Scape Goat I've lost my faith in Ken Hinkley Part 2

[Us against the rest]

Yes this whole "oh well what can we do but lie back and think of England" is just a load of horseshit. As is the oh stop complaining you mustn't be a real supporter because a real supporter would take on all the disdain the club is throwing at us and smile and support the boys. WTAF?

You have way with words, gives me a chuckle.

 

[PAFC66]

He said that ?

Surely people are getting dropped then

We'll see how much power ken has here then

 

[PAFC66]

You would hope so, Motlop was insipid and he had a few mates.

He's fat too.

Get rid of him.

 

[StuMan]

Hinkley on 360 tonight.
Might give that a miss. I can't stand his loser talk anymore. I haven't watched a press conference of his in well over a year.

 

[Us against the rest]

We'll see how much power ken has here then

Bet Spray keeps his spot because he got a few easy goals. At least we know that Neade can't come in lol.

 

[Doctor Feel]

What utter garbage. Those think that Keith and Kochy are just simply there to pay the bills and not to try and ensure the best chances of Port being successful, are wrong. I know it fits the narrative and lines up well with a lot of people's feelings towards the club, but its quite simply a fallacy.

You are right but it also makes them just as liable for our poor performance, as it should be.

 

[PAFC66]

Hinkley on 360 tonight.
Might give that a miss. I can't stand his loser talk anymore. I haven't watched a press conference of his in well over a year.

Should just get a job in the media. He froths over it

 

[JUSTWORK]

Not giving to much away but did identify our inability to use our ruck advantage at ground level

With our two rucks and their best 2 Mids out it is quite pathetic we didn’t dominate this area.

 

[Harlott]

I am not sure what process you are referring to. Up until this year the only process I have ever known is that the PAFC Board selects the Captain. What you are suggesting is a departure from that practice. Back in 2009 Chocco is alleged to have promised the Captaincy to Shaun Burgoyne but that was quashed by the Board who appointed Don Cassisi instead. In recent years the players have voted on the leadership group but that did not include the Captain. There appears to have been a change in direction engineered by Hinkley and possibly Davies.

You are probably right in that Hinkley had a thing about leadership but if on field leadership was a problem last year it does not appear to have been solved by appointing Co Captains. As an example I did not notice Jonas go up to Ryan Burton after that double goal and talk to him. Jonas was involved in the scuffle that broke out in the aftermath but that was doing the 'support ya mates' thing. No one expects a Captain to roar the s**t out of a player who stuffs up but a few words about forgetting it and making up for it in the remainder of the game might have helped.

In my eyes Ken Hinkley is on notice this year and the criteria for judgement must be more more than on field results. Hinkley has been a catalyst in change and if those changes work he deserves credit. If they fail, he fails and he should go.

Jonas was having teamates going up to him telling him to forget about it.

 

[chachi11]

Hinkley on 360 tonight.
Might give that a miss. I can't stand his loser talk anymore. I haven't watched a press conference of his in well over a year.

If I thought they would grill him for his performances and make him squirm I would watch, but you just know it's going to be the same dribble.
It makes me vomit that the loser represents the club.

 

[Us against the rest]

Should just get a job in the media. He froths over it

He should have taken the GC job, then he could of worked here.

 

[Us against the rest]

With our two rucks and their best 2 Mids out it is quite pathetic we didn’t dominate this area.

Yep, that's where I thought we would slowly get on top but with a disfunctional forward line it wouldn't of made any difference.

 

[PA88]

I am not sure what process you are referring to. Up until this year the only process I have ever known is that the PAFC Board selects the Captain. What you are suggesting is a departure from that practice. Back in 2009 Chocco is alleged to have promised the Captaincy to Shaun Burgoyne but that was quashed by the Board who appointed Don Cassisi instead. In recent years the players have voted on the leadership group but that did not include the Captain. There appears to have been a change in direction engineered by Hinkley and possibly Davies.

