back then that due to the Lyon era's list management - we'd have a huge hole in our list for quite a while. I stand by that. Well frankly, it's proven to be 100% correct.
And as a result, I never expected we'd be much different to what we are now. So for mine, the current 'win\loss' is not unexpected. I think the win\loss over the previous 2 seasons were somewhat of a false economy given Riewoldt's form and our great injury run.
A coach in any sport should not be judged on win/loss. Because as I've said, there are way too many factors that influence that - many of which the coach actually has no control over.
Teflon wrote: ↑Thu 21 Jun 2018 10:56pm
As others have noted: let’s see how meek and mild Clarkson would be if Hawks tied his hand behind his back and let a wet nose football manger dictate terms to him like you seem to be suggesting is happening to Richardson.
He's no Alastair Clarkson. Who on earth would think that? And who would expect it?
And I don't where you came up with that I'm suggesting he's being dictated to by the Football Manager? I've simply posed the question, and actually sought clarification as to how much control each of these roles has over the coaching department. It's incredibly relevant when seeking answers for the performance this year I'd have thought. We know at Geelong, Thompson was dictated to. We also know that Hardwick had control taken off him too. So maybe that's the same for us? I have no idea.
We were one win off finals with a s*** list for two years. This year, we're absolute rubbish.
Would he have been sacked after last year? No. The year before? No.
So something has happened between now and then. If he wasn't sackable last year, it's possible that he's not the problem.
Kingsley took on a new role in the box. Who promoted him? Who developed that coaching structure? Who created the Transition Coach role? I have no idea.
Playfair came on board with a new defensive strategy.
These are significant and coincide with a massive drop in form. It can't be discounted that these changes are the main reason for it. Does sacking Richardson change it?
And of course, the other change is that we've had a really bad run with injuries this year. Maybe it's as simple as personnel?
Or maybe Richardson is s*** and Riewoldt's form masked major problems?
I think the whole 'his win/loss is bad so he needs to be sacked' thing is simplistic and short sighted. That's all.