Chris Bond - when to make the call?

[Clay Davis]

As it currently stands, the man who has been at the club longest and holds the most authority is Chris Bond. He arrived at the end of the 2007 season, when Harvey began to take control, and was appointed as list manager, then promoted to head of football operations.

He has overseen five drafts and a number of changes to staff under him - notably Harvey for Ross Lyon, but also the end of Phil Smart's long tenure, replaced by Brad Lloyd.

From the outside, it seems there is a demarcation of responsibilities: the coach effectively prepares the players for matches and the season ahead, while Bond's role manages the playing list over many seasons and the football department in general. The former has a more short term focus, but both aim for winning a premiership. Simply put, it could be said that Bond is ultimately responsible for who is on Freo's list and the long-term shape of that list.

If so, to what standard is Bond held? The club has already made the call that Harvey's short-term results were not good enough, and this was a fair decision. When do we know enough to say whether Bond is up to scratch in the position he is in?

To illustrate, he has overseen five national drafts. Of his first three (2007, 2008, 2009), little more than 50% of players drafted remain on the list. Considering these years were not that long ago and the dire need of obtaining good players in a rebuild, it seems a rather high turnover. Also, there may be some question marks over more recent recruitment where taller options were completely ignored.

We have done well in rookie draft and PSD players under his tenure, however this has never been a problem for Freo historically (Sandilands, Johnson, Duffield, Grover, Hayden, Dodd, and Haddrill have all come from the later drafts and played a significant number of games).

Recruiting players is a difficult process and it takes many years to determine the effectiveness of a strategy. At this point we don't know whether our list is good enough quality. We have what most would call a quality coach. If results don't yield from this new setup who gets the blame? Naturally, as coach, Ross Lyon will be the main fall guy in the eyes of fans. But would other parts of the coaching department see scrutiny? Should they?

 

[blue shark]

2012 is the year to judge Bond, if we are crying out for a key position player, but if the team is sharing the load, our recent draftees have improved, you would have to give Freo a B+
We are not the only club missing forwards, only the top four clubs have quality, Carlton are probably in similar territory to us.
WC won a grand final without A grade forwards, and I think our midfield rotation depth is getting there.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

2012 is the year to judge Bond, if we are crying out for a key position player, but if the team is sharing the load, our recent draftees have improved, you would have to give Freo a B+
We are not the only club missing forwards, only the top four clubs have quality, Carlton are probably in similar territory to us.
WC won a grand final without A grade forwards, and I think our midfield rotation depth is getting there.

Its not the lack of key position forwards that is frustrating me the most about bond, its the fact that most players we have drafted in his time at the club have either turned into duds, or have been seen as acceptible losses i.e traded

 

[prattsta]

Bond's doing a decent enough job. Not great, not terrible, just middle of the road. The results speak for themselves.

I've said on here before that I think he gets far too much credit and not enough criticism. To be honest I'm not sure exactly where his reputation comes from. It certainly isn't based on the results from his time at Richmond or Footscray. The majority of us good folk at Freo love him - in Bond we trust? - but in his time at Fremantle, what has he actually achieved?

He's certainly brought Fremantle closer to the benchmark in a lot of areas. We've hardly turned into a powerhouse though.

Off the field we certainly seem more professional. Though our medium to long term plan simply seems to be 'follow the AFL system, play it safe and most importantly don't do anything stupid.' Hardly ground breaking stuff. Then again, given the club's history and the nature of the AFL maybe that is enough.

As with everything in footy, ultimately it'll be up to the players to make him look good or not.

 

[Lach72]

I wonder whether the failure rate is due to the volume we've had to bring in because of the gaping holes in the list interms of quality and age demographic, and also whether the non-drafting of talls is symptomatic of that. ie, even given the failures we've had, you're more likely to strike a quality player with mids/smalls than you are talls

 

[Nothing]

That will happen with most drafts. The expectation from any National Draft should be 2-3 players make it to a decent AFL level (probably 100 games barring major injury). In addition, possibly another mature recruit (either pre-season or rookie) to make 3-4 players each year.