You are probably right in that Hinkley had a thing about leadership but if on field leadership was a problem last year it does not appear to have been solved by appointing Co Captains. As an example I did not notice Jonas go up to Ryan Burton after that double goal and talk to him. Jonas was involved in the scuffle that broke out in the aftermath but that was doing the 'support ya mates' thing. No one expects a Captain to roar the s**t out of a player who stuffs up but a few words about forgetting it and making up for it in the remainder of the game might have helped.

In my eyes Ken Hinkley is on notice this year and the criteria for judgement must be more more than on field results. Hinkley has been a catalyst in change and if those changes work he deserves credit. If they fail, he fails and he should go.

Yes Hinkley did say that the review showed an issue with on field leadership. I feel that he and Davies had set their minds on co-captaincy model as of that review and weeks before it was announced. I think they did engineer a different process. So I don't think Ollie was promised or had an agreement when he re-signed. Would the club promise captaincy knowing that there is still a chance that the players, coaches, and committee may all not vote him down the track?

I am referring to the decision process where there are three groups that present their preferred captain model. The Football Committee, Players, and the Coach/s. That's the information I got and I think the players presented to the Football Committee who with the coach/s then presented to the board. I heard Hartlett discuss how the players broke up into groups and provided the pros and cons for three players and the three names that tallied the most were the players presented, I assumed to the Football Committee. My source also tells me that the players didn't present a co-captain case but just three names and that it was the Football Committee that presented the case for co-captaincy.

 

[PAFC66]

Jonas was having teamates going up to him telling him to forget about it.

What Jonas couldn't do it himself? It's not enough he has another captain to hold his hand?

 

[PA88]

Smart stuff...

Like "compliance"

Our players arnt "compliant"

Strong word to use really. It 'may' imply that the reins on them are a little slack but not enough evidence.

 

[Harlott]

This decision regarding leadership. I know it's currently fashionable to be slagging off at Ken & Co but retracing my memory over the last few years I can honestly say I hadn't seen anything from the current co captains to say yep their our guys. They have literally been struggling to play consistent football.

 

[Harlott]

What Jonas couldn't do it himself? It's not enough he has another captain to hold his hand?

What I meant was he himself was the guy causing turnovers and had teammates going up to him in consolation.

 

[PAFC66]

Lol get ****ed. I knew they'd show this. He won't be dropped

 

[King_Tredrea]

Whether or not Koch and KT want the club to succeed is an irrelevant point. Actions speak louder than words, and they haven’t made the very pressing and necessary decisions to help the club succeed. That is all that is relevant.

 

[PAFC66]

What I meant was he himself was the guy causing turnovers and had teammates going up to him in consolation.

Getchya

 

[klem22]

Listening to Schoey on 5aa ...


****sake

He should be coaching this club!

The first two games with the way we were playing suggested to me that both Schofield and Montgomery were having some influence over kern.
I did not think it would be long before hinkley took the reigns back and tried to turn this thing about him. he is simply NOT an afl coach simple as that.
It would be hard sitting under hinkley for these two guys i wonder how long they will stay???

 

[1954]

Schoey making a public comment that the players `aren't compliant ' has to at least suggest the coach has lost them, and either they don't believe in the game plan, or can't execute it.
This season is unfortunately already showing all the signs of being a very long one.

 

[Long live PAFC]

Purely from an on field point of view.

3 finals series in 6 years. An ok percentage and around 55% wins. In 2015 we were expected to be a top four team but choked. In 2016, the prediction was that 2015 was the ‘Geelong’ down year before the flag. We choked. 2017 there were no expectations and we managed an embarrassing finals defeat at home. 2018 saw us pushing for a flag again, with three new final pieces of the puzzle before crashing out in fashion that has never before been replicated. We then said it was the players fault and time for a rebuild.

We have managed to lose to a bottom 4 side every year under Hinkley, along with gifting brave wins to depleted interstate sides, regularly losing showdowns and rarely thumping teams when we should. West Coast, Crows, Geelong and Essendon at Docklands remain our bogey sides. Skills, especially set shots, continue to let us down. Through six years we have not developed a tall forward for the future, although I have great hope for Marshall.

