News Phil Walsh - New AFC Coach and Art Critic

[Elite Crow]

I took the lid off when I was in the middle of Poland and got half a dozen texts telling me we'd sacked Sando.

I was looking for you to give you a hug

 

[MRB37]

Scott Thompson says he is open to joining the ranks of veteran players being rested as he seeks to get the most out of his body in his 15th season.

"There's no doubt I'll have sit-downs with Phil throughout the year and talk about how I'm feeling and where the body's at from week to week," Thompson said.

"It's nice to be able to sit down with the midfield coach and the senior coach of the club and have direct conversation, know exactly where you stand [and] what you need to do from week to week to have yourself up and right to play."

Not sure if that's a comment about Sando, or if I'm just reading too much into it.

 

[FR0GGY]

Not sure if that's a comment about Sando, or if I'm just reading too much into it.

pretty sure there was confirmation somewhere that sando and scotty didn't see eye to eye in the end. wasn't it the north game where sando laid into someone and scotty spoke up?

 

[MRB37]

pretty sure there was confirmation somewhere that sando and scotty didn't see eye to eye in the end. wasn't it the north game where sando laid into someone and scotty spoke up?

Was Luke Thompson from what I'd heard and Thommo, sticking up for his name brother, told him there were more problems with what was going on than just LT's performance on Ziebell.

 

[Red mist]

Not sure if that's a comment about Sando, or if I'm just reading too much into it.

When I first read that I thaught so as well.

 

[ADL9798]

I'm glad that the Vince/Dangerfield niggling is getting a lot of publicity and I think Walsh handled the questions on it well. He's made it known that he wasn't all that impressed with it (without coming across as a sook), and you can guarantee that the umpires will be looking at it a lot more closely this week which I think is the point of the exercise at the end.

Danger probably only got half the free kicks he deserved against Melbourne and no doubt that count will be a lot higher if the Dogs try the same tactics this week. Well played Crows.

 

[MRB37]

I'm glad that the Vince/Dangerfield niggling is getting a lot of publicity and I think Walsh handled the questions on it well. He's made it known that he wasn't all that impressed with it (without coming across as a sook), and you can guarantee that the umpires will be looking at it a lot more closely this week which I think is the point of the exercise at the end.

Danger probably only got half the free kicks he deserved against Melbourne and no doubt that count will be a lot higher if the Dogs try the same tactics this week. Well played Crows.

Probably a good thing that Mitch Wallis is out then.

 

[DD#23]

I'm glad that the Vince/Dangerfield niggling is getting a lot of publicity and I think Walsh handled the questions on it well. He's made it known that he wasn't all that impressed with it (without coming across as a sook), and you can guarantee that the umpires will be looking at it a lot more closely this week which I think is the point of the exercise at the end.

Danger probably only got half the free kicks he deserved against Melbourne and no doubt that count will be a lot higher if the Dogs try the same tactics this week. Well played Crows.

sorry but are you new here?

going on our club's history Danger will be lucky to buy a free kick next week.

 

[VSTone]

Got a feeling that Phil is really going to dismantle the WB this weekend

i hope he holds the rage for a week...

 

[mattymac]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but is anyone else getting concerned by how much talking Phil is doing lately?
For a guy who wasn't going to give away any secrets preseason, we now know all about ground ball, the two ladders he keeps and uses as his most important stats and he has been vocal on interchanges, the state of the game etc...

I know a new coach at a big team like the Crows attracts media attention, but can we lock him up a bit now? I'm getting concerned we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves and he is getting overexposed. Let's reign it in now and concentrate on keeping the form up and maintaining our secrets.

Ah excellent point. I had the exact same thought and just posted it elsewhere. Glad to see I'm not overreacting. Great minds...

 

[Redleg Crow]

I get that, but outside of his official pre and post game interviews, it is time he went quiet. No need for extra fluff pieces, or his opinion on the state of the nation. Let's keep some of the mystery there.

I have to say that I am pleasantly surprised with the response on here to my comment. I was expecting to be howled down and told to shut up because Phil is awesome and all he says and does is gold (which may very well be true). I like the fact many are a bit wiser and willing to open their eyes to other possibilities. Well done everyone!

I doubt there'd be any more. Other than On The Couch (which all coaches do) and the Robbo article, there hasn't been much else. Doubt there'd be anything else from now on. There wouldn't be much interest to be honest anyway now.

The Robbo article was good. Didn't really give away anything other than we want to stop scoring from turnovers (which we all knew he was hot on) and he thinks team morale is important.

