Coaching Staff Former Coach Ben "Truck" Rutten - Sacked for real this time - 21/8

[Fin ice Smuggler]

So if we perform poorly next year, instead of moving John on and appointing Rutten (as JW would expect) we will have to ride it out with this arrangement? Surely we won't now sack the interim coach under any circumstances? How could they sack him now - it's not really his plan after all. He's more of a leader than a coach...

If we poor - again - next year, how do you see this playing out?

I think your going to have to learn to deal with it Bruv...

Back in Rutten and Co...

 

[Howard Moon]

I think this applies more to our supporters than anything else.

Edit: I'll expand,

addressing rumours- the rumours we largely ignore by giving no answers or vague answers that only further encourage the talk by media or supporters? Where we get hammered for saying nothing and also when saying something?

spruiking big club status- examples? All I see is the supporters saying this and the club mentions it when attracting talent. That's a good thing. Sell yourself to attract the best. We didn't fly jets up to Noosa if that's what you're getting at?

whining about fixtures- again when? And by who that isn't a supporter? In fact we were quite happy with the commercial aspects of our fixture this year.

Complaining about weather- supporters.

worrying what others think of us- trying to repair a reputation we destroyed ourselves is just smart business. In fact one would say it's within our control to better conduct ourselves


worrying what the media say about us- realising that for a club trying to turn it's image around to ensure we can grow from this black period it is pretty important to at least have sections of the media on board.

creating succession plans to appease baying media- going outside the box of sack current coach (what media wanted) replace with young next of the grid coach action the club instead to assist with the circumstances of our employees through a laid out plan and is implementing a strategic handover? Yes I think we definitely gave the media what they wanted here...

asking for clarification on umpiring mistakes- yeah successfully run clubs don't do that, you would never see a team say second on the ladder ask about the treatment of a player? A star small forward perhaps?
I mean what do you expect a coffee catch-up with woosh on his laptop with Gil? Ha!
No successfull coach or club does that. SO reactionary.

trying to copy other teams game plans or poach their staff - replacing staff with superior talent from superior systems to grow your club. Yes this is...reactionary?

A lot of nonsensical statements wrapped up with some pictures.

You take my shitposting way too seriously It really doesn't deserve in-depth analysis!

 

[CBombers17]

I think your going to have to learn to deal with it Bruv...

Back in Rutten and Co...

I don't think it's a reduculous question. We've been performing pretty poorly for a long time now. We are every chance to do so again next year. Maybe you have an answer as to how we would handle a bad 2020 with this arrangement?

 

[BrunoV]

I dont know why we have to insist two things cant be right at the same time.

This is a sacking in everything but name.

How can Worsfold make 1 decision that impacts upon 2021that Rutten doesnt agree with?

What then does Worsfold actually have control over? It can only be jack shit.

It is extremely curious timing that the succession plan was announced when it was ( when there was a clear risk we'd lose Rutten to Adelside when we clearly want Rutten).

Up until this point Worsfold is the right coach and now he's not. That's rubbish and it's even more so if dependent on finals performances. Either we are satisfied with the game style, list development or we are not.

If we'd stolen a win from an inaccurate WCE would the decision have been the same?

All of this aside, and it's pithy shit, it's a great outcome because it effectively ends the tenure of Lloyd Braun..apparently he just liked the sound of that bell ringing.

 

[Mercurial89]

You take my s**tposting way too seriously It really doesn't deserve in-depth analysis!

I really do. Apologies

 

[Lore]

I don't think it's a reduculous question. We've been performing pretty poorly for a long time now. We are every chance to do so again next year. Maybe you have an answer as to how we would handle a bad 2020 with this arrangement?

You say that like the only way to fix a bad year is by sacking a coach in the middle of it.

If we had thrown Worsfold out on his ear, and Rutten had a rough first year as senior coach in 2020, do you think we would sack him?

 

[CBombers17]

You say that like the only way to fix a bad year is by sacking a coach in the middle of it.

If we had thrown Worsfold out on his ear, and Rutten had a rough first year as senior coach in 2020, do you think we would sack him?

No we wouldn't sack him. Not only that, he would have clear air in 2020 and his first year taken on face value, time to settle in and have the players adjust to his ways etc.

As it stands I think Rutten has little to gain from 2020 now except more experience of sort of coaching the players (as he has done this year).

If we have another poor year or worse next year (say we come 14th) how many years will we offer Rutten as our new coach ? 3 or 4?

