Richardson's Flawed Theory?

[Ghost Like]

"getting the most out of the other blokes" sounds like on field leadership to me.

Then again, I've not heard what other players have said so perhaps I'm taking it out of context.

If this is true, then one of the two scenarios outlined by sunsaint appears likely.

[WellardSaint]

Whilst I am firmly in the "No for Cho" camp, I cannot see the link in Mav's quote to Richardson's Flawed Theory. I don't even see the connection to "natural instinct".

Mav states he has a lot to offer...except Leadership, Inspiration, Mentoring, Guiding and Teaching young players.

This was the year for him to stand up, he was not alone there, others also failed to stand up in a team lacking leadership and experience.

He only speaks of a role, there are dozens of players (delisted and fringe) who could play "a role" in a good team, a team knocking on the finals door. Sadly for Mav, quite a few of those can probably offer more.

Disagree.

The 'assisting other blokes' talks about his on field role - not in terms of leadership but in terms of what his job on.game day was.

Others have spoken about this too.

he says 'getting the most out of other blokes' which I think is one of the pillars of leadership.
Every job i've had, the team leaders wanted to get the most out of us. Among other things.

Pretty simple, I think

[WellardSaint]

maybe the club told him he'd not done well in getting his team-mates up n about.
Is that deflecting?
Blaming him for 4.5 wins? At least partly?
Hanners is prob replacing Mav as on-field leader.
But why not keep Mav as depth, in case Hanners gets injured?

[Cairnsman]

A lot of wild guessing going on this thread.

Isn't that what forums are for? Sharing and discussing opinions?

Absofukinglutely! I wasn't Not knocking your wild guess, I was merely highlighting it. Isn't that what forums are also for?

[gwiltyascharged]

maybe the club told him he'd not done well in getting his team-mates up n about.
Is that deflecting?
Blaming him for 4.5 wins? At least partly?
Hanners is prob replacing Mav as on-field leader.
But why not keep Mav as depth, in case Hanners gets injured?

I think Kent is the replacement for Mav, not Hanners.
We also have Ben Long.

[rodgerfox]

A lot of wild guessing going on this thread.

Isn't that what forums are for? Sharing and discussing opinions?

Absofukinglutely! I wasn't Not knocking your wild guess, I was merely highlighting it. Isn't that what forums are also for?

I wouldn't have thought so.

But each to their own I guess.

[WellardSaint]

maybe the club told him he'd not done well in getting his team-mates up n about.
Is that deflecting?
Blaming him for 4.5 wins? At least partly?
Hanners is prob replacing Mav as on-field leader.
But why not keep Mav as depth, in case Hanners gets injured?

I think Kent is the replacement for Mav, not Hanners.
We also have Ben Long.

on twitter, @matoots57 said when Kent came, she was worried about Mav's tenure.
She n her hubby been official Mav sponsors for a while.

She's been a member for 45 yrs

But I think Hanners would take over Mav's leadership role, while Kent would replace Mav's playing role.

[Cairnsman]

A lot of wild guessing going on this thread.

Isn't that what forums are for? Sharing and discussing opinions?

Absofukinglutely! I wasn't Not knocking your wild guess, I was merely highlighting it. Isn't that what forums are also for?

I wouldn't have thought so.

But each to their own I guess.

You made some guesses at the inner workings of the club, I said it was a wild guess, actually I'll go further and respectfully say they are false claims not based in fact. Isn't that how a healthy forum works?

[wally]

I think the reference to Akermanis was incorrect. He was doing media columns revealing team plans and strategies was told
by leadership group to pull his head in and shut up, didn't so gone.

[rodgerfox]

A lot of wild guessing going on this thread.

Isn't that what forums are for? Sharing and discussing opinions?

Absofukinglutely! I wasn't Not knocking your wild guess, I was merely highlighting it. Isn't that what forums are also for?

I wouldn't have thought so.

But each to their own I guess.

You made some guesses at the inner workings of the club, I said it was a wild guess, actually I'll go further and respectfully say they are false claims not based in fact. Isn't that how a healthy forum works?

Isn't that like walking into a pub and commenting that everyone is drinking?

