Hannebury - Indefinite

[HighettMan]

Disagree. Lethers is good for the club. He has brought in a number of good appointments. E.g. the assistants last year

We need a bit of mongrel. Lethers looks like he wants to get s*** sorted at Moorabbin.

One thing that has been immensely painful over the last 18mths... Moreover here on this forum rather than at the club per’se is the constant attempts to put a positive spin onto what are clearly bad decisions and outcomes.

Hannebery is a great example of it.

Brought in to essentially be our best mid and a leader. One of the highest paid at the club and was pricey in terms of cost.

Almost 12 months in and he’s booted from the leadership group, and has missed all but 2 games of the season with the injury that all knew about and were concerned would derail the rest of his career... that I should confirm, we as a club have admitted was worse than we thought.

On every measurable level, the decision to recruit him for what we gave up was clearly a bad one.

Not to say that Dan can’t get better and still be a good player for us or even represent good value... but it’s clear that the basis for that outcome was not formed by our due diligence... it’s on hope and prayer that it’s okay.

I for one and sick to death of “hoping” things work out instead doing the due diligence and making informed decisions to help maximise the chances of getting the results we want.

We hoped that 2018 was an aberration
We hoped that Kent would be the outside mid that we wanted
We hoped that Hannebery would be ok
We hoped that 2019 we’d recover and play finals... that Richo was a better coach than we were seeing

On and on it went

Great waffle.

Don't read anything positive then. Stay in a cycle of doom and gloom. It's much easier.

The easiest thing is lying to yourself rather than confronting reality.
You were the guy that predicted we’d bounce back this year and play finals... comforting thoughts for you I guess

Have you refined your pick for a coach yet? I'd imagine you've thoroughly assesed the strengths and weakness of the market. Let's start the discussion.

[skeptic]

To be honest HM, hard to really know given the absence of info.

A few ppl have some qualities that I admire but that’s about it. My only real preference is not to get Brad Scott because IMO it’s not the right look. It would reek of boys club (which there already is a perception of) and a 10yr coach that didn’t make it whose team has improved after he left... is just not the image I would prefer to build around. That said, he at least was very vocal in standing up for his club so I would keep an open mind

Do you have preference amongst the ppl that seem gettable?

[kalsaint]

Thank god Lethlean got him cheap. Would be interested to know which way his contract is loaded. We may have paid 1.6mill for this year.

Cheap ?
Surely you're joking.

$800,000 a year for four years = 3.2 million for a broken down, injury riddled player way past his prime.
St.kilda also forfeited their 2nd round draft selection position in this years draft which is likely to be pick 20, 21, or 22.
THIS IS NOT CHEAP, particularly for a player who is only going to play two games this year.
I predicted Hannebery would play six games at best this year before breaking down on the day they recruited him.

It was clearly obvious to anyone with a clue that Dan Hannebery was cooked after two very ordinary and injury riddled years.
I was hoping the club/Lethlean would not be so stupid when I first heard they were interested.

Simon Lethlean's decision making is shoddy at best.
The fact that he cheated on his wife is evidence of his poor decision making and is the only reason the club has him in this position at the St.kilda football club in a role he has never held before. Shipped off to St.kilda as a dumping ground to resurrect his corporate career and now the football club has to endure this foolish incompetence and his flawed decision making.

He offered 1.4 million for Dylan Shiel which would have cost the club pick four and Max King.
The only thing that saved him from making another huge mistake was Dylan Shiel rejecting St.kilda's/ Lethlean's offer.

This year Hannebery has cost the club $400,000 for each game he has played.
And you write "Thank god Lethlean got him cheap"

Then there is the matter of Lethlean being good mates with Hannebery's father.

Given Lethlean is good mates with Brad Scott he should not be on the selection committee for the next coach.
Given his decisions on Hannebery and Shiel he should not be on the selection committee of anything to do with this football club.
Both Lethlean and Finnis should be shown the door right now just like Alan Richardson was.

Both of these AFL snake oil salesmen have made horrendous decisions affecting the forward trajectory of the football club.

Is it any wonder the St.kilda football club is looked upon as a basket case when it's had buffoon's calling the shots for almost it's entire history.

Just lucky you aren't mad about this

[HighettMan]

To be honest HM, hard to really know given the absence of info.

