Review 2014 Post Season Member Briefing (fan forum)

[SuperSub17]

We started a rebuild after back to back grand finals so nothing suprises me anymore

We did this in 2004-05 and ended up with 8 consecutive finals series, 4 straight top 4 finishes, 2 GFs and a flag. I'd say the last time we did this it worked fairly well.

 

[PieNSauce]

We started a rebuild after back to back grand finals so nothing suprises me anymore

Any time you change coaches you have a rebuild except in rare circumstances. When you also have significant retirements and player culture issues the rebuild is not even a question. Why is it that so many are happy to overlook what happened after 2003 when we didn't even have a change of coach.

 

[Rorzza]

We did this in 2004-05 and ended up with 8 consecutive finals series, 4 straight top 4 finishes, 2 GFs and a flag. I'd say the last time we did this it worked fairly well.

Three Grand finals if you include the draw. You are absolutely correct and the future is bright with our list.

 

[speedytiger]

If you're skillful, classy and have a decent game plan you don't have to bust the arse as much as we need to in order of winning games, even against s**t opponents.

Add confidence to that too. The same team who is 'up and about' can run out games better purely on confidence, especially if the opposition is broken

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Reading this thread is really quite amusing.

People who actually ATTENDED were happy with the meeting and thought that the club did a good job trying to address the issues that were raised. It has been described as open and honest, not full of planted people asking questions they were prepared for.

Yet the posters who are eternally angry on these boards, who DID NOT ATTEND, sit back here and take pot shots at the whole thing and declare it a waste of time. I'm talking about posters like escobar, Krueger, PieBeast etc who come on these boards and whinge every day yet didn't attend, then still sit back and complain.

It would be funny if it wasn't so utterly predictable.

Brilliantly said Kirby, and as I have said before we can't let these aholes destroy our club.
We have to show them up for what they truly are

 

[Hardas]

Sincere thanks to all those that helped pass on the content of the evening - particularly 76W for his [?] patient and thorough efforts.

Me thinks this time next year we will have a much clearer idea of where things stand.

If it's true that you learn from your mistakes then it seems to me the club has lots of material to work with these days.

 

[TheFreshBanana]

Two sides of the same coin for mine and I'm coming down on Piebeast's side because we have too many poor ball users in general.

For example our ball use was in the 40's as a % for the first quarter v GWS and that isn't as a result of a fatigue factor...

You've got it wrong if you believe the club believes its an ultimatum and have gone with aerobic power.

Bucks addressed the issue and said it is definitely something that will be worked on.

 

[mike123]

When you have one guy 208cm and another guy 174cm the average is 191cm. They can try and bluff us with stats but I have no doubt we have too many small blokes on our list.

Hawthorn have more

 

[Scodog10]

You've got it wrong if you believe the club believes its an ultimatum and have gone with aerobic power.

Bucks addressed the issue and said it is definitely something that will be worked on.

I'm not sure where you've garnered ultimatum from my posts because I would be silly to make that assumption.

Emphasis is the suggestion based on the information provided and I would like the emphasis placed elsewhere.

No information from the club that they can legitimately release would shift me on that...

 

[76woodenspooners]

Sincere thanks to all those that helped pass on the content of the evening - particularly 76W for his [?] ...

Yeah, I'm a "his"

... patient and thorough efforts.

Thanks, but TBH my deep respect and admiration goes out to SCPaige and TheFreshBanana for updating folks real-time during the meeting.

Things got quite in-depth and candid, and to take it all in and tweet / post at the same time was a fair effort.

The event started at 7:30pm and finished around 10pm. The bar was open and folks were free to go up and chat with Bucks / Pert / Eddie / Hine / etc afterwards - or to just to have a social chat with each other. I left at around 10:30 and it was kicking on strong.

So the few posts I've made in here are just a tiny snapshot of all the things that were said, conveyed through the prism of my understanding.

I hope we get more people who were there to post so we get good diversity of opinion about what was discussed and the impression people got.

Me thinks this time next year we will have a much clearer idea of where things stand.

There has already been historical context.

Bucks started his presentation with the results of the 2013 review, the things that were wrong last year, corrective action, and how we faired this year.

The club haven't finished their 2014 review, so there wasn't much we could pin them to next time. The few KPI's were obviously 'finishing higher up the ladder', 'making finals', finishing top 4'. 'reducing player unavailability due to hamstring injuries' (which will be a combination of preventing the injury and improving rehabilitation and reducing re-occurance), 'improved fitness for transition running'.

