Rumour Daisy Pearce to Geelong as an Assistant Coach

[Partridge]

What was Cresswell ?

Yep there were some very spirited discussions about him at the time.

 

[PhatBoy]

This is a ******* abortion of a thread.

If she’s as intelligent about football as she comes across, good luck to her and I hope we find a role for her.

 

[Micksy]

Super exciting news, I'm pumped.

Who'd have thought we'd have Daisy Pearce, Eddie Betts, Harry Taylor all working at the club?

One of those things is not like the other.

 

[Sire of Claude]

Surely Pearce is being headhunted, not necessarily because the club thinks she's the best coach available, but because of the unique experience, attributes and perspective she can contribute to the coaching team - as a unit. In some respects she's far more experienced and worldly-wise than many another assistant coach.

She's intelligent and communicates well; she got the best out of herself as an athlete and player; she's demonstrated that she sees clearly what is happening on the field; she's never over-awed.

She will talk but she will also listen - perhaps in a different way to the chaps.

She will surely change the ambience round the place in ways that are beneficial to the team and the club.

 

[PhatBoy]

One of those things is not like the other.

True, Taylor and Betts never captained their sides

 

[PhatBoy]

The willingness of people to write someone off before they’ve even had a chance to fail is mind blowing

 

[Partridge]

The willingness of people to write someone off before they’ve even had a chance to fail is mind blowing

Happens with most young players we have so it's not unusual.

 

[PhatBoy]

Happens with most young players we have so it's not unusual.

Does it? I don’t know of many fans that don’t want to see more of what our next group can do.

 

[Partridge]

Does it? I don’t know of many fans that don’t want to see more of what our next group can do.

This board about many, many young players that some can't wait to see the back of.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Does it? I don’t know of many fans that don’t want to see more of what our next group can do.

Partridge reality ≠ truth

 

[Partridge]

Partridge reality ≠ truth

Absolute crap and you know it. You and many others write players off very, very early in their careers. Can think of an example or two where players never got a game and were immediately dismissed. So the notion that this board doesn't do that is ridiculous. Wouldn't mind betting every other club would be similar.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Absolute crap and you know it. You and many others write players off very, very early in their careers. Can think of an example or two where players never got a game and were immediately dismissed. So the notion that this board doesn't do that is ridiculous. Wouldn't mind betting every other club would be similar.

Your social commentaries of what people say or what has been said on here are frequently wide of the mark, like a Matthew McCarthy set shot.

 

[Partridge]

Your social commentaries of what people say or what has been said on here are frequently wide of the mark, like a Matthew McCarthy set shot.

Doesn't matter. It's an opinion. As someone who I thought at the very least - valued independent thought - it's strange that's having a different view on unrelated topics is what you argue about (and I suspect if you bothered to ask further there wouldn't be that much difference).

Remind this board how much faith you wanted shown in Jansen, or the patience and tolerance you showed for those who wanted him given opportunities?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Remind this board how much faith you wanted shown in Jansen, or the patience and tolerance you showed for those who wanted him given opportunities?

The record would show vindication for his lack of games. Genuine dud at two clubs.

 

[Partridge]

The record would show vindication for his lack of games. Genuine dud at two clubs.

That wasn't the argument. It was writing people off BEFORE they had a chance. Delisting a player - rightly or wrongly - after 0 games is exactly that. And most of us have no issue with it either. That's the point.

You can argue the pros and cons of the appointment (for me personally I'd prefer if the club does it they pay 100%), but to infer that only because it's her to people want her to fail is just plainly untrue. We do it all the time for players, coaches and everyone in between.

 

[PhatBoy]

That wasn't the argument. It was writing people off BEFORE they had a chance. Delisting a player - rightly or wrongly - after 0 games is exactly that. And most of us have no issue with it either. That's the point.

You can argue the pros and cons of the appointment (for me personally I'd prefer if the club does it they pay 100%), but to infer that only because it's her to people want her to fail is just plainly untrue. We do it all the time for players, coaches and everyone in between.