[Yorkeys]

Cairnsman, hi, do you know the inner workings? Is Alan actually a good coach dogged by bad luck? If so it would be a comfort to know, as long as he is not a Jonah of course.

[dragit]

Is there a market on how many rounds richo will make it to next year?

[Cairnsman]

Cairnsman, hi, do you know the inner workings? Is Alan actually a good coach dogged by bad luck? If so it would be a comfort to know, as long as he is not a Jonah of course.

Not at all chief, couldn't really tell you one good coach from another other than I'm guessing Alastair Clarkson could go ok. I think the club has made the right call giving Richo the job in 2019 and making the changes they have around him, makes complete sense to me because you could have put Clarko in charge next year and he still could be a coach that lacks resources, a coach of Clarko calibre might have squeezed a few wins more and possibly attracted a player or two in the trade period (which would be his best value right now imo), but I'm guessing our list is still 3-4 years away from being capable of sustained finals appearances and I'm also guessing this is why Richo is still the coach. You get the sense most pundits agree the coach is but one lever needing to be pulled at the moment, arguably the least important lever and again, I think that is why Richo is still there, not because he's the best for the job. I'm also guessing that Lethlean has the radar on in search for a marque signing in the coaching department in the next 12-24 months, all the meanwhile he will continue to make improvements to the other areas, mainly list enhancement, pretty obvious that last point I know. But who knows, funny things happen, the team might turn things around and Richo becomes the dreaded genius, I'll be happy for him if that happens. Don't we all love an underdog at the Saints.

[Cairnsman]

Is there a market on how many rounds richo will make it to next year?

have you noticed how round 6 has grown legs on social media? I think it was mathematically calculated and rubber stamped by ITKs over at BF.

[Zed]

The list is rubbish
I honestly don’t know how in 2016 and 2017 we almost made finals. Maybe it was Richo. Maybe it was the big heart of Rooey supported by class acts Shinner and Joey.
If Richo and Ratts can get this list back to 9th or 10th next year then they are bloody good coaches.

[Harvey To Hayes]

On the other hand ....
Our biggest loss all year was only by 50 points ... despite our challenging draw, wholesale injuries and below-par recruiting - including that of Weller.

I’m still in denial about the Swans game as well...

[dragit]

A 50 point loss is one thing if it's a couple of goals each quarter, but there were quite a few games this year where the game was over in the first quarter, down 30-40 odd points in the first 20 minutes.

[samuraisaint]

On the other hand ....
Our biggest loss all year was only by 50 points ... despite our challenging draw, wholesale injuries and below-par recruiting - including that of Weller.

71 actually - against the Swans, plus two more over 50 points against North and Richmond. Adelaide was 49 points.

We were coached to not lose by too much rather than actively taking games on, and when sides piled goals on against us in very quick succession, we were asked to "park the last five minutes of the first half" - which in a way was asking us to suspend disbelief at the way sides could blow us out of the water and put games out of our reach in a very brief space of time.

Nothing personal, but in terms of match day performances I don't rate the assistants, and I don't rate our senior coach. We had a tough draw and we had shocking injuries to key players, but we still should have done better than winning 4 matches.

Selection was questionable and often didn't make sense, transition into the forward line was frustrating to watch, our scoring conversion was very bad, and the strategy to put more numbers in defence when we were actually playing well and challenging were four issues I had with the Saints this year.

[samuraisaint]

The list is rubbish
I honestly don’t know how in 2016 and 2017 we almost made finals. Maybe it was Richo. Maybe it was the big heart of Rooey supported by class acts Shinner and Joey.
If Richo and Ratts can get this list back to 9th or 10th next year then they are bloody good coaches.

In 2016 we won 12 games, but two were against Essendon at Etihad with player bans, two games against Melbourne (both at Etihad including their home game) who were still struggling big time, two games against Carlton, and our final game was a home game against Brisbane (second last) at Etihad. That's 7 games out of 12 right there. That's how we nearly made finals in 2016. I'm not denigrating the team's efforts in the games that year - just saying it was a very soft draw; that and we still had Joey, Roo and Shinner, which as we all know now makes a power of difference.

