Harvey, whiteants, SuperNanny, cleanout?

[Tony_Clifton]

With Harvey running the show I thought he would be bound to ruffle a few feathers, especially with the understanding the players were running the show under Connolly.

My understanding of Harvey's coaching style is that it is a no thrills approach with discipline and team first principles (I guess all coaches would say that but compared to Connolly, Harvey is Super Nanny). It needs the players to be committed to work. Obviously Harvey had the end of year sit down with each of the players and it looks like he believes they can make it work. No official removal of any white anters yet. No cleanout yet.

Dropping those 6 players and making Hase take a pay cut may be the beginning of make us into a football team, not a lifestyle choice for easy going footballers.

Thoughts?


besides the fact that I couldn't think of an appropriate title

[Dyslexic Emo]

broadbridge maybe? I personally think that he was pushed to leave?

[Avid_Avenger]

I would have pushed him, quite happily.

From all reports Broadbridge is a dud and I'll never forget his words as the players boarded the plane for Adelaide following CC's departure- he pulled a face when asked whether he'd be happy to work under Harvey and said Harves was very experienced but he was also and had high ambitions to become a senior coach - or something there abouts.

Not a team player in my book!

[NiGHTFuRY]

Good luck to Broadbridge at the slime. I'm not going to bag him as he at least put effort into trying to guide us into a force along with CC. It may not have worked out for us as we hoped, but that's life sometimes.

However a new era is upon us.... :thumbsu::thumbsu::);)

Harvey Fresh!

[GentlemanJeff]

Dropping those 6 players and making Hase take a pay cut may be the beginning of make us into a football team, not a lifestyle choice for easy going footballers.



This is your first sensible post Clifton. Well done.

You are bang on the money with your comment above. Too many players at Fremantle see football as a simple money making exersize - this would be fine if they were performing but they are not. They are a bunch of overpaid, underperforming party boys.

There were only about 3 players on the list who could honestly say they earnt their pay packet in 2007. The rest should have been emabarassed to cut their pay cheque each week.

[Roundhouse]

With Harvey running the show I thought he would be bound to ruffle a few feathers, especially with the understanding the players were running the show under Connolly.

My understanding of Harvey's coaching style is that it is a no thrills approach with discipline and team first principles (I guess all coaches would say that but compared to Connolly, Harvey is Super Nanny). It needs the players to be committed to work. Obviously Harvey had the end of year sit down with each of the players and it looks like he believes they can make it work. No official removal of any white anters yet. No cleanout yet.

Dropping those 6 players and making Hase take a pay cut may be the beginning of make us into a football team, not a lifestyle choice for easy going footballers.

Thoughts?


besides the fact that I couldn't think of an appropriate title

We have suspended players before. We have made players take pay-cuts before.

I'm all for supporting Harvey, but lets not re-write history.

Farmer was suspended for 6 weeks under Connolly and given his last chance, the day after Connolly left was in trouble again, yet continued to play under Harvey. I fail to see how Harvey was "tougher" on discipline than Connolly in that regard.

I'd love to believe the fairy tale about how "hard-nosed" coaches like Worsfold or Pagan or Malthouse, or Mathews, put the fear of god into players who subsequently never step out of line, but it's just not true.

I don't think we are doing Harvey any favours by declaring "an new era of toughness has begun" every time he sneezes.

[Memories]

We have suspended players before. We have made players take pay-cuts before.

I'm all for supporting Harvey, but lets not re-write history.

Farmer was suspended for 6 weeks under Connolly and given his last chance, the day after Connolly left was in trouble again, yet continued to play under Harvey. I fail to see how Harvey was "tougher" on discipline than Connolly in that regard.

I'd love to believe the fairy tale about how "hard-nosed" coaches like Worsfold or Pagan or Malthouse, or Mathews, put the fear of god into players who subsequently never step out of line, but it's just not true.

I don't think we are doing Harvey any favours by declaring "an new era of toughness has begun" every time he sneezes.


Roundhouse, the CC family member who still thinks he can take us to a flag.....?

Anytime I see someone fat, who isn't old, I know how much commitment they can make.... not much. That's Chris Connolly and his journey, someone who managed to underachieve for over half his contract and was terrible at gameday decisions.

A carbon rod would instill more fear into the playing group than CC.

[Belnakor]

You are bang on the money with your comment above. Too many players at Fremantle see football as a simple money making exersize - this would be fine if they were performing but they are not. They are a bunch of overpaid, underperforming party boys.


Yup, you've got people coming to the club as a lifestyle choice. Being an AFL footballer should not be easy. It should be hard. You should have to work your guts out, train hard and put your body on the line week in, week out, and you get paid handsomely for such a huge commitment.

Alot of guys at Freo just cut their pay check and look forward to another week of surfing, going to concerts during the week and drinking a few sneaky beers when they can. Not good enough.

[Roundhouse]

Roundhouse, the CC family member who still thinks he can take us to a flag.....?

Anytime I see someone fat, who isn't old, I know how much commitment they can make.... not much. That's Chris Connolly and his journey, someone who managed to underachieve for over half his contract and was terrible at gameday decisions.

A carbon rod would instill more fear into the playing group than CC.

I'm not going to argue with a tool whose football knowledge amounts to suggesting we tank after round three, but I will reiterate.

Saying that Harvey has instilled fear into this playing group assumes that:

a) They know they will be severely punished for transgressing (given that Farmer's transgression was ignored, I'm not sure that Harvey has clearly sent that message).

and

b) They are too scared to transgress under Harvey (the number of players defying team rules prior to round 22 suggests this is not the case either).

I think all this re-writing of history that supporters are doing by claiming that Harvey has brought discipline to the club is a bit premature. I realise that some feel the need to talk up Harvey, and fair enough, but let's not ignore the facts and re-write history in the process.

[Tony_Clifton]

I'm not saying that in the last six weeks Harvey has transformed our transgressors. His challenge and strength as a coach will lie in turning the players around from a me first principle.

Connolly on the other hand was very football smart and tactically proficient but had trouble in applying this to our players. If he had the full support of a committed team he could have been awesome. A little like Neesham in that he was ahead of his time. He introduced rotating off the bench which is now considered standard but when he introduced it many couldn't understand taking your best players off the ground.

Harvey does not have CC's smarts but what he does have is a hard nosed approach. Its not like we are a committed and disciplined team at the minute but that is Harveys challenge over the preseason.

[Topdock65]

Its early days so far, but i have been impressed with Harvey handling of the media. No spin or 4 paragraph answers to questions. Very considered.

Its like our club has now a policy of keeping out of the media :thumbsu:, let our cross town rivals get all the press they crave and we are happy to sit in the background.

Just feel this is the Coach we need to make a impact on the competion.