Mistakes were made with the extension and yet who's admited to that? Nobody. When management don't have the courage to admit their mistakes this is the sort of rubbish they roll out instead.

I think it's healthy to question the club's decision making these days. Something I never would have done a until I'd seen years of incompetence. Those pedalling all the 'wow great solution' and "all these sooks who don't think this is amazing are dickheads' etc can please themselves. Next year the players will vote on this with effort and they just may not love the interim coaching solution - like apparently they didn't love the Neild solution. You would think club will be far from stable if that happens.

 

[Lore]

No we wouldn't sack him. Not only that, he would have clear air in 2020 and his first year taken on face value, time to settle in and have the players adjust to his ways etc.

As it stands I think Rutten has little to gain from 2020 now except more experience of sort of coaching the players (as he has done this year).

If we have another poor year or worse next year (say we come 14th) how many years will we offer Rutten as our new coach ? 3 or 4?

Mistakes were made with the extension and yet who's admited to that? Nobody. When management don't have the courage to admit their mistakes this is the sort of rubbish they roll out instead.

I think it's healthy to question the club's decision making these days. Something I never would have done a until I'd seen years of incompetence. Those pedalling all the 'wow great solution' and "all these sooks who don't think this is amazing are dickheads' etc can please themselves. Next year the players will vote on this with effort and they just may not love the interim coaching solution - like apparently they didn't love the Neild solution. You would think club will be far from stable if that happens.

Rutten already has one year as senior assistant and three years as head coach on his new contract*... So we won't be "offering" him anything, he already has it. Clean air.

*I'm sure I read this/heard this somewhere in the last few days but I couldn't say exactly where..

 

[calyam]

I just hope we've done our due diligence. We half-arse so many things and we cannot afford a another second-tier head coach.

 

[Fin ice Smuggler]

I don't think it's a reduculous question. We've been performing pretty poorly for a long time now. We are every chance to do so again next year. Maybe you have an answer as to how we would handle a bad 2020 with this arrangement?

I’m not that negative in life to worry that far ahead for something out of my control....

I wanted change and I’ve seen change. Now I want a good trade draft period a good fitness coaching acquisition and a decent pre season. 2 areas that are critical to the club changing its culture for success.

 

[Zach Package]

We’re basically just raiding the level 4 coaching accreditation pool, it’s impossible to say whether or not it’s more just talent hoarding than any kind of nepotism.

I would suggest that the midfield equivalent of Mark Harvey should be the priority. A real ‘midfield whisperer’ that can develop basically anything into an AFL standard footballer as Harvey has proven in the backline.

 

[Cold Sober]

Jumped too slow with Woosh , jumped too quick with Rutten.
One day someone will know something about football and make a decision that will help our Club. Nah, I'm dreaming.

 

[Lore]

I just hope we've done our due diligence. We half-arse so many things and we cannot afford a another second-tier head coach.

I'm not really sure what a coaching appointment looks like with due dilligence. Does anyone in the industry do it?

The most "professional" clubs don't sack coaches, so don't need to appoint them very often.

- Sydney had a succession plan for Roos > Longmire. Longmire was their assistant coach from 2002 until 2006, when he got a "super assistant" role in order to facilitate his continued development after he missed out on the Saints job and they were scared he was gonna leave. That involved taking charge of the entire squad over the pre-season, including the pre-season competition, as well as being the line coach for the midfield. He held that role until 2008, when Longmire was appointed as their "coaching co-ordinator" as part of the transition into the big chair when Roos retired in 2011. 4-5 years as a regular assistant, "super assistant" (which sounds similar to our 'senior assistant' jobs to me) for 2 years, and a three year period named as the transition.

- West Coast poached Adam Simpson from Clarkson's stable at Hawthorn when Worsfold stepped down from coaching. He retired from playing in 2009, joined Hawthorn as an assistant in 2010, and was appointed at West Coast at the end of 2013. So three years experience.. but he was a premiership winning midfield/forward assistant coach so I guess that's something.

- Chris Scott retired in 2007, was an assistant at Fremantle for three seasons (08-10) before he got the job at Geelong, when Bomber somewhat famously stepped down due to burnout at the end of 2010.

- 300 years ago Hawthorn poached Clarkson out of Port Adelaide's coaching box (it was actually 2005). He'd had one year of experience as an assistant at St Kilda in 1999, and two years with Port in 2003-04. In between he coached a VFL team for a year and then a SANFL team for two years, winning one SANFL premiership and losing the other. So a grand total of three years in the senior competition, with some promise shown as a head coach at a lower level.