[gwiltyascharged]

On the other hand ....
Our biggest loss all year was only by 50 points ...

71 actually - against the Swans, plus two more over 50 points against North (52) and Richmond (54). Adelaide was 49 points.

Add to that Cats was 47 and Bombers 43.

We were blown off the park by some average teams (North, Cats, Bombers, Swans, Dockers, Dogs).

We thankfully avoided the Eagles and Magpies in the latter half of the season when they had got on a roll.

[degruch]

Is there a market on how many rounds richo will make it to next year?

Depends what we're all drinking, I guess?

[samoht]

On the other hand ....
Our biggest loss all year was only by 50 points ... despite our challenging draw, wholesale injuries and below-par recruiting - including that of Weller.

71 actually - against the Swans, plus two more over 50 points against North and Richmond. Adelaide was 49 points.

We were coached to not lose by too much rather than actively taking games on, and when sides piled goals on against us in very quick succession, we were asked to "park the last five minutes of the first half" - which in a way was asking us to suspend disbelief at the way sides could blow us out of the water and put games out of our reach in a very brief space of time.

Nothing personal, but in terms of match day performances I don't rate the assistants, and I don't rate our senior coach. We had a tough draw and we had shocking injuries to key players, but we still should have done better than winning 4 matches.

Selection was questionable and often didn't make sense, transition into the forward line was frustrating to watch, our scoring conversion was very bad, and the strategy to put more numbers in defence when we were actually playing well and challenging were four issues I had with the Saints this year.

Our flawed theory may be in blaming it all on the coach, and overlooking/downplaying all other factors.

Freo had one or two injuries in 2016 and managed only 4 wins and tumbled from being a grand finalist and minor premier in 2015 - despite their significant home ground advantage.
We had significantly more injuries than Freo did ( in 2016) this year... and we weren’t a grand finalist in 2017. We didn’t tumble by 15 positions on the ladder.
Not saying Richo is good or bad .... just asking how would we know?
How do you isolate a coach’s performance or compare coaches when they are in charge of different teams, with different levels of talent?
Is it bad coaching or an average list overall and a challenging draw plus injuries in our case... And who are our elite A graders and players with x factor?
Most of our accumulators/midfielders consistently butcher the ball - they are not elite skilled, especially under pressure.

Freo got smashed by 130 points this year ... we lost one game by 70 points and had a couple of 50 point losses.
Austin, Steele, Membrey, Roberton have all significantly improved since crossing to us from their previous clubs - how do we account for this?
Austin averaged 7 possessions over 2016 and 2017 with 89% game time at Port Adelaide ...he’s averaging around 20 possessions per game with us in his first season!
I am just asking how do we know ... and also questioning our below-par recruiting over the last 10-12 years. We might actually be getting the most of our available talent.
Again, how would we actually know?
We should be looking at all other factors .. not just coaching, which is hard to tease out and isolate from all else to accurately measure/rate, anyway.

[Cairnsman]

On the other hand ....
Our biggest loss all year was only by 50 points ... despite our challenging draw, wholesale injuries and below-par recruiting - including that of Weller.

71 actually - against the Swans, plus two more over 50 points against North and Richmond. Adelaide was 49 points.

We were coached to not lose by too much rather than actively taking games on, and when sides piled goals on against us in very quick succession, we were asked to "park the last five minutes of the first half" - which in a way was asking us to suspend disbelief at the way sides could blow us out of the water and put games out of our reach in a very brief space of time.

Nothing personal, but in terms of match day performances I don't rate the assistants, and I don't rate our senior coach. We had a tough draw and we had shocking injuries to key players, but we still should have done better than winning 4 matches.

Selection was questionable and often didn't make sense, transition into the forward line was frustrating to watch, our scoring conversion was very bad, and the strategy to put more numbers in defence when we were actually playing well and challenging were four issues I had with the Saints this year.

Our flawed theory may be in blaming it all on the coach, and overlooking/downplaying all other factors.