[Roundhouse]

I'm not saying that in the last six weeks Harvey has transformed our transgressors. His challenge and strength as a coach will lie in turning the players around from a me first principle.

Connolly on the other hand was very football smart and tactically proficient but had trouble in applying this to our players. If he had the full support of a committed team he could have been awesome. A little like Neesham in that he was ahead of his time. He introduced rotating off the bench which is now considered standard but when he introduced it many couldn't understand taking your best players off the ground.

Harvey does not have CC's smarts but what he does have is a hard nosed approach. Its not like we are a committed and disciplined team at the minute but that is Harveys challenge over the preseason.

I agree with most of that. I do believe we have played committed and disciplined football under Connolly (our second half of last year) but getting them to consistently play at that high level has proven a harder challenge.

I hope Harvey is the guy to bring this consistency, and am 100% behind him, I'm just not going to declare that he already done so. As you said, the challenge lies ahead.

[Memories]

I'm not going to argue with a tool whose football knowledge amounts to suggesting we tank after round three, but I will reiterate.

I was calling for CCs head at round 3, not to tank. If we had have changed coaches in round 3 like I suggested, we would have played finals this year in my opinion (do you disagree?). After years of "players don't support the coach" rumours and underperforming he should have been removed much earlier. Harvey showed more tactics in the last 6 games than CC did in the last 3 years, all CC was good at was being friendly to our players and letting them have the freo cafe lifestyle 24/7.

Eventually I said it would be better to "tank" and get high picks by playing our younger players and seeing which ones could progress (ala what harvey did during the last game), this was about round 12 iirc. I said this because I knew we were out of finals contention and it would be in our best interests. I'd rather be near the bottom of the table if we don't make the finals rather than "close but no cigar".

You can't win the GF every year, so getting favourable picks should be the priority in any year we can't get close to a GF.

[GentlemanJeff]

I was calling for CCs head at round 3, not to tank. If we had have changed coaches in round 3 like I suggested, we would have played finals this year in my opinion (do you disagree?). After years of "players don't support the coach" rumours and underperforming he should have been removed much earlier. Harvey showed more tactics in the last 6 games than CC did in the last 3 years, all CC was good at was being friendly to our players and letting them have the freo cafe lifestyle 24/7.

Eventually I said it would be better to "tank" and get high picks by playing our younger players and seeing which ones could progress (ala what harvey did during the last game), this was about round 12 iirc. I said this because I knew we were out of finals contention and it would be in our best interests. I'd rather be near the bottom of the table if we don't make the finals rather than "close but no cigar".

You can't win the GF every year, so getting favourable picks should be the priority in any year we can't get close to a GF.

I agree with every point made in the above post.

[Dyslexic Emo]

Who cares? You are the biggest twit I have encountered in a long, long time.

I agree with every point made in the above post.

[Roundhouse]

I was calling for CCs head at round 3, not to tank. If we had have changed coaches in round 3 like I suggested, we would have played finals this year in my opinion (do you disagree?). After years of "players don't support the coach" rumours and underperforming he should have been removed much earlier. Harvey showed more tactics in the last 6 games than CC did in the last 3 years, all CC was good at was being friendly to our players and letting them have the freo cafe lifestyle 24/7.

Eventually I said it would be better to "tank" and get high picks by playing our younger players and seeing which ones could progress (ala what harvey did during the last game), this was about round 12 iirc. I said this because I knew we were out of finals contention and it would be in our best interests. I'd rather be near the bottom of the table if we don't make the finals rather than "close but no cigar".

You can't win the GF every year, so getting favourable picks should be the priority in any year we can't get close to a GF.

Here is where you suggested tanking prior to round four!

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7243158&postcount=6

You've also suggested that some Freo players place bets on the opposition then play badly for profit, and postulated that you could play for the Dockers, not because you play football, but because you supposedly have low body fat!

You are joke, with zero credibility.

You know nothing of tactics and SFA about footy in general.

[SPEEDWAGON]

memories, belnakor and gentleman jeff all on the same page.

far out!

[GentlemanJeff]

Here is where you suggested tanking prior to round four!

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7243158&postcount=6

.

That post (which was made less than 3 weeks into the season) is spookily prophetic in my opinion.

The club would be in a much stronger position now had they taken Memories advice.

By digging these old posts up, Roundhouse is doing nothing more than proving that Memories is arguably one of the most knowledgeable posters on the Freo board.

[peppy la pew]

Roundhouse, the CC family member who still thinks he can take us to a flag.....?

Anytime I see someone fat, who isn't old, I know how much commitment they can make.... not much. That's Chris Connolly and his journey, someone who managed to underachieve for over half his contract and was terrible at gameday decisions.

A carbon rod would instill more fear into the playing group than CC.


So you judge a persons capability on their body weight,

Thank **** you have nothing to do with the running of my club,

stick to looking into full size mirrors and stroking your ego ,you conceited fool

[Memories]

Here is where you suggested tanking prior to round four!

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=7243158&postcount=6

You've also suggested that some Freo players place bets on the opposition then play badly for profit, and postulated that you could play for the Dockers, not because you play football, but because you supposedly have low body fat!

You are joke, with zero credibility.

You know nothing of tactics and SFA about footy in general.

Err get it right, I said if we lose to Melbourne, pretty much one of the worst teams of 2007, we should tank. Did we lose? No, so I didn't suggest to actually tank until about round 12. You not being able to make this distinction puts into focus your lack of intelligence.

With hindsight, everything I said would have been PERFECT ADVICE for Freo, though with your stubbornness and lack of intelligence I doubt you see it. I knew CC would be booted during the season, I stressed we should DO IT NOW (round 4) to find out if Harvey is up to scratch for most of a SEASON. Thankfully the 6 games he did coach were fairly decent showings so we had enough to hire him on, but that was the risk we took by waiting.

If Harvey had have came on even at round 12 I think we would have made the finals and my suggestion to tank would have been removed. All of my advice about tanking was with CC at the helm, with Harvey there it may have been different. As soon as it's too hard to make a decent dent in the finals we should play all of our rookies and hangers on just to see if they can improve from it. Give our injured players an extended "preseason" by fixing their injuries and have a big stab at next year.

If we never make hard choices we will never win a premiership unless we luck upon our own Judd or million in one chance thing (eg. all other teams have bad injuries). That's why you roundhouse will always be someone who rarely achieves anything in life, extrapolating from your posts here.

[Memories]

So you judge a persons capability on their body weight,

Thank **** you have nothing to do with the running of my club,

stick to looking into full size mirrors and stroking your ego ,you conceited fool

I judge a persons "will" or "mental toughness" on aspects like body weight, yes. It is hard to have a low fat percentage. When you are in a sporting arena would you let someone who is old and fat play? No. Now you say "CC didn't have to play he just had to coach" and I say SURE. However if you've ever been around any sort of team environment you will find you respect people if they can do what they "preach".