Our club and players have a real issue dealing with any kind of expectation and we have never been able to make the step from middle of the table to true contender.

If it isn’t Hinkley then what or who?

Coaches? We lost Richardson and Walsh and Voss is not their equal. We have had a complete clean out and there are some solid supports here. Even if we had some real duds, we have moved them on, our mediocrity does lie on any one assistant coach’s shoulders.

Facilities? Surely they are as good as anyone else’s and we give the team similar levels of support to other clubs.

Players? Under Hinkley we have basically turned over the list. Boak, Gray, Westhoff, Ebert, Jonas, Broadbent, Hartlett are all that remain from pre Hinkley. I’ll admit this is our leadership group and senior core but I would suggest Hinkley has had a chance to move these players on if he desired, as he did with Trengove etc.
Do we have the right players? Is there something that the list managers haven’t been able to give Ken? A ruck, a KPF, speed, midfield depth - really he has for whatever he has asked for.

We are not the Suns, Lions or North with their crap set ups. Our list is good with some deficits but no worse than any other top six contender.

Really there are no excuses. Failure is on the club and the club must be accountable.

 

[raptalia]

Yes Hinkley did say that the review showed an issue with on field leadership. I feel that he and Davies had set their minds on co-captaincy model as of that review and weeks before it was announced. I think they did engineer a different process. So I don't think Ollie was promised or had an agreement when he re-signed. Would the club promise captaincy knowing that there is still a chance that the players, coaches, and committee may all not vote him down the track?

I am referring to the decision process where there are three groups that present their preferred captain model. The Football Committee, Players, and the Coach/s. That's the information I got and I think the players presented to the Football Committee who with the coach/s then presented to the board. I heard Hartlett discuss how the players broke up into groups and provided the pros and cons for three players and the three names that tallied the most were the players presented, I assumed to the Football Committee. My source also tells me that the players didn't present a co-captain case but just three names and that it was the Football Committee that presented the case for co-captaincy.

Thanks for that 88 it is as disturbing as it is enlightening. Do you know who is on this Football Committee?

I rang the Club and got the message that the players approved but it looks as if they did not nominate Co Captains. That looks to be down to Hinkley and his co conspirators.

 

[AdamMarrett]

While I don't agree with the 'heap of talent' on the list (I think the best 22 was very talented, but the depth was poor, as witnessed by the fact that 2014 was our best year for the Magpies), the premise of this post is spot on.

Geelong didn't appoint Hinkley when Thompson resigned as head coach for the very reason that they didn't feel he could be ruthless enough. That's why he's always talking s**t about how great the opposition are - back in 2013/14 he had his chest puffed out talking about how teams that play us better be prepared to run etc. and slogans like 'you don't defend, you don't play'. Now it's always 'nearly guys'...'we'll take positives out of that' and all the other millennial bullshit that breeds an air of unaccountably within the playing group.

I want to know what happened to the ruthless hard arse that joined Port in 2013 and said to the playing group that they managed to get two coaches sacked, and to do the run again. If he's grown too close to the players because of the tragedies that the group has suffered together, then he needs to recuse himself of being head coach ASAP, because one of the jobs of a coach (and a CEO) is to make the tough calls and not be afraid of shaking things up. Stability is only good when it is used as the foundation on which to grow...it's is NOT meant to be the end in itself.

That's why I've said elsewhere that this week will tell me what I need to know. The systems that Montgomery and Schofield spoke about at the convention were exactly the kind of football that I've wanted to see for a long time. If this campaigner even tries to go in unchanged after that soft as s**t performance, he needs to offer his resignation in the press conference that they hold on Thursday when he normally announces the team, and Schofield should be put in his place.

Ken is hanging on by the slenderest of threads with me after that s**t we saw on the weekend. Everyone knew it was going to happen, because it happened the week before.

Out of curiosity why have you only seen it now? And not other seasons where similar has happened? What's the difference, it can't just be Monty and Schofield on board