And for the sake of the other side of it, the Buckley/Malthouse scenario;
- Nathan Buckley retired in 2007. He seems to have spent 2008 and 2009 writing a memoir, working in the media and working with the AIS. He was linked to coaching jobs at a couple of other clubs around that period, but in mid 2009 Collingwood announced he and Malthouse had both signed 5 year deals, with Buckley being an assistant for two years and then taking over as senior coach, with Malthouse moving to a director of coaching role. 2010 was Collingwood's premiership year, and 2011 they made the grand final but lost to Geelong. Malthouse didn't stick around to be a director of coaching after that, and Buckley basically threw all the babies out of the bath but kept the bathwater, which took a while but seems to finally be working in his favour.

Lets not mention the Hirdy/Bomber coaching arrangement. Whatever that could've been, it certainly was not. Best not spoken of.


Rutten's story so far is retiring from playing in 2014, four years as an assistant at Richmond 2015-2018, one year as a senior assistant at Essendon (team defence and KPP). If it goes how it's supposed to, his role next year could be anything from what he's doing now with a seat at the list management and selection committee tables and some mentoring from Worsfold around "here's a scenario, what would you do, here's what I would do and why, what do you think", to what Longmire was doing as "super assistant" and taking charge of the entire pre-season as well.

He's got more experience at senior level than what Bucks, Clarkson, Scott or Simpson had. He'll have a quicker transition than Buckley or Longmire had. And more buy in from Worsfold than Buckley did with Malthouse. He doesn't have quite as much glitter on his apprenticeship compared to Clarkson, although we haven't actually tried putting Truck in charge of a SANFL team so who knows what would happen with the same opportunities. Worsfold does at least seem to be on board with it, and his family reasons are legit.


If Essendon wins a premiership next year that would certainly put an interesting spin on the situation (as it did for Collingwood) but so long as there is buy in from the coaches themselves, it can't really go too far wrong in the immediate future imo. The longer term will just have to take care of itself, as it always has.

 

[Bombermania]

Jumped too slow with Woosh , jumped too quick with Rutten.
One day someone will know something about football and make a decision that will help our Club. Nah, I'm dreaming.

We seem to be the only club run with basically non-footballers in the leadership roles whereas most other clubs seem to have a mix of footballers and non-footballers in key roles.

 

[CBombers17]

I think having a plan in place that gives Rutten a taste of it all without the extra scrutiny and then another first year with full control and enough job security to really have a go at it is plenty enough clean air for a new senior coach. That’s the only kind of clean air I care about.

When you say “very strong on field performance”, how do you judge that? Are you judging the club by something that is actually within their sphere of control? (Thanks Howard Moon)

I would say you judge that by a perceivable improvement on this year's performance. If we have a similar year results wise - say 12 wins - then there will be pressure from outside asking more difficult questions about Rutten's strategy and also the decision to keep Worsfold around as a waste of time (and rightly so). If we perform better than this year (finals win or 2 and actually jump at the start with the rest of the field) then that's a perceivable improvement. I'd suggest that should sit inside the club's control to answer your question.

If we miss finals (especially if by a lot) then I think the club will be under the pump big time and for all the clear air and tastes you think Rutten is getting he will be under pressure. Worsfold will get sacked again (so effectively twice) and we will be less than stable. The media will hammer at the club and Rutten for an 18 month tenure as though hes coached - because they know he has.They know he's in charge and Woosha's just a figurehead.

These bright ideas about perfect handovers often don't work for a reason. They are triggered as a reactionary manoeuvre rather than a progressive forward thinking one. This reeks of reactionary. New Prime ministers often take power in a few weeks or overnight. You either have it or you don't. The long lead in sounds really good and so sensible and safe and it's really optics.

I had lunch with an old boss today. He took over a very big, culturally and physically unsafe waste management operation 3 years ago (80 trucks, both municipal and Commercial collections, heavily unionised workforce, bad press, OHS problems everywhere, losing money) it was a nightmare. Now it's not because he was the right choice. He'd never done that work on that scale. There's really no training for that. Rutten needing all this time is crap IMO.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

My major concern is simple. Football clubs are run increasingly with PR as #1. The reasons for that make sense: the media and public scrutiny on football is beyond any other industry or field. Politics and business included. That puts extreme pressure on people making decisions. And I mean extreme pressure. Nerve shattering, life ruining pressure.

