Wilkes BS

[BigMart]

I think openness is a stretch....

I've played many games in the wet being a Tasmanian, I can tell you, the most influential players are the big guys, with big bodies..... They straighten the team up and smalls feed off them. Brad Davis was a great wet weather player, 195cm108kg...
For structure, and for Rhys Wilkes was crucial...his subbing was silly, Scot acknowledged this.

How did we rate Wilkes in the First Quarter, it was pissing down then??

[plugger66]

I think openness is a stretch....

I've played many games in the wet being a Tasmanian, I can tell you, the most influential players are the big guys, with big bodies..... They straighten the team up and smalls feed off them. Brad Davis was a great wet weather player, 195cm108kg...
For structure, and for Rhys Wilkes was crucial...his subbing was silly, Scot acknowledged this.

How did we rate Wilkes in the First Quarter, it was pissing down then??

It can work the other way as well. We played a final against the Demons a while back and it was wet. Alves went with far to many talls and we ended up with all talls on the bench and lost our run. As for Wilkes he shouldnt have been subbed and it was an error. One that we can live with and learn as we won the game.

[The OtherThommo]

To suggest Watters is not at fault and it's "someone who does the paperworks" job is rubbish - Watters lives and dies by the on field moves he makes from the box it's his responsibility to KNOW when he can/ can't substitute a player... next we'll blame "Joe the camera man"

Nonsense. Why have a football department with people having different responsibilities for executing decisions made by the coaching staff if the execution is down to the group in the box? Why does any organisation have people in roles with differing responsibilities when the sole responsibility, as you seem to be suggesting, comes down to one bloke "upstairs"?

Why are O.H.&S staff employed? Legal counsel? Accountants? Engineers? Sales managers? Marketers? Truck drivers? Because they carry out a set of responsibilities in accordance with their skill and knowledge and their performance adds something of value to the organisation.

A leader's responsibility is primarily to ensure the right people are in the right jobs and they carry those jobs out in accordance with their responsibilities. It is not to appoint people and assume their responsibilities. And, I'm not even sure Watters would be responsible for the appointment of people in boundary line management roles. I thought the post Lyon structure was changed to more clearly delineate roles and responsibilities. Even if it wasn't, the old line about "why buy a dog and bark yourself?" does come to mind.

[Saints43]

To suggest Watters is not at fault and it's "someone who does the paperworks" job is rubbish - Watters lives and dies by the on field moves he makes from the box it's his responsibility to KNOW when he can/ can't substitute a player... next we'll blame "Joe the camera man"

I agree with this. It's the coaches job to understand all of the procedures associated with personnel management. And to take responsibility for their execution.

The Wilkes substitution isn't a massive issue but it's the first step to claiming it's not his job to know who plays the second half of grand finals.

[Saint_in_SA]

My take is that Watters was happy for Wilkes to come off regardless and that is why he told the porky. He assessed his stats up to that point, and aside from the goals he kicked, he didn't get/command enough of the footy for the time he was on the ground. Polo was serviceable with run in his legs in the last part of the game.

If there was a genuine mistake, then Watters needs to take responsibility and LEARN or the person responsible needs to take responsibility and LEARN so that it never happens again.

I hope Wilkes gets another chance to show his wares at AFL level again this week - however, with Kosi available he will be under pressure.

P.S Some of Joey's efforts when he needed to 'go' in a contested situation were poor. C'mon mate, don't leave all the hard stuff to Lenny in the middle!

[Teflon]

To suggest Watters is not at fault and it's "someone who does the paperworks" job is rubbish - Watters lives and dies by the on field moves he makes from the box it's his responsibility to KNOW when he can/ can't substitute a player... next we'll blame "Joe the camera man"

Nonsense. Why have a football department with people having different responsibilities for executing decisions made by the coaching staff if the execution is down to the group in the box? Why does any organisation have people in roles with differing responsibilities when the sole responsibility, as you seem to be suggesting, comes down to one bloke "upstairs"?

Why are O.H.&S staff employed? Legal counsel? Accountants? Engineers? Sales managers? Marketers? Truck drivers? Because they carry out a set of responsibilities in accordance with their skill and knowledge and their performance adds something of value to the organisation.

A leader's responsibility is primarily to ensure the right people are in the right jobs and they carry those jobs out in accordance with their responsibilities. It is not to appoint people and assume their responsibilities. And, I'm not even sure Watters would be responsible for the appointment of people in boundary line management roles. I thought the post Lyon structure was changed to more clearly delineate roles and responsibilities. Even if it wasn't, the old line about "why buy a dog and bark yourself?" does come to mind.

We arent talking BHP here with a bunch of functions providing expert advice 5 layers from the CEO FFS - we are talking about a football coach who is responsible for who is and isn't on the park.... is it really that much to ask that HE know the rules associated with his direct accountability??? Have we really descended into the abyss where it's always someone else's mistake and responsibility can be totally discounted by blaming the middle man??

What's next - I blame the umpiring dept cause I wasn't made aware that putting someone in a chocked hold is against the rules??

Watters should know this rule - u bet he does now....maybe we can reduce head count in the paperwork Dept??

[Teflon]

To suggest Watters is not at fault and it's "someone who does the paperworks" job is rubbish - Watters lives and dies by the on field moves he makes from the box it's his responsibility to KNOW when he can/ can't substitute a player... next we'll blame "Joe the camera man"

Nonsense. Why have a football department with people having different responsibilities for executing decisions made by the coaching staff if the execution is down to the group in the box? Why does any organisation have people in roles with differing responsibilities when the sole responsibility, as you seem to be suggesting, comes down to one bloke "upstairs"?

Why are O.H.&S staff employed? Legal counsel? Accountants? Engineers? Sales managers? Marketers? Truck drivers? Because they carry out a set of responsibilities in accordance with their skill and knowledge and their performance adds something of value to the organisation.

A leader's responsibility is primarily to ensure the right people are in the right jobs and they carry those jobs out in accordance with their responsibilities. It is not to appoint people and assume their responsibilities. And, I'm not even sure Watters would be responsible for the appointment of people in boundary line management roles. I thought the post Lyon structure was changed to more clearly delineate roles and responsibilities. Even if it wasn't, the old line about "why buy a dog and bark yourself?" does come to mind.

We arent talking BHP here with a bunch of functions providing expert advice 5 layers from the CEO FFS - we are talking about a football coach who is responsible for who is and isn't on the park.... is it really that much to ask that HE know the rules associated with his direct accountability??? Have we really descended into the abyss where it's always someone else's mistake and responsibility can be totally discounted by blaming the middle man??

What's next - I blame the umpiring dept cause I wasn't made aware that putting someone in a chocked hold is against the rules??

Watters should know this rule - u bet he does now....maybe we can reduce head count in the paperwork Dept??

[gringo]

My take is that Watters was happy for Wilkes to come off regardless and that is why he told the porky. He assessed his stats up to that point, and aside from the goals he kicked, he didn't get/command enough of the footy for the time he was on the ground. Polo was serviceable with run in his legs in the last part of the game.

If there was a genuine mistake, then Watters needs to take responsibility and LEARN or the person responsible needs to take responsibility and LEARN so that it never happens again.

I hope Wilkes gets another chance to show his wares at AFL level again this week - however, with Kosi available he will be under pressure.

P.S Some of Joey's efforts when he needed to 'go' in a contested situation were poor. C'mon mate, don't leave all the hard stuff to Lenny in the middle!

Maybe he's been on SS and knows the blackshirts on this forum want Polo executed. He was crapping himself having to justify his decision to the rabid hoards.