So when Chris Connolly is telling hasleby to lay off the chops do you think Hasleby respects CC in the same way he would if an athletic coach said the same? When CC is criticizing the team about not running hard enough you don't think the players probably chuckle a bit about it? CC is young and can still exercise but he doesn't. I don't respect that aspect of CC since I am pretty fit myself, you think super fit AFL stars would?

I would say it plays somewhat to some of our players having attitude problems when the coach, the most visual public figure of the team doesn't care about his fitness and appearance. Sheedy and Lethal can get away with it, they already earned their respect, CC didn't.

[peppy la pew]

Sheedy and Lethal can get away with it, they already earned their respect, CC didn't.


That is the biggest cop out, ever.

Your post reinforces the glaring fact for mine, of how shallow a person you are.

Dead set, CC was overweight and that is why the players dis respect him :rolleyes:

20 years ago my coach was a fat bastard, and was highly respected, now he is turning over 20 mill a year, and he is, a really fat bastard.

What a ****ing dud, he obviously has no "Will" or "Mental Toughness"

Back to the mirror stud

[Kram81]

Mark Williams coached a premiership side and he has breasts!:D

[peppy la pew]

Mark Williams coached a premiership side and he has breasts!:D


Stop talking sense you clown


They are not breasts, not a nipple in sight


Man-Boobs is the word you are looking for :D

[Memories]

I'm not saying a fat person can't take a side to the GF or even win one (though notice how mark williams got fatter AFTER winning the GF? ;) ).

What I am saying is when you have undisciplined players you need someone the players can respect, and that ties somewhat into CCs weight issues. It isn't the only reason, like so many people here are quick to jump on whenever someone live me says something you aren't used to.

[Lach72]

I'm not saying a fat person can't take a side to the GF or even win one (though notice how mark williams got fatter AFTER winning the GF? ;) ).

What I am saying is when you have undisciplined players you need someone the players can respect, and that ties somewhat into CCs weight issues. It isn't the only reason, like so many people here are quick to jump on whenever someone live me says something you aren't used to.

Only when you speak complete BS...that just happens to be every time you open your mouth

[peppy la pew]

Only when you speak complete BS...that just happens to be every time you open your mouth



I sense a pattern emerging

[Memories]

Only when you speak complete BS...that just happens to be every time you open your mouth

Yeah I mean, we would have made the finals in all likelihood had the guys at Freo listened to my "complete bs". But lets not let results get in the way of you speaking nonsense about others.

[peppy la pew]

Yeah I mean, we would have made the finals in all likelihood had the guys at Freo listened to my "complete bs". But lets not let results get in the way of you speaking nonsense about others.


No brains, according to you, we would of made the finals if CC was 15 kilos lighter


Back to the mirror to check the skin folds

[Memories]

No brains, according to you, we would of made the finals if CC was 15 kilos lighter


Back to the mirror to check the skin folds

Funny when people make "intelligence" based insults then screw up the grammar.

I seriously can't believe how so many people here are bad at reading comprehension, it's staggering.

[Kram81]

http://morningglory2.files.wordpress.com/2006/04/grammarpolice.jpg

[Lach72]

Funny when people make "intelligence" based insults then screw up the grammar.

I seriously can't believe how so many people here are bad at reading comprehension, it's staggering.

Or basic thinking...

[peppy la pew]

Funny when people make "intelligence" based insults then screw up the grammar.

I seriously can't believe how so many people here are bad at reading comprehension, it's staggering.



What's staggering is your perception of an individual, based on their weight.

would of , would've...............hang me

I never claimed to be intelligent, I jacked it mid way through year 10.

Once again perception is your downfall

How's the mirror ?

[Ripper]

I feel inadequate now , this thread has gone downhill and instead of spending time on the exercise bike so I can look buff , I have been cutting trees down on one of my rental properties.

Do you think that maybe CC didn't have spare time to go to the gym as from all reports he spent 24/7 trying to do the best he could for us?

[Kram81]

Yeah ridiculous.

Many portly men have achieved various great feats - Meatloaf, Marlon Brando, Mark Williams, Luciano Pavarotti, John Candy and that fat bloke with braces from the afternoon cooking show on channel 10.

CC eating a few doughnuts had nothing to do with his success as a coach.

[thebaxters]

Question that is on my mind that really says something about how we feel about the new coach: how long will we be prepared to give Harvey a shot for, before the grumbling starts and folks start asking for his head? Term of current contract? 5 years? End of our "premiership window"?

What if another coach was shopped around next year after a year with similar results to 2007? An inexperienced but hard nut like Voss? An experienced but looong term planner like Sheedy? An experienced and (ex)hard nut like Leigh Matthews? An experienced and tanned bloke like Wallace?*

TBH - I felt Harvey was a good choice given the options available to us, but I am in no way enamoured with him, and given other names out there, I'd preferentially take them in a heartbeat. I'd love to be corrected, but I don't think Harvey will be the Messiah, I think he is on a steep learning curve as the #1, and we'll have to wear the bumps that go with that.





* clearly joking about Terry

[estibador]

* clearly joking about Terry

Why joking? Anyone like Wallace who takes pride in their appearance and has the discipline to spend three hours a day at the solarium must be a fantastic coach.

[Moo]

Mammaries

If they had listened to you and tanked - Pav would have left and Bell retired.

Maybe you should have a burger and an ice cream, I think your brain is suffering from low levels of fat.

[bushie]

I feel inadequate now , this thread has gone downhill and instead of spending time on the exercise bike so I can look buff , I have been cutting trees down on one of my rental properties.

Do you think that maybe CC didn't have spare time to go to the gym as from all reports he spent 24/7 trying to do the best he could for us?

Oi !!!!

There aren't enough trees in Meeka as it is!!

Bloody vandal.:D

P.S.

Memories you are a vain, egotistical tool.

[Keyser Soze]

Fantastic thread guys - great read.:thumbsu:

Memories your insight knows no boundaries.

[Ripper]

Oi !!!!

There aren't enough trees in Meeka as it is!!

Bloody vandal.:D

P.S.

Memories you are a vain, egotistical tool.

They were dead.

I'm a lumberjack and I'm ok....

[Belnakor]

Question that is on my mind that really says something about how we feel about the new coach: how long will we be prepared to give Harvey a shot for, before the grumbling starts and folks start asking for his head? Term of current contract? 5 years? End of our "premiership window"?


Harvs has 2 years. If we don't have a turn around with our current list i'd say he'll be done and dusted by the end of 2009.



TBH - I felt Harvey was a good choice given the options available to us, but I am in no way enamoured with him, and given other names out there, I'd preferentially take them in a heartbeat. I'd love to be corrected, but I don't think Harvey will be the Messiah, I think he is on a steep learning curve as the #1, and we'll have to wear the bumps that go with that.


