Chris Pelchen must go

[saintsRrising]

one thing on this thread is the though that we kept Raph Peake and Polo over keeping Zac ... if i recall Raph was already contracted ... Peake and Polo were both in limbo awaiting to see what Zac decided to do ... Zac decided to walk the club were upset that they lost a player they wanted they then chose to resign Peake and polo after zac had gone ... had zac stayed both would have been delisted sso no the club didnt choose Peake and Polo over Zac the club settled for Peake and Polo ....

..

Thank you for posting what occurred, and my recollection is the same as yours.

Zac and BJ both chose to go. Some cannot seem to accept this basic point.

[SainterK]

So why didn't we trade Zac?

I'm going to remain unconvinced that Chris made Zac feel like a required player, would greatly surprise me given their history.

[plugger66]

So why didn't we trade Zac?

I'm going to remain unconvinced that Chris made Zac feel like a required player, would greatly surprise me given their history.

SK how do you know we didnt try to trade Zac?

[saintsRrising]

, still cap issues, .

Sorry, but can you please at least be logical in your arguments.

On the one hand you want BJ and Zac to have both been paid more to stay....but then you also want to say we still have cap issues and criticise Pelchen for it despite not having to pay the extra dollars.

He has also not been here long enough for all contracts to have washed through the system and to have been renegotiated under his watch.

[SainterK]

, still cap issues, .

Sorry, but can you please at least be logical in your arguments.

On the one hand you wan BJ and Zac to have both been paid more to stay....but then you also want to say we still have cap issues and criticise Pelchen for it despite not having to pay the extra dollars.

He has also not been here long enough for all contracts to have washed through the system and to have been renegotiated under his watch.

Sorry, I can't compute your post without some of the points being bolded

[sainterjo]

I blame Murdoch.

That's very unusual for you. Surely it must be Julia's fault.

I thought his name was Brodie? And Jeeez, give him a game first.

[big_mac_evoy5]

On the day that Chris Pelchen was appointed Head of Football at the Saints, Ross Lyon decided that his future lay elsewhere. Of all the AFL clubs, just one, the Saints, has the club coach as second in command. A quick click onto the Saints website will see it written in B&W. The Board, largely the current Board, got this hopelessly wrong. Other than a complete newbie, no self respecting coach would ever accept such a proposition.

Chris Pelchen made his "name" as recruiter for Hawthorn, but left Hawthorn in mysterious circumstances which have never been fully explained. There was no way that he was going to be viewed as the boss of the coach at Hawthorn, so maybe that was the reason. Today, Scott Watters reports to, and is answerable to, Chris Pelchen. At every other club, the coach is answerable to the Board and, therefore, the members.

Of course, there is a separate issue relating to the quality of the draft picks (2011,2012). Time will tell on those, although the current evidence is not good.

The Board must admit this organisational error, right it (I doubt Chris Pelchen would accept a demotion) and move on.

you are a complete and utter fool!! he has been here two years! adverage player takes 3 years to develop and 5-6 if the are key position or ruck. no u said he made his name as a recruiter, yes he did and if u knew anything he was the catalyst behind the 2004 port adelaide team where he first started out and recruited all there good players and u guessed it won a flag!

then hawthorn pinched him to help rebuild ther team he help the recruit buddy rough jorsdan lewis, hodge, cyril and the list goes on nearly there entire team!

reasons he left were the same as when he was at port he likes a challenge and hawthorn werent much of a challenege when they are top of the table.

so we are lucky to have him and u will regret ever doubting him. if u thinkl watter is second incharge u need to go see a doctor mate!

[Old Mate]

Big Boy laying down the law.

[defacto]

On the day that Chris Pelchen was appointed Head of Football at the Saints, Ross Lyon decided that his future lay elsewhere. Of all the AFL clubs, just one, the Saints, has the club coach as second in command. A quick click onto the Saints website will see it written in B&W. The Board, largely the current Board, got this hopelessly wrong. Other than a complete newbie, no self respecting coach would ever accept such a proposition.

Chris Pelchen made his "name" as recruiter for Hawthorn, but left Hawthorn in mysterious circumstances which have never been fully explained. There was no way that he was going to be viewed as the boss of the coach at Hawthorn, so maybe that was the reason. Today, Scott Watters reports to, and is answerable to, Chris Pelchen. At every other club, the coach is answerable to the Board and, therefore, the members.

Of course, there is a separate issue relating to the quality of the draft picks (2011,2012). Time will tell on those, although the current evidence is not good.

The Board must admit this organisational error, right it (I doubt Chris Pelchen would accept a demotion) and move on.

so now we know brianspeaking lurks two forums now.

BTW pretty sure buckley and a number of other coaches report to a middle man between the board and the coach

[perfectionist]

[BTW pretty sure buckley and a number of other coaches report to a middle man between the board and the coach

Nope. Nathan Buckley does not report to Geoff Walsh. He reports to the Board i.e. Eddy. As it happens, I know Geoff, and his finds it risible the general principle (he will not comment on specific arrangements) that a coach, should report to the football manager. Get you head out of your arse.

[St Lenny]

People talk crap on this site, no wonder hardly anyone comes on here any more.

[defacto]

[BTW pretty sure buckley and a number of other coaches report to a middle man between the board and the coach

Nope. Nathan Buckley does not report to Geoff Walsh. He reports to the Board i.e. Eddy. As it happens, I know Geoff, and his finds it risible the general principle (he will not comment on specific arrangements) that a coach, should report to the football manager. Get you head out of your arse.

nathan buckleys direct report is geoff walsh. ultimately the hiring and firing of any coach has to be ticked off by the board but i think you'll find he reports directly to geoff

[perfectionist]

The issue is clear and it has still not been resolved.

