Dual Captaincy (topic stolen from Demon board)

Remove this Banner Ad

TigerTank

Premiership Player
Aug 24, 2000
3,218
2,881
Wendouree
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
KC Chiefs, Royal Park FNC, Man City
Apologies to those on the Melbourne Board, but I think this topic applies across the spectrum.

Silvertail suggested that Melbourne should have dual captaincy (Neitz and Schwarz), at which point I went in all-guns-blazing saying that joint captaincy doesn't work.

Maybe I am wrong on this?

According to my view: Joint captaincy devalues the captaincy to the point where neither player is fully regarded as team captain. Instead of two captains, you are left with no real captain.

I am all for having two vice-captains - because if the captain is a backman, it makes sense to have a vice-captain responsible for the midfield and a vice-captain responsible for the forward line. (rotate these if the captain is a forward or midfielder).

But my gut instinct is that there should only be one captain.

Now that's all great in theory, but what about the practice? Has it worked on the field?

Geelong supporters (and others, Saints? not sure) have some experience of joint captaincy. What do you think about whether it works or not?

If you think it works, why?

If you say it doesn't, why not?

------------------
TT - Obligatory bad-tempered Richmond supporter
 
Nothing wrong with having a few vice-captains (four or five) as this reflects the reality of leadership in a relatively large sporting team (22 players)

I commented on the WCE board that dual captains is not Ken Judges style so he would have been overruled on the dual captaincy there

[This message has been edited by Pessimistic (edited 08 February 2001).]
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I feel that it is a cop out when a club appoints multiple captains - haven't they got the guts to make a hard decision?

This does apply particularly to West Coast at the moment as is has been announced that Ben Cousins will share it with Dean Kemp.

Look at two of the best captain apppointment in the past 2 decades - Kernahan and Carey. Both clubs saw these players as strong leaders and had the balls to appoint them at a young age. Both clubs profited immensely from this decision. (You could probably throw Paul Kelly in there as well)

West Coast had the perfect opportunity to do this with Cousins, but failed to do so. Now the perception I get is that West Coast don't have complete faith in him, and both club and player will be poorer for it.

When the Richmond captaincy was vacant last year, I was advocating Joel Bowden for much the same reason. Nonetheless, at least we made a firm decision with Campbell.

------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.
 
Agreed. One captain only. A few vice-captains is a sensible idea.

I get the idea that Cousins didn't really feel he was ready for the job. If this is true don't give it to him at all!
 
Co-captaincy is a cop-out. The captain's role in today's game is a much diminished one, but one important aspect of the leadership role remains, and that is to set the tone for the rest of the team. That job can't be done effectively by more than one person, simply because they will set different standards.

The administrations of the clubs are to blame - it appears to me that the captaincy is being used in some cases as a bargaining tool, or as appeasement. It should always be a single player, and that player should be the best 'leader of men' in the club.



------------------
He's blonde, he's quick
He's got a massive ... err ... kick
Danny Chook! Danny Chook!
 
Originally posted by BMD:
Agreed. One captain only. A few vice-captains is a sensible idea.

I get the idea that Cousins didn't really feel he was ready for the job. If this is true don't give it to him at all!

I think you are right BMD. Cuz was not sure he could handle it alone, so he probably should have been a vice captain until he felt he could take the captaincy on.

There is a lot of Politics going on at the Eagles these days though.

Should Vossy have been made a co~captain three years ago?
 
...and another thing!

The captaincy should never be given as a 'reward' or to 'honour' a player. We are not talking about a players retirement benefit. We are talking about the future leadership of your club.

If you want to reward a player, buy him a gold watch!

Posted by Danny Chook Fan Club:
...and that player should be the best 'leader of men' in the club.

Spot on Danny! There is a lot more to being captain than tossing the coin and geeing the players up. The captain is one of the most important public faces of the club, along with the Coach and maybe the President.

It it imperative that this position be given to the best available candidate who has all the skills required to be captain. Do not make the mistake of giving it to the best player or the most loyal servant unless they have all the goods required for the job. (Ie., Geelong and Hocking)

You would never appoint 2 head coaches, why would you do the same with the captain?

------------------
This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.

[This message has been edited by CJH (edited 08 February 2001).]
 
Originally posted by CJH:

You would never appoint 2 head coaches, why would you do the same with the captain?



Didn't Carlton have 2 head coaches last year ? Brittain might not 'officially' of been named as coach but everyone knows he and Parkin were both coaches.
Collingwood had 3 coaches for there VFL team last year .


------------------
"Hey ,just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand"
 
My two cents.

Two captains only serves to confuse everyone. One is certainly the only realistic option. I echo the calls for it not to be turned into a bargaining chip. The rumours I hear about it being in player's contracts goes against the whole concept.

The captain should be the player all supporters adore, who represents the club at all levels, who leads the team both on and off the field, who puts the club first and himself second and lastly he should be the kind of player we would all hope would play the game for the love of it and the club rather than for the paycheck.

I find it hard to belive that clubs could put forward two players who could do all this together, at the same time.
 
Completely agree TT.

I think the reason they didn't go for Cuz alone, was because of certain older more experienced players. He will be a good captain, 'ready-made captain' he was called a couple of years ago, and I guess by making Kempy co-cap, it's softening the blow for older players with their noses out of joint.

Oh well.... I dont know what the answer is...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I think yer right TT. One captain only, more than one kinda de-values the honor of captaining a club. Well that's what i reckon.
Cheers.

where's wally?
 
It will all be history as soon as it was news. Kemp has one maybe two years left, Cousins will be sole captain soon enough.

------------------
I can handle the fighting, its the affection i cant stand and i dont mind us talking just dont try to touch my hand.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Dual Captaincy (topic stolen from Demon board)

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top