Got to agree. Harvs has shown us a bit, but we definately have a messiah complex where one guy is going to come into the club and lead us to a premiership. Harvs has a big big job ahead of him, and in reality he has no senior experience beyond a couple of games this year.

[sonofswift]

Harvey does not have CC's smarts but what he does have is a hard nosed approach. Its not like we are a committed and disciplined team at the minute but that is Harveys challenge over the preseason.

I hope Harvey learned something from Sheeds and Connolly to add to his hard nose approach. Look at how far the Roos got with limited talent.

[thebaxters]

Harvs has 2 years. If we don't have a turn around with our current list i'd say he'll be done and dusted by the end of 2009.
Would you still give him the 2 years if Matthews (footy nous and hard nosed) was available next year, and we'd just scraped into the 8 in 2008? I'm a bit undecided on this - I think you have to give any new coach a good run at it (minimum 2 years - probably 3), and I really liked the fact we gave CC a good crack at it, but Harvey has already had a year and a bit at the club as assistant, and I'm not that enamoured that I can't see a more experienced coach being a better prospect of a flag in a 3-4 year window. I reckon I'd take the more bankable option; experience over speculation (much like trading established players over draft picks).

Who knows, maybe we'll win it this year :o Harves turns out better than Bomber and it's all a moot point adn we don't think about coaching staff for many years (I really, really hope so), but I don't like our recent history of dumping coaches mid-season and then having to "settle" on a coach. I'd rather grind out the rest of the year and have the off-season to court and sign a new coach. If we don't get results this year, I'd focus all of our energy on fixing that rather than a players list (general consensus being that we have the cattle) and actively hunt a coach.

FWIW, I have nothing against Harvey, I rated him as a player, I like that he stuck with us rather than making a play for the Essendon role and he may be the coach of the century, but I just don't like our decisions to blood coaches at senior level...

[Freo Shark]

Harvey has only just been appointed and we're talking about ditching him ??

FFS, you have to give a coach the confidence and time for him to build or in our case adjust the list and his footy dept for his own personal style.

I think it will take till 2009\10 before we see Freo hopefully push towards being a premiership threat.

[GentlemanJeff]

Harvey has only just been appointed and we're talking about ditching him ??

FFS, you have to give a coach the confidence and time for him to build or in our case adjust the list and his footy dept for his own personal style.

I think it will take till 2009\10 before we see Freo hopefully push towards being a premiership threat.

This comment just encapsulates you perfectly FreoShark - with you the premiership cup is just a mirage in the desert, always 2 or 3 years out of reach.

I am not prepared to wait until 2010. I think we can win the cup in 2008.

Harvey has inherited a premiership team that just needs a little tweeking and needs to get hungry.

Harvey does not have 3 years grace. I am willing to give him 1 year to perform - after that the knives come out as far as I am concerned.

[bushie]

This comment just encapsulates you perfectly FreoShark - with you the premiership cup is just a mirage in the desert, always 2 or 3 years out of reach.

I am not prepared to wait until 2010. I think we can win the cup in 2008.

Harvey has inherited a premiership team that just needs a little tweeking and needs to get hungry.

Harvey does not have 3 years grace. I am willing to give him 1 year to perform - after that the knives come out as far as I am concerned.


Yeh that's right GJ.....let our proud history of instability continue.

Sharpen that knife son!!

:rolleyes:

[Belnakor]

Yeh that's right GJ.....let our proud history of instability continue.

Sharpen that knife son!!

:rolleyes:

Letting a coach stay when the team underperforming creates instability.

[Lach72]

Letting a coach stay when the team underperforming creates instability.

After 1 year?

[bushie]

Letting a coach stay when the team underperforming creates instability.


Stating that you are going to knife a rookie coach after his first year does the same.

Jesus H Christ on a wooden leg, give the guy a chance.

Oh....I must mention how surprised I was to see you jump in and back up GJ!!



NOT!!!

[dockertor]

As I've always said the players play the game and the players win and lose games not the coach.

[GentlemanJeff]

Yeh that's right GJ.....let our proud history of instability continue.

Sharpen that knife son!!

:rolleyes:

Think thing is, guys like FreoShark will always be saying "three more years" "three more years" "three more years". Everytime an oppurtunity slips by you will have a guy like Freo Shark saying "our time will come...three more years".

The window is open now. We need to jump through.

Harvey has a bloody good list, he just needs to get the most out of it.

I actually like Harvey, but the truth is, if we fail to make an impact in the finals next year then he has failed given the quality of our list.

[Belnakor]

As I've always said the players play the game and the players win and lose games not the coach.

you must not watch much football.

[Ripper]

you must not watch much football.

How come Choco and Leathal didn't get sacked after 2006 then?

Both had better than 1/2 a team of premiership players.

[GentlemanJeff]

How come Choco and Leathal didn't get sacked after 2006 then?

Both had better than 1/2 a team of premiership players.

Choco and Lethal didnt get the sack because they made the most of their premiership window in the years prior.

Choco and Lethal are evidence of the fact that it is crucial to take your oppurtunity when the premiership window presents itself.

[Ripper]

Choco and Lethal didnt get the sack because they made the most of their premiership window in the years prior.

Choco and Lethal are evidence of the fact that it is crucial to take your oppurtunity when the premiership window presents itself.


So you agree that the players make the coach.

[GentlemanJeff]

As I've always said the players play the game and the players win and lose games not the coach.

The coach has a crucial role to play in getting the most out of the list.

How does Dockertor account for the success of the Kangas this year? They had a workmanlike team, yet they played of for a shot in the final. The junk yard dog got the most out of a workmanlike list.

Ang again, look at Choco and Port. Choco took a young Port list and got then to the final - he got the most out of his list.

The suggestion that a coach is not responsible for a teams performance is fanciful.

[dockertor]

you must not watch much football.

Watched and been involved in a lot of football, Enough to know sh1t from clay, unlike you

[GentlemanJeff]

When ever Pav's contract comes up for renewal the club always spin him the same line: "Sign up for one more contract Pav, because we've got a three year window here".

We spun Pav that line in 04, and again in 07. He has bought it twice, but will he buy it thrice?

By 2010 if we are still on the Freo Shark "three year journey" do you think Pav will re-sign?

We need success within the next 2 years as a priority. Failing this I actually fear for the long term viability of the club.

[dockertor]

The coach has a crucial role to play in getting the most out of the list.

How does Dockertor account for the success of the Kangas this year? They had a workmanlike team, yet they played of for a shot in the final. The junk yard dog got the most out of a workmanlike list.

Ang again, look at Choco and Port. Choco took a young Port list and got then to the final - he got the most out of his list.