I don’t watch VFL so I personally can’t give an opinion on players like that one way or the other, but many people who comment can - they’re making their assessments based on at least some sort of visual evidence. Drafting someone and writing them off before they’ve even trained with the club would be a closer comparison to what many are saying about Daisy Pearce.

 

[dazbroncos]

I'm sure you can read between the lines, unless you think there aren't any better candidates out there ... You know ones who actually have their accreditation.

This is clearly a measure to get women coaching in footy and the club is clearly employing her because it doesn't count towards the soft cap and is AFL funded. You even wrote that yourself.

So no, this isn't a case of earnt on merit which is why some clearly aren't happy with the appointment/or possible appointment.

I'm not sure why there's needed to be pages of denial about this when the truth is staring you in the face.

Of course there's the usual 'the club does no wrong' brigade which brings us to this point.

Where did say the club can do no wrong or is that just you posting for me?
So its your "reading between the lines" is an interpretation just south of being facts. Got it.

Where is the denial - other than a river in Egypt.

I just asked where it was posted by the club that her hiring would be a cost saving measure - which is now shown to be an interpretation rather than fact.

Go Catters

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I just asked where it was posted by the club that her hiring would be a cost saving measure - which is now shown to be an interpretation rather than fact.

Go Catters

If she was a legitimate assistant coaching candidate there would be no need for the AFL to offer clubs an incentive to hire her and other females.

It really isn't hard to wrap one's head around.

 

[Spearman]

just throwing this out there: was there this much discussion on Rooke being named a development coach?

 

[And_ROOS]

If she was a legitimate assistant coaching candidate there would be no need for the AFL to offer clubs an incentive to hire her and other females.

It really isn't hard to wrap one's head around.

Except a lot of clubs are well documented boys clubs and do "jobs for the boys" at the expense of other talent.

Funny how people s**t talked Peggy O'Neal and Kate Roffey as token hires at their clubs, yet the most dominant teams over the last few years have had female Presidents.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

The record would show vindication for his lack of games. Genuine dud at two clubs.

Played some very good games at the Lions before injury and form loss.
Now doing very well as a member of East Fremantles midfield - hardly a dud - talented and a very fine young man as well.

 

[patience]

OMG. I can't even...

The lack of real world knowledge by some posters here is astounding and demonstrates why the AFL have taken this step to support potential future female coaches in the first place. Male privilege isn't hard to wrap one's head around. As someone who has suffered direct financial and career disadvantage purely because I am female from my first days in the work place, I can only shake my head that dinosaurs still walk.

Thank f**k even the AFL has cottoned on.

 

[FredLeDeux]

OMG. I can't even...

The lack of real world knowledge by some posters here is astounding and demonstrates why the AFL have taken this step to support potential future female coaches in the first place. Male privilege isn't hard to wrap one's head around. As someone who has suffered direct financial and career disadvantage purely because I am female from my first days in the work place, I can only shake my head that dinosaurs still walk.

Thank f**k even the AFL has cottoned on.

What do you call a female dinosaur?

 

[feelinfeline]

If she was a legitimate assistant coaching candidate there would be no need for the AFL to offer clubs an incentive to hire her and other females.

It really isn't hard to wrap one's head around.

As another poster has argued, just like Mark O'Connor wasn't a 'legitimate' AFL footballer and had to be given a helping hand into the system as a category B rookie.

By your logic, you must be opposed to the whole concept of category B rookies.

It really isn't hard to wrap one's head around.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Except a lot of clubs are well documented boys clubs and do "jobs for the boys" at the expense of other talent.

Funny how people sh*t talked Peggy O'Neal and Kate Roffey as token hires at their clubs, yet the most dominant teams over the last few years have had female Presidents.

Who said anything about any other females with roles in the league. I've got nothing against them. I have though with Daisy Pearce potentially coming here as an assistant coach which is what this thread is about.

There's simply better candidates.