A few ppl have some qualities that I admire but that’s about it. My only real preference is not to get Brad Scott because IMO it’s not the right look. It would reek of boys club (which there already is a perception of) and a 10yr coach that didn’t make it whose team has improved after he left... is just not the image I would prefer to build around. That said, he at least was very vocal in standing up for his club so I would keep an open mind

Do you have preference amongst the ppl that seem gettable?

I'm warming to Brett Ratten. Obviously has a CV that gets him an interview. However the most attractive aspect for mine with BR is the possibility of a smooth transition and can hit the ground running. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a succession plan put in place by SL last season.

The sooner we get stability back the better. Mind you I don't think there has been as much instability or kaos if any of note that is usually associated with a coach departure and so becuse BR has been at the club long enough to establish trusting relationships and confidence in his ability he would now be well placed to settle the organisation down quickly and sharpen everyones focus.

So obviously there is more to the position but I think our list is within striking distance of playing finals albeit we have a crucial trade period coming up and a coach that has just walked in the door could be flying blind and get it horribly wrong.

I will say straight up I don't think the Robert Harvey types would be a good fit right now for where we are in the development cycle. Harves needs to cut his teeth on a club that is at the start of their rebuild.

[ss1986]

You should all be banned for demeaning a Saints official!

Can't be demeaning if it's true.

Apparently that doesnt matter! One must obey and bow to the Supreme leaders!

[skeptic]

To be honest HM, hard to really know given the absence of info.

A few ppl have some qualities that I admire but that’s about it. My only real preference is not to get Brad Scott because IMO it’s not the right look. It would reek of boys club (which there already is a perception of) and a 10yr coach that didn’t make it whose team has improved after he left... is just not the image I would prefer to build around. That said, he at least was very vocal in standing up for his club so I would keep an open mind

Do you have preference amongst the ppl that seem gettable?

I'm warming to Brett Ratten. Obviously has a CV that gets him an interview. However the most attractive aspect for mine with BR is the possibility of a smooth transition and can hit the ground running. I wouldn't be surprised if this was a succession plan put in place by SL last season.

The sooner we get stability back the better. Mind you I don't think there has been as much instability or kaos if any of note that is usually associated with a coach departure and so becuse BR has been at the club long enough to establish trusting relationships and confidence in his ability he would now be well placed to settle the organisation down quickly and sharpen everyones focus.

So obviously there is more to the position but I think our list is within striking distance of playing finals albeit we have a crucial trade period coming up and a coach that has just walked in the door could be flying blind and get it horribly wrong.

I will say straight up I don't think the Robert Harvey types would be a good fit right now for where we are in the development cycle. Harves needs to cut his teeth on a club that is at the start of their rebuild.

Hey HM, thank you for your considered response. I did attempt to reply yesterday but somewhere between when I logged back on and hit submit I got banned.

I agree with your points on Ratten and think he would be a fine choice. Thought he was pretty decent at Carlton... his results were okay considering where he came in and what he had to work with and I think he was shafted before his time.

In addition to what you’ve already posted, I like the notion that he had a sustained run at the head coach role and then has had the opportunity to move on, reflect, work under a different coach/s and grow.
That type of experience seems fairly rare to me on cursory glance.

Furthermore, I think he has strong opinions on regarding an approach (pbly more an assumption on second hand info but still), has been captain and coach and a good player despite somewhat limited attributes that suggest good communication/leadership, strong work ethic and an understanding of what it takes. All very desirable qualities.

On Harvey, there are a fees trains of thought IMO.

First of all, Harvey was about as elite a player as they came with a preparation and work ethic that was just about second to none. Personally I think this is a particularly desirable quality because people with it are typically are self-reflective and constantly seeking to improve/address their weaknesses.
They may not start off as the best but will do everything in their power to get there.

In addition to this, he’s had the luxury of playing under a vast array of different coaches with different styles, seen different types of captains and of course worked with/under numerous different coaches/assistants. It’s actually a hell of an apprenticeship he has done.

And the final big point is that if you have read his book, Harvey detailed an incredible insight into the degree of thinking he put into his football... everything from how he measured if he was doing well or not, how to get back into games if he was being beaten... a real step by step visual approach to problem solving that I was super impressed with.
I get the impression from him that he has a real gift for mental preparation, psychological strength and overcoming doubts etc that was reflected in his career and is really a quality that this current group would requires.