2007 - Palmer, Hinkley, Mayne, Mark Johnson, Bradley - (I give Palmer a pass because he will have an AFL career that last 100 games and I think effectively you have just traded to a newer model - even discounting him is 2/5
2008 - Hill, Balla, Suban, Clarke, Walters, Bucovasz, Ruffles, Hall, Sibosado, de Boer, Shepheard, Pearce, van Berlo, Broughton - Probably the year to judge (definitely in the rebuild) and I think the strike rate is reasonably good with 4 of the players seemingly destined to play decent careers with Freo/AFL. Those in italics show significant potential whilst having not achieved to date.
2009 - Morabito, Fyfe, Houghton, Crichton, Roberton, Bollenhagen, McPhee, Barlow, Silvagni - claiming Mora based on him getting back to full fitness, but nonetheless still a healthy hit rate.

2010 and 2011 I think are too soon to call.

As blue shark mentioned, 2012 will probably reveal a lot more about Bond with a large chunk of the 2008 players nearing that time when they need to be playing consistent good footy. If most of those players end up discarded by 2013 then Bond should be turfed too.

 

[yakka man]

I wonder whether the failure rate is due to the volume we've had to bring in because of the gaping holes in the list interms of quality and age demographic, and also whether the non-drafting of talls is symptomatic of that. ie, even given the failures we've had, you're more likely to strike a quality player with mids/smalls than you are talls

Exactly! Not to mention that a lot of our draft picks over the last 5 years have been high picks. In 2008 we had four draft picks after pick 50. Three of them are now gone and Walters has been banished to Swan Districts. People on here don't understand that we are still in the middle of a rebuild. In this years draft we recruited 10 new players. I am very confident in Bond. Lest we forget that in the olden days we would have sold the farm to get Mitch Clark over here but we stuck to our guns.

 

[prattsta]

2007 - Palmer, Hinkley, Mayne, Mark Johnson, Bradley - (I give Palmer a pass because he will have an AFL career that last 100 games and I think effectively you have just traded to a newer model - even discounting him is 2/5

A top ten draft pick and rising star winner that had next to no value on the open market when he left our club is a win?

I hear what you're saying about the trade to GWS, but he was completely mismanaged since his return from injury. We got less for him than what we paid for him...

 

[tacopavlich]

A top ten draft pick and rising star winner that had next to no value on the open market when he left our club is a win?

I hear what you're saying about the trade to GWS, but he was completely mismanaged since his return from injury. We got less for him than what we paid for him...

How is it a reflection on Bond though. Not his fault Palmer was injured and played out of position.

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

he's still another three or four years off scrutiny in my book, once fyfe, hill, mora et all mature and get their groove on.

 

[Nickos66]

Exactly! Not to mention that a lot of our draft picks over the last 5 years have been high picks. In 2008 we had four draft picks after pick 50. Three of them are now gone and Walters has been banished to Swan Districts. People on here don't understand that we are still in the middle of a rebuild. In this years draft we recruited 10 new players. I am very confident in Bond. Lest we forget that in the olden days we would have sold the farm to get Mitch Clark over here but we stuck to our guns.

I tend to agree with this angle. The alternative would've been the same old track we've been going down since our inception. He's been serviceable, his real value remains to be seen until some of these kids hit the sweet spot of their careers.

 

[Clay Davis]

Lest we forget that in the olden days we would have sold the farm to get Mitch Clark over here but we stuck to our guns.

So what? Those days were nearly five years ago. When are we able to assess whether Bond is doing enough to put Freo in the frame to win a premiership?

Let's say we don't make top four this year. Bond will have been overseeing the list for five years without a top four finish. Contrast that with Schwab and Connolly. They got the club into the top four in their fifth year.

Add in to that, some of the best players currently at Freo are very close to retirement. It is very likely, if not certain, that top four will get even more difficult in 2013. How many years grace period does Bond get for what is subpar performance?

 

[estibador]

Off the field we certainly seem more professional. Though our medium to long term plan simply seems to be 'follow the AFL system, play it safe and most importantly don't do anything stupid.' Hardly ground breaking stuff. Then again, given the club's history and the nature of the AFL maybe that is enough.

There's a few examples of us taking risks and backing ourselves when we needed too.

Taking Hill over sure-thing Rich was a ballsy move. So was 'reaching' for a mature aged Ballantyne, which many supporters were ropeable about at the time.

I just really like the fact that for the first time the club is working towards a clearly identifiable plan. Holding on to early picks to get the best available youth, taking one or two of the best mature agers from the state comps with our rookie picks, and using the PSD for a free hit at an experienced player every year.