If it's true that you learn from your mistakes then it seems to me the club has lots of material to work with these days.

That differed from person to person ...

Ed - there are a lot of things we need to fix (matchday experience in general is broken, the cheer squad is broken)

Justin Reeves - barely spoke all night, but his challenge is to operate when expenses are going up (inflation) when keeping income constant (ie: membership prices) - no decision made.

Pert - I don't remember him speaking all night? That probably says as much as anything what sort of night it was.

Buckley - TBH, I don't think he presented many big ticket items for him to 'fix', but that's probably because he's only really just started a review and it's premature.

Eade - Barely spoke all night. I only remember him speaking once in answer to a member's question who was calling on Eade's memory to comment on the rise of Hawthorn and their skills.

Davoren - increased fitness base (presently 6.5 / 10) and the hamstrings.

Hine - didn't really discuss future targets in detail which was fair enough going into trading season.

 

[MarkT2]

Any time you change coaches you have a rebuild except in rare circumstances. When you also have significant retirements and player culture issues the rebuild is not even a question. Why is it that so many are happy to overlook what happened after 2003 when we didn't even have a change of coach.

We didn't lose anyone that was any good in 2004/5. We exited players that weren't up to it. Arguably a Betheras/Scotland were stiff but what we've done post 2012 is poles apart from post 2003 and starting from a better base. 3 years after losing the 2003 GF we made the finals. 3 years after losing the 2011 GF we finished 11th and culture change has not saved us from ourselves.

 

[Markfs]

well i can understand the fitness issue resulting from the way the game has changed....although we appear to be a long way behind other teams which is a worry from a football division that gets so much money.

The issue of skills is also understandable to some degree with the way the game has changed too. However, Hawthorn has been drafting skilled players since Clarkson got there and it would appear a little ridiculous to say that we are only now moving to place more importance on skill based players.

Again, both of the above would appear to be reactive situations, where we are some distance behind other teams. Some of this is understandable because we were so successful with contested possession/pressure on ball carrier type of football.....but once again, the football department is paid a fortune and should be on top of changes to the game. I said in an earlier post that Butters didnt appear to be challenged about his little research baby of altitude training etc. I just get the impression that no one had the guts to tell him the game was changing and we needed a different kind of fitness...yes I'm just speculating. I still wonder about how Geoff Walsh left. There is a story in there and no one is telling it.

I had a look at our draft picks after Pendles - Thomas and there were hardly any high ones until we took the threesome from south australia. That's about 7 or 8 years without top end talent and I think it shows. I commend the club for the last two drafts. Its a big improvement and needed to be done. I would hope that our skills will improve as we integrate last year's batch into the team.

I believe Buckley is on the right track...so it wouldnt really improve things to change the coach now....I mean that in the context that a new coach would be doing much the same stuff as Buckley...yes, my opinion.

 

[makethat2]

Having just had a look back at the NAB cup game he does his hamstring kicking the ball without anyone touching him with 4 mins and 20 seconds left in the first half. Nowhere near 10 minutes to go in the game and no opposition player caused it he was just kicking the ball while running at about 80% pace by the vision! Just another lie from Davoren!

I felt reasonably happy until you pointed this out. It's just ass covering lies. Stuff the campaigner.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Internally, the situation has been different, much more heated. McGuire, as is his right, went on an in-house rant in the same week, demanding answers to why so many players fell to injury for a second consecutive year. At one stage of his blow-up, no one felt safe in his job, particularly high performance manager Bill Davoren.

This is wrong.

Eddie made it quite clear that he is just like one of us. He question everybody from Pert to Bucks, as to what the **** is going on at the club. There is no illusion that the club deems that this season has been a failure.

Hmmm, it wouldn't surprise me if Barrett is correct in this article.

There was a reference made on the night to a chain of command (about who gets stuck into whom) and Ed is at the top.

It would not surprise me at all if Ed (as the representative of the members, as you say) gave the management a kick up the backside - and part of that could have been to go up in front of the membership and explain the reasons for our failings.

The meeting went well (as you and I both thought) but the presenters would have still left feeling "Gee, I'd want to have some good things to report to this mob when I go up in front of them next year".

 

[76woodenspooners]

If you're skillful, classy and have a decent game plan you don't have to bust the arse as much as we need to in order of winning games, even against s**t opponents.

Indeed, and a Bucks said as much.

If you work hard at the contest to gain possession you don't to work harder to run back to defend.