The potential knock on Sir Robert from the outside looking in, as detailed by us laymen’s, is whether or not he has the outward leadership qualities... most notably communication to inspire people to follow him.
To be clear, I’m not saying he does or doesn’t but again as an outsider, that seems to be the potential doubt people have on him that has held him back thus far.

The challenge unfortunately IMO is that that is a quality that St.Kilda as a FC really requires. We don’t have powerful presidents or media support to drive an agenda or make a point... it seems to me that the coach of St.Kilda whoever they may be is in the unenviable position of being the guy that needs to generate enthusiasm and excitement to the club... especially if it goes through another rebuild.
For all of their faults, these were qualities that GT and RL excelled in in different ways.

The other big challenge I see with Harvey is that regardless of how good his pedigree is... and I think he’s certainly worth a shot somewhere, he has the additional knock of a perception of nepotism despite what he’s done to earn a shot as a coach. Again and it’s only my opinion... in the toughest job in football, it’s just another unnecessary hurdle.
Still, I would certainly get behind him as the reality is that few people have survived in the AFL as long as Rob has and that counts for something.

I also really like Lenny Hayes who exudes a high degree of leadership, high performance and excellent communication but it’s really too early for him. Love to have him back as an assistant IMO.

[HighettMan]

Hey HM, thank you for your considered response. I did attempt to reply yesterday but somewhere between when I logged back on and hit submit I got banned.

I agree with your points on Ratten and think he would be a fine choice. Thought he was pretty decent at Carlton... his results were okay considering where he came in and what he had to work with and I think he was shafted before his time.

In addition to what you’ve already posted, I like the notion that he had a sustained run at the head coach role and then has had the opportunity to move on, reflect, work under a different coach/s and grow.
That type of experience seems fairly rare to me on cursory glance.

Furthermore, I think he has strong opinions on regarding an approach (pbly more an assumption on second hand info but still), has been captain and coach and a good player despite somewhat limited attributes that suggest good communication/leadership, strong work ethic and an understanding of what it takes. All very desirable qualities.

On Harvey, there are a fees trains of thought IMO.

First of all, Harvey was about as elite a player as they came with a preparation and work ethic that was just about second to none. Personally I think this is a particularly desirable quality because people with it are typically are self-reflective and constantly seeking to improve/address their weaknesses.
They may not start off as the best but will do everything in their power to get there.

In addition to this, he’s had the luxury of playing under a vast array of different coaches with different styles, seen different types of captains and of course worked with/under numerous different coaches/assistants. It’s actually a hell of an apprenticeship he has done.

And the final big point is that if you have read his book, Harvey detailed an incredible insight into the degree of thinking he put into his football... everything from how he measured if he was doing well or not, how to get back into games if he was being beaten... a real step by step visual approach to problem solving that I was super impressed with.
I get the impression from him that he has a real gift for mental preparation, psychological strength and overcoming doubts etc that was reflected in his career and is really a quality that this current group would requires.

The potential knock on Sir Robert from the outside looking in, as detailed by us laymen’s, is whether or not he has the outward leadership qualities... most notably communication to inspire people to follow him.
To be clear, I’m not saying he does or doesn’t but again as an outsider, that seems to be the potential doubt people have on him that has held him back thus far.

The challenge unfortunately IMO is that that is a quality that St.Kilda as a FC really requires. We don’t have powerful presidents or media support to drive an agenda or make a point... it seems to me that the coach of St.Kilda whoever they may be is in the unenviable position of being the guy that needs to generate enthusiasm and excitement to the club... especially if it goes through another rebuild.
For all of their faults, these were qualities that GT and RL excelled in in different ways.

The other big challenge I see with Harvey is that regardless of how good his pedigree is... and I think he’s certainly worth a shot somewhere, he has the additional knock of a perception of nepotism despite what he’s done to earn a shot as a coach. Again and it’s only my opinion... in the toughest job in football, it’s just another unnecessary hurdle.
Still, I would certainly get behind him as the reality is that few people have survived in the AFL as long as Rob has and that counts for something.