Under Bond we've managed to redress the gaping hole of mid aged players in our list Schwabolly left us with. And they haven't done it by trading away ND picks for list-fillers from other clubs, instead they've actually uncovered some real stars for nothing with some astute raiding of the state leagues.

If a list manager is ultimately judged by the state of the list then Bond is passing with flying colours so far, considering what he started with. I've been a Freo fan since the beginning and I've never seen our list in a healthier shape, generally speaking. There's a few holes in the key forward depth, but it only takes one or two astute picks to fix that.

 

[Ktrain]

I'm ambivalent towards Bond. Seems to be doing okay but doesn't stand out that much (maybe a quiet achiever is a good thing). No reason to turf him but no reason to increase his responsibilities. However I too liked not selling the farm for Clark.

Given the smaller relative size of the entity, the Board, President & CEO seem to wield much more day to day control at footy clubs and are judged as such. i.e Bond (or Lloyd for that matter) wouldn't be implementing anything Rosich didn't agree with.

 

[yakka man]

So what? Those days were nearly five years ago. When are we able to assess whether Bond is doing enough to put Freo in the frame to win a premiership?

Let's say we don't make top four this year. Bond will have been overseeing the list for five years without a top four finish. Contrast that with Schwab and Connolly. They got the club into the top four in their fifth year.

Add in to that, some of the best players currently at Freo are very close to retirement. It is very likely, if not certain, that top four will get even more difficult in 2013. How many years grace period does Bond get for what is subpar performance?

I haven't met you Clay but I can tell that there is just no pleasing you. We underwent a huge cleanout of one of the oldest lists in the competition. Finished sixth in 2010 and were in finals contention for a large part of last season until an unprecedented injury crisis occurred. After which Bond was part of a decision and strategy to poach us our first experienced AFL coach and the current coach with the highest win/loss ratio. Recruiting is not his sole responsibility and besides it's not fair to judge any of the drafts from 2008 onwards yet. It takes a lot less time to weed out the duds then it does to develop the potential players.

If in a few years time Hill and Fyfe have won Brownlows and Mora has been named All Australian you will forget who Bucovaz, Hall, Bollenhagen etc are. You will never have enough data to accurately judge Club staff but for now I don't think Bond has done much wrong.

 

[Beetlebum]

2012 is a defining year for a lot of people at Freo. Given the change of coach, the fact that the players seem to be fit and ready to go for the start of the season a lot of people have staked a lot on us getting back to the finals this season and heading toward success.

If this season is a failure and by that I mean anything from knocked out in the first week of the finals or down the table and not making it at all there will have to be questions asked about a lot of the people who have made the decisions around our footy club in the last few years like Bond, Harris, Rosich, the rest of the board, the football department, etc.

 

[yakka man]

2012 is a defining year for a lot of people at Freo. Given the change of coach, the fact that the players seem to be fit and ready to go for the start of the season a lot of people have staked a lot on us getting back to the finals this season and heading toward success.

If this season is a failure and by that I mean anything from knocked out in the first week of the finals or down the table and not making it at all there will have to be questions asked about a lot of the people who have made the decisions around our footy club in the last few years like Bond, Harris, Rosich, the rest of the board, the football department, etc.

If we didn't have 16 players who had post season operations I would agree. Still finals should be realistic.

 

[imadoka]

There's a few examples of us taking risks and backing ourselves when we needed too.

Taking Hill over sure-thing Rich was a ballsy move. So was 'reaching' for a mature aged Ballantyne, which many supporters were ropeable about at the time.

I just really like the fact that for the first time the club is working towards a clearly identifiable plan. Holding on to early picks to get the best available youth, taking one or two of the best mature agers from the state comps with our rookie picks, and using the PSD for a free hit at an experienced player every year.

Under Bond we've managed to redress the gaping hole of mid aged players in our list Schwabolly left us with. And they haven't done it by trading away ND picks for list-fillers from other clubs, instead they've actually uncovered some real stars for nothing with some astute raiding of the state leagues.

If a list manager is ultimately judged by the state of the list then Bond is passing with flying colours so far, considering what he started with. I've been a Freo fan since the beginning and I've never seen our list in a healthier shape, generally speaking. There's a few holes in the key forward depth, but it only takes one or two astute picks to fix that.

I have followed Freo since day one and this is exactly how i see it as well and i believe 2012 will prove we are on the right track thanks to Chris Bond and our Senior Management

 

[theGav56]

List Management is about getting the list into a state where we can expect sustained finals action. Coaching is about getting the most out of that list with the aim of attaining a Premiership. They both aspire to a premiership, but they are not judged the same.