It’s totally natural that individuals will do anything possible to avoid that happening to them. So avoiding media storms becomes the greatest priority. Actually greater than success. I mean that. Spoken or unspoken, the need to avoid media storms is ever-present and extremely powerful.

Every step of the way, Essendon has demonstrated this.

These stupid, early contract extensions for coaches are arranged for no other reason than to avoid media pressure in the final year of a contract.

We did this with Worsfold. We couldn’t handle the thought of the year of pressure in 2019. (The stupidest part about these ones is they don’t work anyway. Media still come for contracted coaches).

I have zero doubt it’s driven this situation in large part. No media storm over Worsfold in his final year. No media storm over keeping him in the role when we clearly haven’t performed or progressed sufficiently in two years. No media storm over not moving on him decisively earlier. No media storm over throwing in an untried coach... we’re quietly sliding him in instead.

To be quite honest, I think we reek of a fear of these media storms and let it largely dictate what we do. We still have never thrown our coaching position open and run a proper process to ensure we had the right person. Maybe we’ll get lucky and Rutten will be anyway.

 

[Lore]

I would say you judge that by a perceivable improvement on this year's performance. If we have a similar year results wise - say 12 wins - then there will be pressure from outside asking more difficult questions about Rutten's strategy and also the decision to keep Worsfold around as a waste of time (and rightly so). If we perform better than this year (finals win or 2 and actually jump at the start with the rest of the field) then that's a perceivable improvement. I'd suggest that should sit inside the club's control to answer your question.

If we miss finals (especially if by a lot) then I think the club will be under the pump big time and for all the clear air and tastes you think Rutten is getting he will be under pressure. Worsfold will get sacked again (so effectively twice) and we will be less than stable. The media will hammer at the club and Rutten for an 18 month tenure as though hes coached - because they know he has.They know he's in charge and Woosha's just a figurehead.

These bright ideas about perfect handovers often don't work for a reason. They are triggered as a reactionary manoeuvre rather than a progressive forward thinking one. This reeks of reactionary. New Prime ministers often take power in a few weeks or overnight. You either have it or you don't. The long lead in sounds really good and so sensible and safe and it's really optics.

I had lunch with an old boss today. He took over a very big, culturally unsafe waste management operation 3 years ago (80 trucks, both municipal and Commercial collections, heavily unionised workforce, bad press, OHS problems everywhere, losing money) it was a nightmare. Now it's not because he was the right choice. He'd never done that work on that scale. There's really no training for that. Rutten needing all this time is crap IMO.

I think you've missed the point about what it is we actually have control over. I was referring to Howie's post in the other coaching thread, here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...-succession-plan.1228580/page-3#post-62904176

If you head over to that thread I also posted there with some of the recent successful teams and their coaching handovers. It might be interesting to you, and it might not. I feel like I'm somewhat duplicating my posts across these two threads as it stands.

If you really think that changing coaches with zero continuity or handover or anything every time we finish a season (or half of one?) without "perceivable improvement" is likely to lead to a grand final appearance one of these decades then I don't think there's much purpose in the conversation anymore.

Also if we're holding up the revolving door of the prime ministers office as some sort of gold standard in leadership handovers then I'm definitely, 110% done with this conversation

 

[CBombers17]

I think you've missed the point about what it is we actually have control over. I was referring to Howie's post in the other coaching thread, here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...-succession-plan.1228580/page-3#post-62904176

If you head over to that thread I also posted there with some of the recent successful teams and their coaching handovers. It might be interesting to you, and it might not. I feel like I'm somewhat duplicating my posts across these two threads as it stands.

If you really think that changing coaches with zero continuity or handover or anything every time we finish a season (or half of one?) without "perceivable improvement" is likely to lead to a grand final appearance one of these decades then I don't think there's much purpose in the conversation anymore.

Also if we're holding up the revolving door of the prime ministers office as some sort of gold standard in leadership handovers then I'm definitely, 110% done with this conversation

I'm unconcerned if we continue the conversation or not but your read on my estimation about what would put us under media pressure and potentially destabilize the club (yours and others reasoning for this succession plan) is totally off base.

My actual opinion on who should be coaching in 2020 is Worsfold unless the club performs poorly again - in this case replace him with Rutten. That's hardly suggesting no continuity. It's just saying cut the PR crap because it won't save us scrutiny or destabilization.

Anyway. I've more than said my piece so we will see how smoothly this all pans out in 2020.