I also really like Lenny Hayes who exudes a high degree of leadership, high performance and excellent communication but it’s really too early for him. Love to have him back as an assistant IMO.

Banning?

Your point re nepotism is an interesting one, I'm wondering if the outrage displayed towards Brad Scott being a possible selection due to a certain friendship is coming from the same people who want Robert Harvey selected.

Incidentally I did read Rob's book and thought it was a typical cookie cutter book about an AFL player and only marginally more stimulating and enlightening than reading articles from the HS. Nick's book I enjoyed mostly but find books on AFL players to be mostly boring reading.

If you haven't already read it, Ric Charlesworth book, "The Coach" is a great read. Probably anyone that has coached any team sport has read it.

I just think with Robert that he should have a crack at a club other than his beloved Saints. Time is on his side, if he is successful as head coach at another club then he could name his price when next applying for the head coach at St Kilda. This would be the best way for him to assume head coach at the Saints, he wouldn't be starting with big question marks over his head and I think he would be handicapped from day one at our club without giving us a look from a distance at how he goes in the position. A little bit of try before you buy. Because as you know Skeppers, we are very hard on our coaches here at the Saints. I'm saying this only applies to Robert and him possibly wanting to be head coach only at the Saints. For other candidates they wouldn't necessarily need this career path to our head coach position.

Robert should apply for the North Melbourne job. If he doesn't then I'll be thinking he has resigned to the realisation that he is best suited as a great 2IC man, a bit like Blakey at the Swans. Honestly I really hope he doesn't apply for the Saints gig this time around, I think the club made its decision late last year when Ratts was brought in. Robert will know if that is the case anyway and decline to apply. Who does and doesn't apply will give us some clues about where it's at for Harves and possibly others.

Incidentally, should we be outraged if Ratts walks straight into the job?, shouldn't we be asking questions about integrity of process and all that other BS that get's bandied around. Who says it's not a popularity contest. Brad Scott is going to need a PR consultant after this year's coaching circus is over for damage control to his reputation. I won't be surprised if he doesn't apply for any of the coaching jobs this time around. Probably would be wise to sit it out for a year or two while his reputation recovers.


Yeah Lenny is way off being ready.

[Special]

Be nice if we could get Craig Bellamy although he’s now 59

[skeptic]

Hey HM, thank you for your considered response. I did attempt to reply yesterday but somewhere between when I logged back on and hit submit I got banned.

I agree with your points on Ratten and think he would be a fine choice. Thought he was pretty decent at Carlton... his results were okay considering where he came in and what he had to work with and I think he was shafted before his time.

In addition to what you’ve already posted, I like the notion that he had a sustained run at the head coach role and then has had the opportunity to move on, reflect, work under a different coach/s and grow.
That type of experience seems fairly rare to me on cursory glance.

Furthermore, I think he has strong opinions on regarding an approach (pbly more an assumption on second hand info but still), has been captain and coach and a good player despite somewhat limited attributes that suggest good communication/leadership, strong work ethic and an understanding of what it takes. All very desirable qualities.

On Harvey, there are a fees trains of thought IMO.

First of all, Harvey was about as elite a player as they came with a preparation and work ethic that was just about second to none. Personally I think this is a particularly desirable quality because people with it are typically are self-reflective and constantly seeking to improve/address their weaknesses.
They may not start off as the best but will do everything in their power to get there.

In addition to this, he’s had the luxury of playing under a vast array of different coaches with different styles, seen different types of captains and of course worked with/under numerous different coaches/assistants. It’s actually a hell of an apprenticeship he has done.

And the final big point is that if you have read his book, Harvey detailed an incredible insight into the degree of thinking he put into his football... everything from how he measured if he was doing well or not, how to get back into games if he was being beaten... a real step by step visual approach to problem solving that I was super impressed with.
I get the impression from him that he has a real gift for mental preparation, psychological strength and overcoming doubts etc that was reflected in his career and is really a quality that this current group would requires.

The potential knock on Sir Robert from the outside looking in, as detailed by us laymen’s, is whether or not he has the outward leadership qualities... most notably communication to inspire people to follow him.
To be clear, I’m not saying he does or doesn’t but again as an outsider, that seems to be the potential doubt people have on him that has held him back thus far.