 

[mike123]

Indeed, and a Bucks said as much.

If you work hard at the contest to gain possession you don't to work harder to run back to defend.

Also if you are more skilful and hit targets instead of turn the ball over, you also don't have to work harder to defend.

 

[TheFreshBanana]

Hmmm, it wouldn't surprise me if Barrett is correct in this article.

There was a reference made on the night to a chain of command (about who gets stuck into whom) and Ed is at the top.

It would not surprise me at all if Ed (as the representative of the members, as you say) gave the management a kick up the backside - and part of that could have been to go up in front of the membership and explain the reasons for our failings.

The meeting went well (as you and I both thought) but the presenters would have still left feeling "Gee, I'd want to have some good things to report to this mob when I go up in front of them next year".

I'm sure he gave them a kick up the backside.

But Barrett here is saying this is not the case that was shown at the forum, which was not true.

The picture shown wasn't all rainbows and sunshine, Eddie made it clear that he was and is just as disappointed and, to a degree, concerned, and is constantly pestering the head honchos about what's going on at the club.

 

[Bay Pie]

We didn't lose anyone that was any good in 2004/5. We exited players that weren't up to it. Arguably a Betheras/Scotland were stiff but what we've done post 2012 is poles apart from post 2003 and starting from a better base. 3 years after losing the 2003 GF we made the finals. 3 years after losing the 2011 GF we finished 11th and culture change has not saved us from ourselves.

Our list was very similar from 2003 to 2004.

I continually ask this but rarely get an answer. Since our flag year in 2010, what year was our best chance to win a flag? Absolutely no doubt it's 2011. Malthouse was the coach then.

We had a crack in 2012 with a similar group from 2010/2011 albeit not the same quality especially Bally's injury. We wouldn't have won it all in 2010 without him.

2012 finishes and the list management guys decide this group will not take us back to the top. So do we look to trade early picks to top-up and remain a contender or do we trade guys out and reload with early picks for another shot a few years down the track.

In hindsight, the calls to move on or let go Dawes, Thomas and Wellingham have shown to be correct calls. Their form over the past 2 years has been ordinary to say the least. Broomhead and Grundy have both shown great signs and Scharenberg has been injured but has massive potential. Shaw may be debated but given we were reloading, why not flick a pest and recruit a replacement for one of our most important players in Luke Ball. We saw what happened in 2012 without him. When I say pest, I'm basing this on rumours from the leadership group and their opinions on Shaw. They weren't disappointed to see him go. Shaw has been Shaw at GWS. Some really nice things but your standard howler of a kick a common occurrence.

If we had have retained all these players, perhaps we finish a bit higher, but contending, I think not and that's what it's about.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Yes against Geelong at Kardinia Park in Round 1 of NAB cup. It's the only game he featured in all year and only got to 4 mins 20 to go before half time…and that was the end of his season.

I felt reasonably happy until you pointed this out. It's just ass covering lies. Stuff the campaigner.

It's perfectly reasonable to want to check the facts to see if you can trust the person or not (or if that person is going senile or not).

I got the impression that Buckley remembers every gameday kick, handpass and contested possession since he took over 3 years ago - there can be no doubt Buckley is compos mentis. And FWIW I got the strong impression that Buckley is honest and competent - I don't mean disrespect to anybody here - But I have the strong belief that if any of us tried 'one on one' with him at the pub over beers to poke holes in his gameplan / strategy / tactics / etc that he would have zero trouble defending his position, or referring to specific calculated risks, or referring to unintended consequences of alternate strategies / etc / etc.

As for Davoren, I just can't see how he would be willingly deceitful - his colleagues would know, judge him on it, and turf him out (led by Ed).

Davoren has only been at the club for 12 months - not long - and he is now on notice. That's all that really matters.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Well he clearly was on two occasions from what was reported on here - one about not using the bikes during the season for conditioning - which they do and once a week also for recovery day after games (which is more of a roll the legs over not a conditioning exercise like the other session is during the week) and the other being that Freeman's injury was caused by fatigue with 10 minutes to go in the game and pressure from a Geelong player as neither of those two things are true if you re-watch the replay - 4 mins 20 to go in the 2nd quarter and no Geelong player pushing or tackling him as he did it! Both of those examples are him being willingly deceitful and I assume hoping no-one there in the public seats had any information to the contrary or could remember Freeman's injury!

The mistake may have been mine ... TheFreshBanana do you remember those things being said?