The suggestion that a coach is not responsible for a teams performance is fanciful.

In fact the idea that a coach is entirely responsible for a team’s performance is ludicrous. We lost games because players miss shots on goal, because players kick directly to the opposition, because players haven’t got the speed to outrun opponents, because players cant win the ball at a stoppage (this one does also involve coaching and setups). The coach does none of these things.

[Lach72]

When ever Pav's contract comes up for renewal the club always spin him the same line: "Sign up for one more contract Pav, because we've got a three year window here".

We spun Pav that line in 04, and again in 07. He has bought it twice, but will he buy it thrice?

By 2010 if we are still on the Freo Shark "three year journey" do you think Pav will re-sign?

We need success within the next 2 years as a priority. Failing this I actually fear for the long term viability of the club.

You are Frank from Canning Vale aren't you? I've never seen such a succession of moronic tripe

[GentlemanJeff]

In fact the idea that a coach is entirely responsible for a team’s performance is ludicrous. We lost games because players miss shots on goal, because players kick directly to the opposition, because players haven’t got the speed to outrun opponents, because players cant win the ball at a stoppage (this one does also involve coaching and setups). The coach does none of these things.

But hang on, if a player is missing shots on goal, kicking to the opposition, is too slow, or is too old, the the coach should not pick him.

But if the coach keeps on picking these players and doesnt give someone else a chance, then when the team keeps losing the coach is responsible.

The coach has absolute control. He picks the game plan, he decides the team list each week, he decides who to recruit.

If the coach keeps picking players that: miss targets, miss shots on goal, dont follow the game plan, are too slow, then guess what: That coach is a shithouse coach.

[dockertor]

But hang on, if a player is missing shots on goal, kicking to the opposition, is too slow, or is too old, the the coach should not pick him.

But if the coach keeps on picking these players and doesnt give someone else a chance, then when the team keeps losing the coach is responsible.

The coach has absolute control. He picks the game plan, he decides the team list each week, he decides who to recruit.

If the coach keeps picking players that: miss targets, miss shots on goal, dont follow the game plan, are too slow, then guess what: That coach is a shithouse coach.


Or perhaps there are no BETTER players to pick. The coach can only pick the best side from whats available. The eveness of the competition is such that a few mistakes costs games, You somehow assume there better players just waiting in the wings than the ones we put on the park. Somehow I think the coaches who work full time with these guys know them better than you.

[Roundhouse]

But hang on, if a player is missing shots on goal, kicking to the opposition, is too slow, or is too old, the the coach should not pick him.

But if the coach keeps on picking these players and doesnt give someone else a chance, then when the team keeps losing the coach is responsible.

The coach has absolute control. He picks the game plan, he decides the team list each week, he decides who to recruit.

If the coach keeps picking players that: miss targets, miss shots on goal, dont follow the game plan, are too slow, then guess what: That coach is a shithouse coach.

Damn you Connolly! If only you had dropped Pavlich for the Collingwood game, and Thornton for the Kanga's game we woulda made the finals. :rolleyes:

Gotta love supporters who feel justified in criticising from the cheap seats (with the benefit of hindsight no less). Bless their ignorant, egomaniacal little hearts.

[GentlemanJeff]

Or perhaps there are no BETTER players to pick.

If a coach cant replace a player that "cant hit a target, kick a goal, and is too slow" then that is an indictment on his list management and recruiting.

And when it comes to Freo's list there were plenty of people deserving of being dropped to make way for some fresh blood. The truth is Cuddles played favourites with certain players at the club - they knew they were untouchable so they didnt care if they underperformed.

[Roundhouse]

If a coach cant replace a player that "cant hit a target, kick a goal, and is too slow" then that is an indictment on his list management and recruiting.

By that rationale every coach in the comp should be sacked bar the premiership coach. Every other team is not good enough (even Laidley's who's coaching you praised earlier) so it is an indictment on their coachs' list management and recruiting.

The position you take is easy to argue from (all you have to say is "we haven't won a flag, so the coach is not getting the most out of his players or his list management/recruiting has been shit), but it requires you to admit that every coach is shit except the one currently on top.

Hardly insightful stuff, in fact it's a scarily child-like view of things that indicates a footy intellect well below the average Freo poster here.

Having said that, I'm sure the folks at wehavethepoison would lap it up. :thumbsu:

[dockertor]

If a coach cant replace a player that "cant hit a target, kick a goal, and is too slow" then that is an indictment on his list management and recruiting.

And when it comes to Freo's list there were plenty of people deserving of being dropped to make way for some fresh blood. The truth is Cuddles played favourites with certain players at the club - they knew they were untouchable so they didnt care if they underperformed.

But the whole point is the players picked were our best players for the match in the opinion of the selection panel. The truth is you have no idea and want scapegoats so you go for the coach or the assistant coaches or the boot studder or whoever you can think of.

[Belnakor]

The buck has to stop at the coach. The coach does the recruiting, he manages the game plan. Why he would not be responsible for the team losing? You are just talking crap if you think the coach can't do anything about poor players. If a player is missing targets, then he needs to work on his kicking, and the coach needs to help him. Its not rocket science, but the coach gets paid like 400k because he is DIRECTLY responsible for the teams performance. You guys seem to want a guy like Harvs to have free reign at the club for 3 years with no kind of performance appraisals. That is just bullshit. He needs to work with the list which he inherited. If it isn't a finals list, then he should say so, and say its going to take 3 years for him to get them up to scratch, and the reasons why its not a good list. But at the moment we have a good list, we just need a little bit more pace.

Cuddles was reknowned for playing favourites. Guys like M.Carr were getting a game every week based on reputation and Cuddles not wanting to ruffle a few feathers. That is bad coaching. That is why the team was losing. You want to talk about how the players win the match when the coach is selecting players who are too slow, disinterested and have poor skills? You want to talk about players winning a match when Connolly leaves Thorton while his opponent kicks 5 and wins them the game?

Teams have plans. The coach is in charge of the plan, and 2 things can make it go badly, the plan is poor, or the players aren't able to execute it. Both are the responsibility of the coach.

[GentlemanJeff]

You guys seem to want a guy like Harvs to have free reign at the club for 3 years with no kind of performance appraisals. That is just bullshit. He needs to work with the list which he inherited. If it isn't a finals list, then he should say so, and say its going to take 3 years for him to get them up to scratch, and the reasons why its not a good list. But at the moment we have a good list, we just need a little bit more pace.

Yep, Harvs thinks we have a good list that just needs tweeking.

If he thought the list was shit and required a 3 year re-biuilding phase then we would have seen a whole swag of delistings at the end of the season - this has not happened.

The truth is that after wondering around in the desert for years we are finally on the door step of the promised land. We are standing on the Golan Heights looking down on Israel, yet guys like FreoShark want to lead us back of into the wilderness for "three more years". The city gates are open, we need to crash through. Anything less than a grand final play off next year is a failure.