 

[Lore]

I'm unconcerned if we continue the conversation or not but your read on my estimation about what would put us under media pressure and potentially destabilize the club (yours and others reasoning for this succession plan) is totally off base.

My actual opinion on who should be coaching in 2020 is Worsfold unless the club performs poorly again - in this case replace him with Rutten. That's hardly suggesting no continuity. It's just saying cut the PR crap because it won't save us scrutiny or destabilization.

Anyway. I've more than said my piece so we will see how smoothly this all pans out in 2020.

I must have some of your posts confused with someone else. Seems that the general theme around here to just scorched earth the entire club and start fresh every 12 months. There was certainly someone in here before saying we should just pay Worsfold out and move on asap.

So you're saying we should basically do what we're doing and don't announce it? Or just endure whatever circus we cop over the next 12 months in silence, and then parachute Rutten into the top job (if he's still available) with no formal mentoring or increased duties?

 

[CBombers17]

I must have some of your posts confused with someone else. Seems that the general theme around here to just scorched earth the entire club and start fresh every 12 months. There was certainly someone in here before saying we should just pay Worsfold out and move on asap.

So you're saying we should basically do what we're doing and don't announce it? Or just endure whatever circus we cop over the next 12 months in silence, and then parachute Rutten into the top job (if he's still available) with no formal mentoring or increased duties?

Short answer - Yes.

I think we should have kept it as it is an not announced it - 100% (if Rutten stayed for that outcome of course) Just stick by our guns and suck up any media crap. If the team has another bad start to 2020 then put Rutten into the job if he's still here or start looking for a new coach then.

Otherwise, if we thought Rutten's our man when Adelaide sniff around a month ago and we get scared he will leave then have the courage to put him in the main job and give him a fresh start - immediately (as in at the end of the season). Sack Worsfold at that point and move forward with a 3 year contract for Rutten.

Or, if we really want to keep Worsfold for 2020 for some reason (all this loyalty we apparently feel or something) then let Rutten do what he has to - go to Adelaide or whatever - and spend 2020 working out who's the best senior coach we can get and make that happen.

Either way I think that means transparency continuity, consistency and also integrity in decision making for the playing group, the club and it members and supporters.

People can hack a mistake like signing Woosha for too long. But start bullshitting around, getting tricky and not owning your errors and the results always the same in life. I have a bad feeling this is all NQR and we could see this turn out badly 2020 and possibly beyond. This is my fear here, not some twisted hope as I have supported Essendon for a long time. But I've seen more than enough to be suspicious of the spin that has become Essendon.

 

[Fin ice Smuggler]

I would say you judge that by a perceivable improvement on this year's performance. If we have a similar year results wise - say 12 wins - then there will be pressure from outside asking more difficult questions about Rutten's strategy and also the decision to keep Worsfold around as a waste of time (and rightly so). If we perform better than this year (finals win or 2 and actually jump at the start with the rest of the field) then that's a perceivable improvement. I'd suggest that should sit inside the club's control to answer your question.

If we miss finals (especially if by a lot) then I think the club will be under the pump big time and for all the clear air and tastes you think Rutten is getting he will be under pressure. Worsfold will get sacked again (so effectively twice) and we will be less than stable. The media will hammer at the club and Rutten for an 18 month tenure as though hes coached - because they know he has.They know he's in charge and Woosha's just a figurehead.

These bright ideas about perfect handovers often don't work for a reason. They are triggered as a reactionary manoeuvre rather than a progressive forward thinking one. This reeks of reactionary. New Prime ministers often take power in a few weeks or overnight. You either have it or you don't. The long lead in sounds really good and so sensible and safe and it's really optics.

I had lunch with an old boss today. He took over a very big, culturally and physically unsafe waste management operation 3 years ago (80 trucks, both municipal and Commercial collections, heavily unionised workforce, bad press, OHS problems everywhere, losing money) it was a nightmare. Now it's not because he was the right choice. He'd never done that work on that scale. There's really no training for that. Rutten needing all this time is crap IMO.

What a load of negative bullocks. go and support another team if you're that unhappy.

 

[fairbump_playon]

Short answer - Yes.

I think we should have kept it as it is an not announced it - 100% (if Rutten stayed for that outcome of course) Just stick by our guns and suck up any media crap. If the team has another bad start to 2020 then put Rutten into the job if he's still here or start looking for a new coach then.