Anyway, it's not like he is on AFL 360 every Monday night.

 

[adelaidecrows]

I don't even care if it was your point or not right now, I want to get my rant out there.

There's a collection of fans on this board who have always tried to mischaracterise criticism as being unduly negative.

For years we had to put up with a cornucopia of 'LOL dis board is sooo negative -eyeroll emoticon-' posts.

Here's whats pissing old Southerntakeover off today: those eye rollers aren't copping their medicine. The minute the club makes a new decision they seamlessly move into line with it, whilst acting like they never spent their time trying to drown out the criticism which is entirely consistent with the moves that they now support.

The 'negative' element of this board was largely vindicated. To them go the spoils.

Ok but here is my counter argument!=

Just because as fans we have the right to critic the club, doesn't mean we have too any chance we get in front of a computer!

Here is some advice:
Why not gather evidence first. Instead of jumping on the out coached by Roos criticisms 3 games into his career, why not give Walsh 11 games, write down what mistakes he seems to make over and over again for example; refusal to make positional changes that cost us a few games or keeps throwing Smith into the back line stopping our run etc. Make similarities to mistakes made by our previous coaches. But 3 games in is just crap, pure crap beyond belief.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Tex got asked about that scuffle after the siren on Triple M this morning...

Reckons Thommo got asked by Walsh to "go in there and sort Bernie out would ya" haha. Nek minnit Thommo has Bern in a headlock, suggesting he "just calm down a bit". Apparently Bern's response was "ok, I'm done".

Love the idea of Walsh telling Thommo to get in there to "sort it out". Gold.

I think criticism at Bernie has been blown out of proportion. The media should be asking the club why it took so long for the players to start protecting Danger.

 

[DD#23]

everyone continues to miss Phil's comments RE: Danger and Vince

he wasn't trying to say that punching Vince in the face as a retaliation would be tough (as they seemed to believe on Talking Footy moments ago), he simply meant that what Bernie was doing shouldn't be considered tough anymore because he CAN'T be retaliated against as he would have been in the past. A crime without a punishment if you will.

guess its all you can expect from ex-footballers trying to analyse clear English.

 

[adelaidecrows]

everyone continues to miss Phil's comments RE: Danger and Vince

he wasn't trying to say that punching Vince in the face as a retaliation would be tough (as they seemed to believe on Talking Footy moments ago), he simply meant that what Bernie was doing shouldn't be considered tough anymore because he CAN'T be retaliated against as he would have been in the past. A crime without a punishment if you will.

guess its all you can expect from ex-footballers trying to analyse clear English.

I think Walsh will learn a lesson about dealing with the fickle media. He wont do it again.

 

[RodnyDangrfield]

I think Walsh will learn a lesson about dealing with the fickle media. He wont do it again.

No wonder he doesn't like them. This wont help the appeal

 

[Sanders]

Vince 2 votes in the coaches awards

 

[anthc]

why are there mongrels there?

Thats good

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

That's probably because they've heard it out of context. I have the same issue with people saying they've watched all the footage of Vince's tagging on Danger, and it was okay. They haven't mentioned all the off-camera niggling. It was more noticeable at the game.

... Unless you are a blind umpire.

If they paid an early free that was warranted, it would never have come to this. Good umpires put out fires before they get out of control.

 

[Wright Away]

Vince 2 votes in the coaches awards

Yes and 3 in the campaigner awards.

 

[headache1]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, but is anyone else getting concerned by how much talking Phil is doing lately?
For a guy who wasn't going to give away any secrets preseason, we now know all about ground ball, the two ladders he keeps and uses as his most important stats and he has been vocal on interchanges, the state of the game etc...

I know a new coach at a big team like the Crows attracts media attention, but can we lock him up a bit now? I'm getting concerned we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves and he is getting overexposed. Let's reign it in now and concentrate on keeping the form up and maintaining our secrets.

Can't say it worries me that much. I'm betting the 17 other AFL senior coaches know what "ground ball" is. What matters is their ability to coach their players on how to win it, and then instruct them on how to best use it.

That said, I'm all for keeping a lid on it in general. Except of course for when I run into any Port supporters I know.

 

[headache1]

Tex got asked about that scuffle after the siren on Triple M this morning...

Reckons Thommo got asked by Walsh to "go in there and sort Bernie out would ya" haha. Nek minnit Thommo has Bern in a headlock, suggesting he "just calm down a bit". Apparently Bern's response was "ok, I'm done".