The challenge unfortunately IMO is that that is a quality that St.Kilda as a FC really requires. We don’t have powerful presidents or media support to drive an agenda or make a point... it seems to me that the coach of St.Kilda whoever they may be is in the unenviable position of being the guy that needs to generate enthusiasm and excitement to the club... especially if it goes through another rebuild.
For all of their faults, these were qualities that GT and RL excelled in in different ways.

The other big challenge I see with Harvey is that regardless of how good his pedigree is... and I think he’s certainly worth a shot somewhere, he has the additional knock of a perception of nepotism despite what he’s done to earn a shot as a coach. Again and it’s only my opinion... in the toughest job in football, it’s just another unnecessary hurdle.
Still, I would certainly get behind him as the reality is that few people have survived in the AFL as long as Rob has and that counts for something.

I also really like Lenny Hayes who exudes a high degree of leadership, high performance and excellent communication but it’s really too early for him. Love to have him back as an assistant IMO.

Banning?

Your point re nepotism is an interesting one, I'm wondering if the outrage displayed towards Brad Scott being a possible selection due to a certain friendship is coming from the same people who want Robert Harvey selected.

Incidentally I did read Rob's book and thought it was a typical cookie cutter book about an AFL player and only marginally more stimulating and enlightening than reading articles from the HS. Nick's book I enjoyed mostly but find books on AFL players to be mostly boring reading.

If you haven't already read it, Ric Charlesworth book, "The Coach" is a great read. Probably anyone that has coached any team sport has read it.

I just think with Robert that he should have a crack at a club other than his beloved Saints. Time is on his side, if he is successful as head coach at another club then he could name his price when next applying for the head coach at St Kilda. This would be the best way for him to assume head coach at the Saints, he wouldn't be starting with big question marks over his head and I think he would be handicapped from day one at our club without giving us a look from a distance at how he goes in the position. A little bit of try before you buy. Because as you know Skeppers, we are very hard on our coaches here at the Saints. I'm saying this only applies to Robert and him possibly wanting to be head coach only at the Saints. For other candidates they wouldn't necessarily need this career path to our head coach position.

Robert should apply for the North Melbourne job. If he doesn't then I'll be thinking he has resigned to the realisation that he is best suited as a great 2IC man, a bit like Blakey at the Swans. Honestly I really hope he doesn't apply for the Saints gig this time around, I think the club made its decision late last year when Ratts was brought in. Robert will know if that is the case anyway and decline to apply. Who does and doesn't apply will give us some clues about where it's at for Harves and possibly others.

Incidentally, should we be outraged if Ratts walks straight into the job?, shouldn't we be asking questions about integrity of process and all that other BS that get's bandied around. Who says it's not a popularity contest. Brad Scott is going to need a PR consultant after this year's coaching circus is over for damage control to his reputation. I won't be surprised if he doesn't apply for any of the coaching jobs this time around. Probably would be wise to sit it out for a year or two while his reputation recovers.


Yeah Lenny is way off being ready.

On Ratten, if they really earmarked him for the position 12 months ago and reckon he is the right person for the job... then why not.
What gives him a leg up over most other potential appointees is that they’ve had 12months to have a look at him up close. Am struggle to think of a better potential ‘process’.

Which brings me to my next talking point that is about the selection process. Would love to know more about it as from the outside looking it, it can appear rather nebulous.
Said process albeit over some different admins has brought Richo, Watters and Lyon... whilst a less thorough process got as GT and Blight. Quite the variance really. One would want to know exactly the club quantifies a good candidate and what of the things they do actually suggests that the candidate could excel.

I know in my field... health industry said process is a joke. 10 questions and a referee check. The questions are usually knowledge based, many specific to the organisation, HR suggests you can’t deviate of script and many managers are afraid to even ask f/u candidates.
Very little is found out about the actual candidate, their style, personality, values etc. most of the time my impression is that the most suitable candidate won’t even get the job as they’re not necessarily the best talkers. It been a heavy slog to try and change a culture whereby we start to attempt to identify good workers or ppl with excellent qualities opposed to ppl with a skill set of being great at answering questions.

Oh to be a fly on the wall

P.S- suspension for baiting that was. 24h. I’ll check out the suggested.