[dockertor]

We want idiots like you to realise that not everything is in the coaches control. I've helped coach good teams and I've helped coach bad teams, let me tell you the difference was the players not the guys on the sidelines.
The side we have is good but not great. Close enough that with things falling our way we are right up there but if a few things go wrong we aren't far enough ahead to not notice it.

[Memories]

We want idiots like you to realise that not everything is in the coaches control. I've helped coach good teams and I've helped coach bad teams, let me tell you the difference was the players not the guys on the sidelines.
The side we have is good but not great. Close enough that with things falling our way we are right up there but if a few things go wrong we aren't far enough ahead to not notice it.


Maybe for the "amateur" teams you coach that is true, it's well known that coaches CAN be the difference in the AFL. Look at Richmond beating Adelaide last year for only ONE obvious instance.

Connolly made shit game day decisions, or really, his lack of any decisions is what cost us many many games. Letting players who were hot continually not be tagged or dealt with, etc. Once the game was started, CC was out of moves most of the time.

[FD369]

Failing this I actually fear for the long term viability of the club.


Ripper the above is a perfect example of why we need a sub-sub board for Jeffnakor and friends.

Somewhere they can go and tear shreds off the club, knife the coach whatever they like but without the rational thinking normal Freo supporter having to actually read such dribble.

Sort of like a playroom for the little-uns you know.

[Belnakor]

Mate, if were up to you, we'd still have Cuddles Connolly running things.. the coach never does anything wrong! Its the players!

And then the next minute you'll be takling about how good it is to have Harvs in there.

You can't have it both ways, sometimes hard decisions need to be made, and getting rid of Cuddles was one such example.

[Roundhouse]

Ripper the above is a perfect example of why we need a sub-sub board for Jeffnakor and friends.

Somewhere they can go and tear shreds off the club, knife the coach whatever they like but without the rational thinking normal Freo supporter having to actually read such dribble.

Sort of like a playroom for the little-uns you know.

There is such a place. It is known as wehavethepoison. Unfortunately even the whiteanting doomsayers don't go there anymore because nobody reads it due the constant negative, one sided, anti-establishment dribble about everything FFC.

I'd be happy if the mods just deleted their baseless rumours and carded them for it as promised.

[GentlemanJeff]

I'd be happy if the mods just deleted their baseless rumours and carded them for it as promised.

The moderators come down harder on us than any other "faction" on this board. And for what its worth, we cop alot more abuse than we dish out.

What "basless rumours" are you talking about? The comments in this thread a pure opinion and nothing more.

The moderators are not going to card us just because you dislike our opinions.

[Belnakor]

Whats more, i think that GJ and myself have posted more credible information and tips than anyone else on this board. I was onto the Kepler Bradley stuff months before the rest of the reactionalist crowd here. GJ floated that P.Bell was going to retire well before the rumor mill started on that.

Between myself and GJ we have actually contributed more than anyone.. i find it personally offensive that people would say they are baseless rumors, when they are not.

[Roundhouse]

What "basless rumours" are you talking about? The comments in this thread a pure opinion and nothing more.


How about these ones...


Cuddles was reknowned for playing favourites. Guys like M.Carr were getting a game every week based on reputation and Cuddles not wanting to ruffle a few feathers.


The truth is Cuddles played favourites with certain players at the club - they knew they were untouchable so they didnt care if they underperformed.

You tools/tool try to present slurs on the club/coaching staff/admin as "common knowledge" or "the truth".

You don't really fool anyone, because people know you have zero "inside knowledge" and zero understanding of what goes on at the club, but they are baseless rumours by definition and I'm sure the majority get sick of having them tossed up every day as though they are fact.

They should be deleted because they are defamatory and they cannot be proven.

[Belnakor]

nobody reads it due the constant negative, one sided, anti-establishment dribble about everything FFC.


And nobody reads Dockerland because it is full of positive moderated crap. If you want the mods to delete dissenters you should be over there.

[FD369]

I was onto the Kepler Bradley stuff months before the rest of the reactionalist crowd here. GJ floated that P.Bell was going to retire well before the rumor mill started on that.




Both of those fantastic insights went well didn't they.

Please give us more.

[GentlemanJeff]

You tools/tool try to present slurs on the club/coaching staff/admin as "common knowledge" or "the truth".

You don't really fool anyone, because people know you have zero "inside knowledge" and zero understanding of what goes on at the club, but they are baseless rumours by definition and I'm sure the majority get sick of having them tossed up every day as though they are fact.

They should be deleted because they are defamatory and they cannot be proven.

Firstly, just so you know, if I call someone a tool I always get a card.

Secondly, if you want us to be banned then you should prove that Cuddles wasnt playing favourites.

[Jetau]

Yes, GJ and Belkanor provide all the useful information on this forum. The rest of us are fair dinkum clowns. We should bow down before their superior knowledge. In fact, Memories is pretty close to joining their elite status as well. Just a few more pearls of wisdom like the one about CC's weight, and he will have ascended to the holy dais. ;)

[FD369]

Firstly, just so you know, if I call someone a tool I always get a card.

Secondly, if you want us to be banned then you should prove that Cuddles wasnt playing favourites.


If thats all thats required I am ringing the MFC ASAP.

But how exactly have you proved that he was?

[SupersonicDocker]

dockerland is a joke, if you post anything there that makes shaney boy look like he isn't the king ding wise emperor he removes your poast...

the only posts your allowed there are "isnt pav just gorgeous and fantastic" threads...

[SupersonicDocker]

and in terms of inside info and breaking news to people, no one here has inside information that can be proven... thats why we are all on this site... to speculate

[GentlemanJeff]

and in terms of inside info and breaking news to people, no one here has inside information that can be proven... thats why we are all on this site... to speculate

extacly, I would rather hear abit of sensible speculation compared to the same old boring shite that is peddled by the usual suspects.

To avoid any doubt, a post about "who is on the plane to Melbourne" is incredibly boring.

I would rather someone present an original point of view even if it is not mainstream.

[Memories]

I'd rather hear the comments of someone who has some critical thinking tools like GentlemanJeff or Belnakor rather than roundhouse and friends who could be related to Shane Richmond, with his "ban everyone who doesn't think like I do" approach.

Do you see any of these people mentioned (and even myself) going out of our way to insult anyone? From what I've seen it's always the same crew of "supporters" on this board coming up with the first insults. Rather than read the post, and get it's points, they find one thing they can take out of context then go to town on it, ala peppy and fd369 up there.

[Roundhouse]

I'd rather hear the comments of someone who has some critical thinking tools like GentlemanJeff or Belnakor rather than roundhouse and friends who could be related to Shane Richmond, with his "ban everyone who doesn't think like I do" approach.