 

[MyManLynch]

Well he clearly was on two occasions from what was reported on here - one about not using the bikes during the season for conditioning - which they do and once a week also for recovery day after games (which is more of a roll the legs over not a conditioning exercise like the other session is during the week) and the other being that Freeman's injury was caused by fatigue with 10 minutes to go in the game and pressure from a Geelong player as neither of those two things are true if you re-watch the replay - 4 mins 20 to go in the 2nd quarter and no Geelong player pushing or tackling him as he did it! Both of those examples are him being willingly deceitful and I assume hoping no-one there in the public seats had any information to the contrary or could remember Freeman's injury!

Good pick up DH, although I guess we will never know if he was being deliberately deceitful or whether this type of event was knew to him & caught him off guard & got it wrong or was confused (whilst under the spotlight).
The club will judge him on all aspects. Final internal review still to be done.
For the club to let him go after only 12 months, they would have to be sure that his actions or non actions contributed directly to our soft tissue injuries.

 

[makethat2]

It's just puts a question mark on everything he has said if his quote about late in the game, sprinting etc etc is true.

Something I hope the club has picked up on.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

We didn't lose anyone that was any good in 2004/5. We exited players that weren't up to it.

About the same this time around, except the only player we moved on who was stiff was Heath Shaw.

Wellingham can't break into West Coast (even when he can get on the park), Dawes could never perform, Thomas left for money and is injury plagued just as he ever was anyway and Leon gave up.

The rest retired because they were OLD MEN.

Do people not understand this?

 

[Piestration]

Whatever advantage they have by playing at their training bases is surely offset by the amount of traveling they do.
Obviously Geelong is a completely different story.
St Kilda are exactly where they were predicted to be when Lyon left.
And what happened to us over the last couple of years can not be considered a part of the natural cycle,

The travel factor does even up the advantage but don't underestimate the home crowds or ground advantages . Also the AFL, fixture teams like the Shockers & Weagles to have a few games in a row at home. Especially towards the end of the season. Yes we get to play at the MCG but it's normally against the Bombers, Scum, Geelong, Hawks, Richmond, Melb?, North & Bullies. What home advantage do we get there. Crowds are also 70/30 at worst so atleast there is some voice from both supporter groups creating atmosphere. I absolutely hate going to Subiaco. If the Shockers or Weagles are winning then all is good with the supporters = no noise. If the away team is winning then a couple of thousand opposition supporters scattered like pepper throughout the stadium isn't enough to create a combined voice and put additional pressure on both the home team and white maggots like the last time we played the Weagles and Ump Schitt gave 49 frees to the Weagles in the 1st 20min.

I also forgot. What about our 1st game this year against the Shockers. Played at Etihad. WTF. Thats not our home ground. What advantage did we get there for our opener. Absolute bulls?t and Eddie needs to speak up about this crap. The AFL is driven by money so until the comp is even with all teams playing each other twice Home & Away we need Ed to negotiate a better deal.

 

[MyManLynch]

The travel factor does even up the advantage but don't underestimate the home crowds or ground advantages . Also the AFL, fixture teams like the Shockers & Weagles to have a few games in a row at home. Especially towards the end of the season. Yes we get to play at the MCG but it's normally against the Bombers, Scum, Geelong, Hawks, Richmond, Melb?, North & Bullies. What home advantage do we get there. Crowds are also 70/30 at worst so atleast there is some voice from both supporter groups creating atmosphere. I absolutely hate going to Subiaco. If the Shockers or Weagles are winning then all is good with the supporters = no noise. If the away team is winning then a couple of thousand opposition supporters scattered like pepper throughout the stadium isn't enough to create a combined voice and put additional pressure on both the home team and white maggots like the last time we played the Weagles and Ump Schitt gave 49 frees to the Weagles in the 1st 20min.

I also forgot. What about our 1st game this year against the Shockers. Played at Etihad. WTF. Thats not our home ground. What advantage did we get there for our opener. Absolute bulls?t and Eddie needs to speak up about this crap. The AFL is driven by money so until the comp is even with all teams playing each other twice Home & Away we need Ed to negotiate a better deal.

Every year we play 2 of our home games at Etihad.
I guess it's a trade off, as we also get to have 4 or 5 away games at the MCG (from Carlton, Essendon, Hawks, Geelong, Richmond, Melbourne).
So we have 13-14 at MCG, 4 at Etihad & 4-5 interstate.
Can't really complain about that.