Love the idea of Walsh telling Thommo to get in there to "sort it out". Gold.

Haha, I haven't seen the full melee on TV, only what was in that Danger v Vince video, but it certainly looked like Tex and Thompson went straight for Vince, and both ripped him out of the melee, and it's not clear in the vision, but I thought I could see Thompson walking away with Vince in a headlock.

A headlock from Thompson is one of the last places I'd want to find myself. A slight flex and it could be all over.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Good rant. One I'm quite comfortable with as I mostly agree with you. Not sure what you mean by spoils mate... it's not exactly a competition. But I do appreciate you felt unfairly attacked at times - still remember it vividly - so 'fair enough'.

It was a turn of phrase. It took all of my restraint not to refer to it as conquest.

For what it's worth though: the spoils are what they could only be on an internet forum. Credibility. It was a competition- just one of ideas. Ultimately one of the competing sets of ideas was vindicated, one was discredited.

Every now and then I feel the need to remind people which was which.

Since we're taking a turn on the soap box I'll get one in as well

Back in the 10/11 seasons I was quite adamant we had significant issues down at the club. Was very hard to be specific but over the years there have been a number of things that have seemed to have contributed to that. Took us 2 coach changes (possibly... still early days there!!) and changes at board and CEO level to make sufficient change to put alot of it behind us. I feel quite vindicated in my opinion of that period.

I think the thing we should all learn from it is not just to dismiss opinions that don't heap on praise and go with the expected flow. There is plenty of room for constructive criticism. If the club had had a harder look at itself earlier, perhaps it wouldn't have taken 4 to 5 years to have a more positive vibe about our immediate and longer term future. I for one was quite excited about some of the changes Sando brought in - but it turned out to not be enough. But the thing I like about at least taking that change, at least we tried something which led us closer to the changes we did need.

One of the most important things I took away from meeting with Fages was his multiple reiterations that he welcomed feedback and criticism. He didn't see it as negative (he was actually quite strong on that point). He saw it as many of us felt we expressed ourselves - in the best interests of the club. Those were almost his exact words. I remember vividly as he said it in response to me making a joke about winning a few games before going crazy with releasing changes.

There's a time, place and manner in which to do it of course. However, labeling those providing it as agitating, pathetic and 'poor' supporters is NOT the way to encourage the situation It just makes people more frustrated - and less constructive.

I agree with you. It's been a heck of an experience. Funny thing is: I recall back on '06 I was one of those that would frequently howl down the critics. The only problem was it became harder and harder to maintain that position as more and more evidence came forth.

I don't think I've quite made it back into the happy with how everything is going camp though. I've still got this foreboding thought that we've just seen Isildur pocket the ring. Sure, we're no longer getting crush injuries from that guy carrying the mace, yet we haven't yet seen the true defeat of the shadow. Full voting rights- an accountable board. Without it I worry that we haven't actually fixed the problem, just the symptoms.

 

[Southerntakeover]

I think there is more to it than "the negative posters" and "the positive posters". The poster's view being "positive" or "negative" is of little relevance. When they are trying to argue with emotion and their heart on their sleeve with very little rationalisation they can go in the "childish" group for all I care. I respect "positive" and "negative" posters if the content of their words is objective and thoughtful. I have no respect for tantrums when the side is losing or blind defence of idiocy at the club.

No, that's not properly understanding what I said.

'Negative' is not an accurate description, it was a pejorative being used to discredit criticism no matter how based in fact and logic it may have been.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Ok but here is my counter argument!=

Just because as fans we have the right to critic the club, doesn't mean we have too any chance we get in front of a computer!

Here is some advice:
Why not gather evidence first. Instead of jumping on the out coached by Roos criticisms 3 games into his career, why not give Walsh 11 games, write down what mistakes he seems to make over and over again for example; refusal to make positional changes that cost us a few games or keeps throwing Smith into the back line stopping our run etc. Make similarities to mistakes made by our previous coaches. But 3 games in is just crap, pure crap beyond belief.

Uh, what? That's not a counter argument at all.

If you disagreed with someones opinion, you disagreed with their opinion. There's nothing wrong with that. I personally don't hold much stock in the outcoached theory either. I actually think Walsh would far rather us play arm wrestle football than 'shoot out'.

Here is some advice though:

Don't turn every point that you disagree with into a hackneyed repetition of a discredited narrative about our supposedly negative supporter base.