Do you see any of these people mentioned (and even myself) going out of our way to insult anyone? From what I've seen it's always the same crew of "supporters" on this board coming up with the first insults. Rather than read the post, and get it's points, they find one thing they can take out of context then go to town on it, ala peppy and fd369 up there.

LMAO I've lectured in critical thinking!

Critical thinking does not equate with scapegoating and making criticisms based on rumours you buffoon.

Thinking critically dictates that one is able justify their opinions without having to rely on flawed techniques of argument and common fallicies of logic, and without having to claim "good authority" or "common knowledge" as evidence.

I could go through all of GJ/Belnakors "arguments" and show how they are weak and based on dumb logic.

That you three consider yourselves "critical thinkers" is nearly as funny as your argument that linked coaching ability to low skinfolds.

[Memories]

That you three consider yourselves "critical thinkers" is nearly as funny as your argument that linked coaching ability to low skinfolds.


If you have lectured in critical thinking (or did you mean you've been lectured about it?) then you must know what reading comprehension is. Try it sometime.

[Roundhouse]

If you have lectured in critical thinking (or did you mean you've been lectured about it?) then you must know what reading comprehension is. Try it sometime.

Comedy gold yet again!

Try learning a little more of the language before you get critical of someone for using it correctly.

[GentlemanJeff]

If you have lectured in critical thinking (or did you mean you've been lectured about it?) then you must know what reading comprehension is. Try it sometime.

The point is that Roundhouse etc do not even try to address the merits of a post. They do not even read the post. They just look to the left of the screen, determine who the poster is, and then resort to petty name calling.

Roundhouse will never actually engage in any critical thinking on this board. To think critically about someone elses post you actually have to read it first. He doesnt even bother. He just skips straight to the name calling. If anyone needs to be carded around here its Roundhouse.

[poshman]

LMAO I've lectured in critical thinking!

Critical thinking does not equate with scapegoating and making criticisms based on rumours you buffoon.

Thinking critically dictates that one is able justify their opinions without having to rely on flawed techniques of argument and common fallicies of logic, and without having to claim "good authority" or "common knowledge" as evidence.

I could go through all of GJ/Belnakors "arguments" and show how they are weak and based on dumb logic.

That you three consider yourselves "critical thinkers" is nearly as funny as your argument that linked coaching ability to low skinfolds.

I have a look at this site a couple of times a day, don't often post as if I agree with something already said there is little point. However as an outsider, why the need for the insult? You where making an argument, quite intelligently and then lost the plot with the buffoon comment, and as a result the rest of the argument is weakened.

I don't always agree with what GJ, B and Memories have to say but one thing they do provide is a fresh perspective, and some character to the board.

[bushie]

extacly, I would rather hear abit of sensible speculation compared to the same old boring shite that is peddled by the usual suspects.

.

And that is where you and your two buddies arguments fall down.

Sensible speculation does not equate to constant and illogical provocation.

For an argument to be sensible it must be grounded in fact and not based on pure speculation and personal bias.

It has been stated by you lot in this thread that, between the three of you, some "breaking" or "inside" news has been broadcast to the masses.

But on closer inspection it has only been the repitition of a well known rumour, that when put to the sword, only turned out to be yet another urban myth.

I know that the three of you are trying very hard to be agents provocateur or even devils advocate, but until you stop this constant barrage of baseless criticism and biased commentary it will never happen.

However, I for one, welcome your input and sincerely hope that you can put your efforts into something more productive for the club.

Instead of just focussing on the potential negatives and past mistakes.

[Memories]

The point is that Roundhouse etc do not even try to address the merits of a post. They do not even read the post. They just look to the left of the screen, determine who the poster is, and then resort to petty name calling.

Roundhouse will never actually engage in any critical thinking on this board. To think critically about someone elses post you actually have to read it first. He doesnt even bother. He just skips straight to the name calling. If anyone needs to be carded around here its Roundhouse.

Well I'm usually against banning people because people should be able to voice their opinions. However when people continually fail to read posts and just resort to an "I'm anti this person, regardless of what is said" position something should happen. I have seen some posts of roundhouse which are decent, so I wouldn't say he is completely a "troll".

Unfortunately it seems some people interpret this forum as some kind of personal playground where they run in packs and have a type of group speak. When this is the case, as soon as you say something they disapprove of they will try and make the environment hostile, collectively, until you leave or "join" them. This isn't helpful in any healthy debate environment.

[Memories]

And that is where you and your two buddies arguments fall down.

Sensible speculation does not equate to constant and illogical provocation.

For an argument to be sensible it must be grounded in fact and not based on pure speculation and personal bias.

It has been stated by you lot in this thread that, between the three of you, some "breaking" or "inside" news has been broadcast to the masses.

But on closer inspection it has only been the repitition of a well known rumour, that when put to the sword, only turned out to be yet another urban myth.

I know that the three of you are trying very hard to agents provocateur or even devils advocate, but until you stop this constant barrage of baseless criticism and biased commentary it will never happen.

However, I for one, welcome your input and sincerely hope that you can put your efforts into something more productive for the club.

Instead of just focussing on the potential negatives and past mistakes.

Well I have never passed off something as breaking news, "inside fact" or anything of that nature, so lumping me in with these people on other items is a bit misleading. I haven't seen all their posts to make such a statement for or against that claim.

Since probably anyone on this board isn't involved with the club internally all we can do is offer suggestions/opinions on why something is happening. For instance saying that M Carr was a favourite of CC could be based on him having sub par performances continually and nothing ever happening with it. That logic is sound to me, and we all know it isn't a fact, just a theory. People can offer pieces of evidence for and against why they think it's true or false, however we will probably never really know and we are left to make our own ideas based on those pieces of evidence.

If people want to remove that ability of us posters here, then I wouldn't visit anymore since that is a major reason I come here. As long as it's fine to do that I would like that others have a bit of respect and properly read my posts.

[bushie]

Well I have never passed off something as breaking news, "inside fact" or anything of that nature, so lumping me in with these people on other items is a bit misleading. I haven't seen all their posts to make such a statement for or against that claim.

Since probably anyone on this board isn't involved with the club internally all we can do is offer suggestions/opinions on why something is happening. For instance saying that M Carr was a favourite of CC could be based on him having sub par performances continually and nothing ever happening with it. That logic is sound to me, and we all know it isn't a fact, just a theory. People can offer pieces of evidence for and against why they think it's true or false, however we will probably never really know and we are left to make our own ideas based on those pieces of evidence.

If people want to remove that ability of us posters here, then I wouldn't visit anymore since that is a major reason I come here. As long as it's fine to do that I would like that others have a bit of respect and properly read my posts.


That is all well and good.

And if you are not guilty of being a scoop merchant then I apologise.