Freo had one or two injuries in 2016 and managed only 4 wins and tumbled from being a grand finalist and minor premier in 2015 - despite their significant home ground advantage.
We had significantly more injuries than Freo did ( in 2016) this year... and we weren’t a grand finalist in 2017. We didn’t tumble by 15 positions on the ladder.
Not saying Richo is good or bad .... just asking how would we know?
How do you isolate a coach’s performance or compare coaches when they are in charge of different teams, with different levels of talent?
Is it bad coaching or an average list overall and a challenging draw plus injuries in our case... And who are our elite A graders and players with x factor?
Most of our accumulators/midfielders consistently butcher the ball - they are not elite skilled, especially under pressure.

Freo got smashed by 130 points this year ... we lost one game by 70 points and had a couple of 50 point losses.
Austin, Steele, Membrey, Roberton have all significantly improved since crossing to us from their previous clubs - how do we account for this?
Austin averaged 7 possessions over 2016 and 2017 with 89% game time at Port Adelaide ...he’s averaging around 20 possessions per game with us in his first season!
I am just asking how do we know ... and also questioning our below-par recruiting over the last 10-12 years. We might actually be getting the most of our available talent.
Again, how would we actually know?
We should be looking at all other factors .. not just coaching, which is hard to tease out and isolate from all else to accurately measure/rate, anyway.

Well articulated and augments some of what I think and guess in relation to the club and coach. It's why I think it was smart not to revert to the old administration paradigm of find a scapegoat or circuit breaker, call it whatever you like but essentially it is hitting the panic button just to appease the frothers and bubblers. And that is by no means to suggest the coach isn't part of the problem, but sacking a coach without a solution and plan in place has been the norm for so long now and my take on what's happening is we have Lethlean and co working away at the solution and plan in the background to find incremental improvement.

[Saintmatt]

"I think I have a lot to offer a team, especially one knocking on the door of the finals where I can go in and just play a role and not worry about getting the most out of the other blokes, which is the role I played at St Kilda this year."
- Mav Weller


This is why I don't think our list is that awful.

I reckon we have about 15 guys who aren't playing their natural game. McCartin and Bruce are two obvious ones, Weller is clearly another, and I reckon our entire midfield all play some sort of over-engineered style of football that is barely recognisable as AFL footy and is even less effective.

How many more do we have that aren't being allowed to play football? Free flowing, instinctive footy.


Instead, they're all part of some impossible dream of a coach that is out of his depth.


We can only hope, that Kingsley was the driving force behind it.

Your last sentence places a bit of ambiguity about the claim you are making which reads like Richo has a flawed theory of requiring players not to play thier natural game but your last sentence then reads like you're guessing it was Richos theory.

I'm absolutely guessing.

My position has always been that one of either Kingsley or Richardson must go. The way we play must rest at the feet of the either the head coach or the head tactician.

It's not the List, nor a fluke that we have no system.

I'm just hoping we pulled the right rein.

Wholeheartedly agree. The list is the list. Yes - it's entirely unbalanced with a preponderance of poorly skilled, slow, one-sided & undersized players. However - a list, in and of itself, is neither a system nor a game plan.

In respect of "pulling the right rein" - I truly believe that the rein we pulled was the only one that could be pulled.

When the numpty, resume-building CEO has increased the club's debt level to >$10M and then needlessly extended the under-performing coach and also removed said coach from the new Football Manager's review process (depending upon whom you believe) then, well, it can only be the chief tactician that has to walk the plank (albeit to 2017's Premier club).

I don't know whether it was The Dribbler or Kingsley's idea to move from a workable 'hard running, high press / pressure on the man/ball carrier' style to the 2018 version which largely revolved around 'guarding grass, not players / hoisting it high to a 1 on 3 forward' but I do know that if I had to go to work every day and listen to The Dribbler ... at some point, I'd probably just stay in bed or shoot myself. Either way - there'd not be a whole lot of passion about my performance.

[Sainternist]

Sounded like a winge from Mav to my ears.
He was pretty poor this year. So rather than being a victim of poor team form he could well take responsibility and realize he was a contributor to the poor firm.

Wish him well...but I seem to remember similar sour grapes when GCS moved him on to us.

Maverick by name, maverick by nature.