Otherwise, if we thought Rutten's our man when Adelaide sniff around a month ago and we get scared he will leave then have the courage to put him in the main job and give him a fresh start - immediately (as in at the end of the season). Sack Worsfold at that point and move forward with a 3 year contract for Rutten.

Or, if we really want to keep Worsfold for 2020 for some reason (all this loyalty we apparently feel or something) then let Rutten do what he has to - go to Adelaide or whatever - and spend 2020 working out who's the best senior coach we can get and make that happen.

Either way I think that means transparency continuity, consistency and also integrity in decision making for the playing group, the club and it members and supporters.

People can hack a mistake like signing Woosha for too long. But start bulls**tting around, getting tricky and not owning your errors and the results always the same in life. I have a bad feeling this is all NQR and we could see this turn out badly 2020 and possibly beyond. This is my fear here, not some twisted hope as I have supported Essendon for a long time. But I've seen more than enough to be suspicious of the spin that has become Essendon.

I suspect the missing piece may be that it’s not loyalty - the club actually likes and rates Worsfold. If he didn’t have a drive to return to Perth he would be coaching next year full stop. As it stands he wants out and (thank god) we have a 37 year old prince in waiting. The club is excited about Rutten but believes he can learn more from the old dog Worsfold who they respect and trust. So here we are.

To me this arrangement makes a heap of sense.

I feel like generally the response on this board shows a lot of people traumatized by the slightly winning and fairly mediocre seasons we’ve had. The trust is super low and people are being triggered whenever the club does anything at all.

In that lens the club literally can’t win. Player injury? Club sucks. Player leaves? Club sucks. Recruit performs well but not amazingly? Club sucks. Keep the coach? Club sucks.

The only thing that (briefly) soothes the beast is big changes and the hope they bring. Shiel? Thrilling Until April. New coach? Thrilling until a couple of early losses and then suddenly a stupid choice. Lore’s parallel to the prime ministerial merry-go-round is a good one. Abrupt change for change’s sake would actually be the ultimate PR stunt.

 

[Vindicater]

I could have sworn that about threee weeks ago the overriding sentiment on this board was that Worsfold should see out his contract and then Rutten or Caracella take over.

Fast forward three weeks and we get confirmation that thsi will happen and everyone goes apeshit.

FMD.

 

[CBombers17]

I suspect the missing piece may be that it’s not loyalty - the club actually likes and rates Worsfold. If he didn’t have a drive to return to Perth he would be coaching next year full stop. As it stands he wants out and (thank god) we have a 37 year old prince in waiting. The club is excited about Rutten but believes he can learn more from the old dog Worsfold who they respect and trust. So here we are.

To me this arrangement makes a heap of sense.

I feel like generally the response on this board shows a lot of people traumatized by the slightly winning and fairly mediocre seasons we’ve had. The trust is super low and people are being triggered whenever the club does anything at all.

In that lens the club literally can’t win. Player injury? Club sucks. Player leaves? Club sucks. Recruit performs well but not amazingly? Club sucks. Keep the coach? Club sucks.

The only thing that (briefly) soothes the beast is big changes and the hope they bring. Shiel? Thrilling Until April. New coach? Thrilling until a couple of early losses and then suddenly a stupid choice. Lore’s parallel to the prime ministerial merry-go-round is a good one. Abrupt change for change’s sake would actually be the ultimate PR stunt.

So you think the club likes and rates Worsfold as a coach? And that this is only happening because he wants to go home and fortunately we happen to have Ben Rutten in the wings to take over? And the Club is just doing it's best given Worsfold (who we want to stay) wants out...

Obviously people on here agree with this - I don't and I don't hold suspicion over some of the club's decisions because we can't win a final either. Think more along the lines of the management of the club that saw Bomba put in charge and you're closer.

 

[fairbump_playon]

So you think the club likes and rates Worsfold as a coach? And that this is only happening because he wants to go home and fortunately we happen to have Ben Rutten in the wings to take over? And the Club is just doing it's best given Worsfold (who we want to stay) wants out...

Obviously people on here agree with this - I don't and I don't hold suspicion over some of the club's decisions because we can't win a final either. Think more along the lines of the management of the club that saw Bomba put in charge and you're closer.

Yep that’s what I think. Except it isn’t fortunate that Rutten is there - it’s intentional - because the club has known for some time that Worsfold wouldn’t be around forever.

Fair enough re the Bomber Thompson hiring bungle - but there’s been pretty solid regime change at board and CEO level since then.