However, I would be interested in your comment on the rest of my post.

[Memories]

Well I will just speak for myself here, not the other 2 you mention.

I know that the three of you are trying very hard to be agents provocateur or even devils advocate, but until you stop this constant barrage of baseless criticism and biased commentary it will never happen.

I often play that role in "the real world" I will admit, it often helps everyone in a debate to do so. I don't do it so much on forums though, when it is needed I will just to show someone something they said might have been a bit silly.

Instead of just focussing on the potential negatives and past mistakes.

I'm pretty sure I don't only post negative comments and I concentrate on the future mostly. When someone will comment on something wrong in our past I may join the debate, the best way we can learn is from our mistakes as a team.

Some of my advice earlier in the season would have most likely seen us in the finals this year, which I guess I could use to show others that unpopular advice isn't necessarily bad advice. I want Freo to succeed, some ignorant people may confuse that drive with the opposite, but I simply just want results.

[bushie]

Well I will just speak for myself here, not the other 2 you mention.

Fair enough



I often play that role in "the real world" I will admit, it often helps everyone in a debate to do so. I don't do it so much on forums though, when it is needed I will just to show someone something they said might have been a bit silly.

Fair enough



I'm pretty sure I don't only post negative comments and I concentrate on the future mostly. When someone will comment on something wrong in our past I may join the debate, the best way we can learn is from our mistakes as a team.

Fair enough.

I am not prepared to search your posts.

But I get the feeling that if you are wrong it will be pointed out.



Some of my advice earlier in the season would have most likely seen us in the finals this year,

That is pure speculation with some very expensive 20/20 hindsight glasses.

The same argument could be mounted with regard to losing some key players...Wiz, MJ etc...


which I guess I could use to show others that unpopular advice isn't necessarily bad advice. I want Freo to succeed, some ignorant people may confuse that drive with the opposite, but I simply just want results.

We all want that success.....there isn't one amongst us who doesn't crave it.

But to consistently knife a coach and a team within the first 3 weeks of a season only smacks of personal bias and an axe to grind.

Which leads me to a point I made in my original post.

Sensible speculation does not equate to constant and illogical provocation.

[Memories]

But to consistently knife a coach and a team within the first 3 weeks of a season only smacks of personal bias and an axe to grind.

I can certainly understand your reasoning about "3 weeks in", however we had 5 years prior to see what CC is. It's not like they were the 3 first games of him we saw, the port game where we lost could have easily been won with the right coaching decisions imo. All those 3 games showed me the usual CC trademark, and I knew, that nothing had been changed or improved from his end. Barring a miracle I knew we were doomed in 2007 unless he left.

I'm going to stand behind Harvey (as in , not call for his head, I will still criticize him when necessary) all season regardless of what happens because he deserves at least one season to get things right in my opinion. I have higher hopes than that, but yeah. I dislike the idea that we should stand behind suboptimal people like CC regardless of what happens (who we fired for his poor job need I remind) just because they are our coach, star player, water boy, etc. I also think the accusations that some of us are here just to rail on people and coaches is a bit wild. I have been nothing but extremely supportive of Harvey thus far, why aren't I backstabbing him if thats my motive? Oh right I'm just waiting for him to fail so I can talk some more "backstabbing", is that the theory some of you have here?

Personally I wouldn't care if Humpty Dumpty led our team to GF, I have no real love for any individual because players and coaches come and go. Pavlich wasn't there when I started following the dockers in 96, it's about the team not the players or coaches in it at some particular time. The team is more than that so only caring about a few individuals is going to hurt the team as a whole. They are all expendable, even Pavlich, if it means winning the GF. Don't get me wrong I love the Freo team as it stands now and will do whatever I can to support them the best I can. But I am perhaps a bit heartless when it comes to caring about CCs feelings when it's in our best interests to boot him.

How many here disagree that if we had have booted CC after round 3 and put in Harvey we would have MOST LIKELY played finals? Harvey is a better coach, at least from what we saw of him so far.

[bushie]

I can certainly understand your reasoning about "3 weeks in", however we had 5 years prior to see what CC is. It's not like they were the 3 first games of him we saw, the port game where we lost could have easily been won with the right coaching decisions imo. All those 3 games showed me the usual CC trademark, and I knew, that nothing had been changed or improved from his end. Barring a miracle I knew we were doomed in 2007 unless he left.

You knew??

Or you speculated???

Don't get me wrong.

I am/was not a huge fan of CC. But at that point of the season he was the coach who led us to a PF in 06.

Knifing him in Round 3 made little sense and it makes little sense now, even with the benefit of hindsight.



I'm going to stand behind Harvey (as in , not call for his head, I will still criticize him when necessary) all season regardless of what happens because he deserves at least one season to get things right in my opinion.

Why only one season??

Is that standing behind him??

I think not.

Is there a pattern forming here?



I have higher hopes than that, but yeah. I dislike the idea that we should stand behind suboptimal people like CC regardless of what happens (who we fired for his poor job need I remind) just because they are our coach, star player, water boy, etc. I also think the accusations that some of us are here just to rail on people and coaches is a bit wild.


Should we follow Richmonds path and just stab the coach at the first opportunity?


I have been nothing but extremely supportive of Harvey thus far, why aren't I backstabbing him if thats my motive?

Well so far you have been supportive of him as long as he has a successful first year...

Otherwise it's out with the old and in with the new.



Oh right I'm just waiting for him to fail so I can talk some more "backstabbing", is that the theory some of you have here?

Yes.

One could make that assumption.



Personally I wouldn't care if Humpty Dumpty led our team to GF, I have no real love for any individual because players and coaches come and go. Pavlich wasn't there when I started following the dockers in 96, it's about the team not the players or coaches in it at some particular time. The team is more than that so only caring about a few individuals is going to hurt the team as a whole. They are all expendable, even Pavlich, if it means winning the GF. Don't get me wrong I love the Freo team as it stands now and will do whatever I can to support them the best I can. But I am perhaps a bit heartless when it comes to caring about CCs feelings when it's in our best interests to boot him.


I can't argue there:thumbsu::)



How many here disagree that if we had have booted CC after round 3 and put in Harvey we would have MOST LIKELY played finals? Harvey is a better coach, at least from what we saw of him so far.


I would say again that your statement is pure speculation, but I am happy to let the rest of us have our say.

[freocynic]

That is an interesting theory, that if we got rid of CC in round 3 we would have made the finals. Maybe, probably, but we'll never know...

I think the mistake with CC was the contract extension so early on. That was what really hurt us later. It seems the FFC administration has made every mistake in the book off field (salary cap breaches, way too early with coaches contract extension, bad recruiting, etc) . The positive is we look like we are getting it right now...Pav stayed, Bell is playing on, Harvey will do well I think.