[saintspremiers]

The issue is clear and it has still not been resolved.

Watters has gone so that helps.

Either we burn another coach or maybe Pelchen should be coach as well and save some money.

Dermott was glad Pelch left the Hawks for us as it saved them the money they'd have had to pay to sack him.

[bigcarl]

maybe Pelchen should be coach as well and save some money.

Agree. Why spend a lot on an underling if Pelican is calling the shots. Give him the responsibility and the accountability that goes with it.

Was this what Yabby intended, I wonder?

[spert]

Pelchin seems to be the only one in a managerial role, who has a clear direction as to what is required to rebuild the team. Watters obviously needed to pull his head in and work with Pelchin who he was answerable to, rather than sook off to directors. This saga is the outcome of an employee not following company policy so to speak.

[BigMart]

Great OP, common sense thread, which won't be accepted by delusional apologists who just deny any wrongdoings.....

The management structure is a joke....

Chris Pelchin is in a dangerous position and is a cancerous character I reckon.....

SW fell to bits, it seems.... A coach looking over their shoulder for Pelchins knife is always under the pump.

[saint-stu]

It does say something about both people (Chris and Scott) if they got to the point where they weren't talking to each other.

It seems really unprofessional to me.

Reminds me of Grant Thomas being sacked, with Butterss following soon after.

[Ghost Like]

Great OP, common sense thread, which won't be accepted by delusional apologists who just deny any wrongdoings.....

The management structure is a joke....

Chris Pelchin is in a dangerous position and is a cancerous character I reckon.....

SW fell to bits, it seems.... A coach looking over their shoulder for Pelchins knife is always under the pump.

OMFG, I really did use to enjoy some of your writings when it came to summaries of players, team lists, positions etc but you are now becoming like that neighbours dog, continually barking, that no one can shut up.

What is it with you & Pelchin? You don't like that he hasn't printed out your theories and choices of players and implemented them? You don't like that he clearly makes a very good living managing AFL lists whilst you don't get paid for putting your opinions on a forum? Unless of course you are doing these during 'free periods' in which case you are getting paid, just not as much, nor is anyone acting on your theories as you wait for time to pass, allowing hindsight to be your barometer.

Pelchin, identifies short fallings in a list and tries to address those for the now whilst keeping an eye on the future. All I want from a coach is to be able to communicate his plan to his assistants and his players so they can all work towards that goal at training and on match day. It appears SW fell well short in that ability.

I hope whoever we get next can work with all in the club, recognising their strengths and utilising those for the best of the club. We are in for some pain in the next two or three years but in my opinion, less pain than if we hadn't started to address the shortcomings of our playing list. Our next coach should not be judged on win/loss for seasons 2014 / 2015 but his development & communication abilities. 2016 & 2017 will have more tangible results placed upon him and the list compiled by Pelchin.

[saintsRrising]

Of all the AFL clubs, just one, the Saints, has the club coach as second in command..

What Garbage. Most people keeping quoting the Cats as the model to follow.

Well at the Cats, Neil Balme - General Manager Football, was brought in above Thompson, and he has been above the Cats coach ever since.
Thompson was initially furious, but later admitted it was the best thing that had happened to him.

[vacuous space]

Yep. List manager manages the list and the senior coach coaches the list. Not rocket surgery at all.

[saintsRrising]

Great OP, common sense thread, which won't be accepted by delusional apologists who just deny any wrongdoings.....

The management structure is a joke....

Chris Pelchin is in a dangerous position and is a cancerous character I reckon.....

SW fell to bits, it seems.... A coach looking over their shoulder for Pelchins knife is always under the pump.

Well I think there is some delusion going on......

Now lets look at this analytically for the common denominator;

SW does not get on with his assistant coaches
SW does not get on with Pelchen
SW does not get on with the players
SW does not get on with the Board
SW does not get on with other StKilda Staff

So let's see...yes it must be Pelcin that is the villain???????????????

Open your eyes and ears and LISTEN. Sort the wheat form the chafe and it soon becomes very, very clear that SW was a GT Mark II in that while he may have had many bright ideas, his personality traits were such that once he became the numero uno that he was impossible to work with.

Posted by a Carlton supporter on Bigfooty:
Sorry to intrude. But I just wanted to let you guys know that this was probably the best decision for the club. My mum works with Dal Santo's wife and she made it quite clear the reason Dal left was Watters. He didn't want to leave St Kilda. He loves the club. But Watters treated him very poorly. Hopefully now that Watters is out, the club can get someone in who will help develop your young kids but still maintain a good relationship with the older players.

[SainterK]

Luke Ball left for similar reasons.

Not everyone likes the coach.

BJ hates Pelchen btw....

Our club is becoming a boys club again.

I would not be surprised if harves comes back at all.

[lefty]

The issue is clear and it has still not been resolved.

Yep, the club needs to do something about this issue.

If it doesn't work, then they need to change.

In all honestly, everyone gave GT crap, but it was the most stable years imo, until his personal issues with Butters effected St.Kilda.
We really need some leadership and stability right now.

[saintsRrising]

Luke Ball left for similar reasons.

.

Rubbish,

Ball left because Lyon did not rate Ball's ability to run and spread and perform the role in the game-plan that Lyon wanted. Coaches need to make tough calls.

Ball disagreed with Lyon's use of him. That does not mean that Ball did not rate him as a coach. It meant that Ball was on the outer re requited playing roles, and he was not content to be a fringe player at the Saints.