Bond's position seems to be larger than list management, but I am not sure exactly what those responsibilities are.

If there was a significantly better option to Bond available then I would hope that the club would show the same ruthlessness as it did with Harvey in securing them.

 

[sportsmaniac89]

2012 is a defining year for a lot of people at Freo. Given the change of coach, the fact that the players seem to be fit and ready to go for the start of the season a lot of people have staked a lot on us getting back to the finals this season and heading toward success.

If this season is a failure and by that I mean anything from knocked out in the first week of the finals or down the table and not making it at all there will have to be questions asked about a lot of the people who have made the decisions around our footy club in the last few years like Bond, Harris, Rosich, the rest of the board, the football department, etc.

This sums up my sentiments in a nutshell

Quality post

 

[Clay Davis]

I haven't met you Clay but I can tell that there is just no pleasing you. We underwent a huge cleanout of one of the oldest lists in the competition. Finished sixth in 2010 and were in finals contention for a large part of last season until an unprecedented injury crisis occurred. After which Bond was part of a decision and strategy to poach us our first experienced AFL coach and the current coach with the highest win/loss ratio. Recruiting is not his sole responsibility and besides it's not fair to judge any of the drafts from 2008 onwards yet. It takes a lot less time to weed out the duds then it does to develop the potential players.

If in a few years time Hill and Fyfe have won Brownlows and Mora has been named All Australian you will forget who Bucovaz, Hall, Bollenhagen etc are. You will never have enough data to accurately judge Club staff but for now I don't think Bond has done much wrong.

When it comes to footy I'm actually easily pleased. Playing quality football, winning more games than you lose, and making finals regularly would be pretty satisfying, while making a grand final or winning a premiership every decade would make be happier than anything. It's arguable whether Freo has done the very first - most of the football Freo's played in its history has been bog ordinary, but sometimes it has been amazing - everything else it certainly hasn't done. That's probably why it seems I'm difficult to please.

I don't really care that Freo had the oldest list at the end of 2007. As said, it is getting towards five years. There is a point where you can no longer blame what's gone before you and the problems become your own. I would say five years is more than enough time to rectify the mess you've been left with.

I doubt many of us thought at the end of 2007 we'd have not made the top four by 2012. Harvey certainly carries most of the blame for that, and he has been moved on. If that run of below par form continues, should the coach we've obtained then cop all the blame, or should the guy with as much power as coach but with little of that role's accountability start to feel the heat?

Saying we're not as bad as the old days certainly doesn't give us a premiership. Just puts us as lukewarm mid table finishers.

 

[yakka man]

When it comes to footy I'm actually easily pleased. Playing quality football, winning more games than you lose, and making finals regularly would be pretty satisfying, while making a grand final or winning a premiership every decade would make be happier than anything. It's arguable whether Freo has done the very first - most of the football Freo's played in its history has been bog ordinary, but sometimes it has been amazing - everything else it certainly hasn't done. That's probably why it seems I'm difficult to please.

I don't really care that Freo had the oldest list at the end of 2007. As said, it is getting towards five years. There is a point where you can no longer blame what's gone before you and the problems become your own. I would say five years is more than enough time to rectify the mess you've been left with.

I doubt many of us thought at the end of 2007 we'd have not made the top four by 2012. Harvey certainly carries most of the blame for that, and he has been moved on. If that run of below par form continues, should the coach we've obtained then cop all the blame, or should the guy with as much power as coach but with little of that role's accountability start to feel the heat?

Saying we're not as bad as the old days certainly doesn't give us a premiership. Just puts us as lukewarm mid table finishers.

At the end of this season it will be five seasons, yes. Although that sounds like a long time it isn't enough time for every new recruit to reach peak performance. You also have to acknowledge the setbacks in player development due to poor coaching and improper injury management. If such things did infact take place under Harves.

 

[Clay Davis]

If they did, then why did the head of football operations agree to extending Harvey's contract?

 

[23cmonShane!]

i believe 2012 will prove we are on the right track thanks to Chris Bond and our Senior Management

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THIS

 

[yakka man]

If they did, then why did the head of football operations agree to extending Harvey's contract?

I'll call the club and find out. Maybe because no other good senior coaches were available or simply because 2010 was a very good season and they wanted to go with the flow. Regardless the list is in good shape so he has my approval