Opinion Sack Hinkley 10 - UnTENable

Remove this Banner Ad

The thing I take from Graham's piece is the problem with our forward structure is the failure of delivery and the two younger KPFs. It is not his son's absolutely dogshit setup.


I don't blame Chad for the setup, like everyone blamed Bass, it's Hinkley's bloody plan, they just take orders.

How many coaches and players have we burned through? I mean we were bombing it on Sam Gray's head once... I mean he finished up 4 years ago.
 
Five minutes into pre-season with a fresh coach they'll be Kenny who? it's the biggest load of rubbish ever how attached they are to this bloke.
I'm not sure they are anymore. Watching Ken on the bench with the players, the body language doesn't indicate that. You watch Ken talking to players on the bench, Zac getting a rocket a few weeks ago and Charlie's discussion the other week. Ken just talks at them, there is no engaged, back and forward discussion. Connor sitting next to Ken on the bench, off injured on Thursday. Connor was obviously shattered, he sat staring ahead, there was no interaction or obvious effort from Ken to try and console him or encourage him. This is very different from other coaches on the bench with players in similar situations.
For a while we were inundated with photos of Ken with players, or snippets of interviews with players mentioning how connected they were with Ken and how great he was. Maybe I just haven't seen as much media lately, but I don't recall seeing any of that for a while now.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The Connor Rozee situation from the weekend is the perfect metaphor for the greater coaching scenario. The blame needs to be laid at the club. Relying on Ken to resign or let you know when he's done is insane. He's got a great squad, he's earning a good payday, he may even feel like he IS the best man for the job. Just like the coaching team should have taken action on Rozee, the club should have taken action on Ken. And just like with Rozee we were too scared of change we risked further damage. To quote Kane Cornes "it's an unforgivable mistake".
 
Last edited:
Kane Cornes defends Ken Hinkley: "they're sitting inside the top 8!"

They were both defending Ken. At least Cornes was actually saying he needs to win some finals this year to keep his job.

I don't think that is the case though. Ken only needs to make finals and he'll be here next year. We all know that.
 
They were both defending Ken. At least Cornes was actually saying he needs to win some finals this year to keep his job.

I don't think that is the case though. Ken only needs to make finals and he'll be here next year. We all know that.

Or finish within a reasonable distance of the top eight. It's not like there isn't 18 teams trying to fit in.
 
Kane Cornes defends Ken Hinkley: "they're sitting inside the top 8!"

I agree with the comment, "You can't compare Port Adelaide with the Western Bulldogs. The Dogs have won a flag, and made another grand final, so they're already ahead of Port on that score. And when the 2 teams met in 2021 in a game that really counted, Port finished the game in third place (daylight second). So yeah - don't compare Port with the Dogs: it's embarrassingly in favour of the Dogs.
 
Last edited:
They were both defending Ken. At least Cornes was actually saying he needs to win some finals this year to keep his job.

I don't think that is the case though. Ken only needs to make finals and he'll be here next year. We all know that.
I reckon he could lose every game until the end of the season and still survive. There's nothing to indicate anything about our board caring about performance
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

On this occasion Graham Cornes is on the money, we have been saying that Hinkley coaches the fear of losing rather than winning.

We are as Cornes put it mentally fragile, it's something we have been saying for a decade.

Mental strength has to be coached into the players just like Jack used to. All the loser talk that comes from Hinkley has manifested itself like a virus amongst our playing group, something that will take some time to rectify.
 
On this occasion Graham Cornes is on the money, we have been saying that Hinkley coaches the fear of losing rather than winning.

We are as Cornes put it mentally fragile, it's something we have been saying for a decade.

Mental strength has to be coached into the players just like Jack used to. All the loser talk that comes from Hinkley has manifested itself like a virus amongst our playing group, something that will take some time to rectify.
I was thinking about this, and if you look back at players like Zak, Xav, Chad Wingard, and others like them. They come into the club and play with flair, bucketloads of confidence and real spark, then look at them again after a few seasons with Ken. I really want to see our players with a coach that gives them back that confidence and joy in what they are doing, and stops players like JHF losing those qualities that make them special.
 
I was thinking about this, and if you look back at players like Zak, Xav, Chad Wingard, and others like them. They come into the club and play with flair, bucketloads of confidence and real spark, then look at them again after a few seasons with Ken. I really want to see our players with a coach that gives them back that confidence and joy in what they are doing, and stops players like JHF losing those qualities that make them special.
Yeah agreed, it seems any player showing ability has the confidence sucked out of them be Hinkley, this is why imo when things are not going our way, we don't have enough individuals that can turn things around and drag other players in, JHF and Butters tried but that fear stopped the rest.
 
Here's a scenario, hypothetically, if Butters would request a trade if Ken got sacked, would you rather we put up with Ken til he finishes his contract to keep Butters, or just cut Zak loose and move on?
As much as I like Zak, I would be shopping him around in an instant in that scenario. At the very least, it would give the new coach something to work with and it would mean not having someone committed to the club on the list.

Commitment to the club is an non-negotiable for me.
 
As much as I like Zak, I would be shopping him around in an instant in that scenario. At the very least, it would give the new coach something to work with and it would mean not having someone committed to the club on the list.

Commitment to the club is an non-negotiable for me.
It would hurt, but I agree
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top