Hot Topic 2016 Leadership Group - Murphy retains Captaincy

[Space Cadet]

I doubt there's any financial bonuses. The payments would be included in contracts/salary cap, which would mean leaderships positions are determined when contracts are signed and that doesn't make sense.

 

[JustaBattler]

Stoked for Simpson and Ed - so well deserved. Walker to lead forwards - good on him.

btw Shiek group pf seven is better than 5 - SOP in group design.

 

[LordLucifer]

btw Shiek group pf seven is better than 5 - SOP in group design.

Please explain why ??

 

[JustaBattler]

Please explain why ??

1. You have uneven numbers in a functioning group- because it doesn't allow for 50/50 splits on anything.
2. You don't have three because that is too narrow .
3. If you had five - you risk group think ( not enough differences)
So seven - which in this case allows for some blooding of younger ones
any more becomes dysfunctional any less is sub optimal.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

How about the club makes a decision on the structure and number the leadership group will be and sticks to it - year after year. This floating, changeable thing saps confidence and is too arbitrary for mine.

Agreed.

Strange bedfellows.

 

[thylacine60]

How many times - I am not Effendi's goat-boy.

 

[thylacine60]

I offend one goat......

 

[Robbo's my hero]

You've got to be kidding me. Only one goat?

 

[thylacine60]

1. You have uneven numbers in a functioning group- because it doesn't allow for 50/50 splits on anything.
2. You don't have three because that is too narrow .
3. If you had five - you risk group think ( not enough differences)
So seven - which in this case allows for some blooding of younger ones
any more becomes dysfunctional any less is sub optimal.

The year we go sub-optimal I put the cue in the rack. NO to sub-optimal!

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The year we go sub-optimal I put the cue in the rack. NO to sub-optimal!

Transformerist

 

[Dramoth]

It's going to be interesting... We have 2 veterans in the leadership group, 3 guys from the 25-28 year old group and 2 guys from the under 23s group.

Very good age spread really.

 

[Soapy V]

Jamison didn't nominate apparently.

 

[Navara79]

That last row of seats were my families reserved seats. Oh how I miss those seats!

 

[Jatz]

Thrilled for Murphy. Was the only senior player that stood up last season when the going got tough. Absolutely deserves his reappointment.

 

[1981]

Is there a left sided slant?
Cripps genuinely looks like a giant

 

[Jatz]

Is there a left sided slant?
Cripps genuinely looks like a giant

Now that you've said that, all I can see is the slant that doesn't actually exist! Haha.

 

[Azzurro]

Actually having second thoughts. Personally, I think that a 5-man leadership group is not enough.
The leadership group we had last year was horrible.

Gibbs did not really set examples on the field and was getting injured.
Jamison was out for quit a while, and was not there to support.
Rowe was inconsistent and does not seem to be strong enough for a leader.
Henderson was a joke, and did practically nothing for weeks.

Murphy was basically carrying the team on his shoulders for the majority of the season, and I felt quite sorry for him. But I admired the level of effort he brought when playing under Barker. It made him just as worthy for the best and fairest like Cripps.

Most People think that having too many leaders can become an issue, but I believe that for a group of players like we have now (including new faces, young kids and struggling bodies), about 7-8 would be just about right. If only this could happen.

Marc Murphy (Captain)
Bryce Gibbs (Vice Captain)
Kade Simpson (Vice Captain)
Andrew Walker
Dale Thomas
Sam Docherty
Ed Curnow

If 8, probably Zach Tuohy to be included.

A great leadership group requires a perfect balance of:

- People that have the ability to lead and communicate ideas and plans thoroughly to players. People who have the ability to install belief and faith in the others. People who can get them to listen. (Murphy, Gibbs, Walker, Simpson)
- Players who become standouts in most matches. Players who are praised for their outstanding level of skill and poise to make a difference in the game. (Murphy, Gibbs, Simpson, Tuohy, Thomas)
- Players who throw their body on the line and/or always put in a good effort. Players who show their love for the jumper and passion for the game. Players who do their work and expect others to do theirs. (Simpson, Docherty, Curnow)
- Players who share things in common, such as level of experience, strength, position on the field, etc.

So close! Well done NBTJ35

 

[LordLucifer]

I offend one goat......

I have many man-servants with desert eyes who have told me different.

 

[ferrisb]

I offend one goat......

You've got to be kidding me. Only one goat?

Lift, ffs!

 

[LordLucifer]

1. You have uneven numbers in a functioning group- because it doesn't allow for 50/50 splits on anything.
2. You don't have three because that is too narrow .
3. If you had five - you risk group think ( not enough differences)
So seven - which in this case allows for some blooding of younger ones
any more becomes dysfunctional any less is sub optimal.

I can understand your rationale here JaB but don't necessarily agree with it.

I've been involved with a rather large cricket club for over a decade now of which team captains & vice-captains (in consultation with the executive committee of the club) made up the leadership group. This has worked well extremely well and gave the team leaders some additional respect & responsibility in the club.

What it also allowed was for natural and/or vocal leaders within each team to not only set examples for the younger players but they also provided a level of encouragement and support for them as well. They didn't need to be appointed to an official position, it all happened organically and worked extremely well.

With the Blues, I believe the focus should be on the quality of the personnel, not the quantity. Three genuine on & off field leaders can have a huge impact on a group if they are the right people in the first place.

What does makes me scratch my head and question the larger group is just how did the club survive for so long and win so many premierships with just a standard three-man team (captain, vice-captain & deputy vice-captain) in the past ??

To me, appointing actual "leadership groups" is just another recent fad in the game to go with warm-ups on the ground, singing the club song in the rooms after the match in front of the TV cameras & cliche'd 'yeah-nah' answers to post-match interviews.

If the size, structure & personnel of the leadership group keeps changing from year to year then I have to seriously question its legitimacy.

 

[LordLucifer]

It's going to be interesting... We have 2 veterans in the leadership group, 3 guys from the 25-28 year old group and 2 guys from the under 23s group.

Very good age spread really.

This is the only aspect of the larger leadership group that does have some genuine appeal.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Is there a left sided slant?
Cripps genuinely looks like a giant

Murph seems to be leaning left and the ones on the left of frame are leaning slightly left but the ones on the right are leaning their weight right. So the heights are still right. Cripps is that much taller. Remember Walker in front of him is 190cm.

 

[LordLucifer]

Jamison didn't nominate apparently.

Probably for good reason too.

 

[Stephene]

Yeah good....now can we just get on with the footy

 

[Big Sim is Back]

Thrilled for Murphy. Was the only senior player that stood up last season when the going got tough. Absolutely deserves his reappointment.

Yes he did indeed. Answered his critics by leading by example.

I liked this group. Interesting that Walks is in: have to think the prospects of his body holding up this season are OK given his elevation. I hope so. We need him firing in the forward line.