Remove this Banner Ad

Gary Pert. Too much control.

  • Thread starter Thread starter SugarCoat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

SugarCoat

Club Legend
Suspended
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Posts
1,471
Reaction score
1,086
AFL Club
Collingwood
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/co...-injury-concerns/story-fndv8g1a-1227112543281

“In the pre-season I will oversee the football program while we are working through the pre-season and the selection process,’’ Pert said.

Is anyone worried Pert has too much control over the football dept. ?
It's not good practise to have a CEO interfere with the football dept. in such a controlling manner.
What's the bet they don't replace the manager's role until Pert can fully leave his imprint on the football dept. if he hasn't already.
 
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/co...-injury-concerns/story-fndv8g1a-1227112543281



Is anyone worried Pert has too much control over the football dept. ?
It's not good practise to have a CEO interfere with the football dept. in such a controlling manner.
What's the bet they don't replace the manager's role until Pert can fully leave his imprint on the football dept. if he hasn't already.
Betting odds:

Gary Pert Manages Football Department In A Sensible And Competent Manner Until Such A Time That An Adequate Replacement Can Be Made:
$1.01

Gary Pert, Collingwood CEO, Drunk With Newfound Power Instates 1984 Style Totalitarian Dictatorship: $1001.00
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Don't see what the issue is. Club using existing resources to cover the departure of Rocket, makes sense to me.
 
I'm nervous about this running program, really nervous.

Been widely discussed that the running capacity of the squad needed to be improved if the Pies want to return to being competitive with the ladder leaders. As I understand it, there was an accepted risk of injuries in 2014, players should be coming from a much higher base this preseason so that injury risk is considerably deminished. It is what it is, the club either matches the leading teams or falls by the way.
 
Been widely discussed that the running capacity of the squad needed to be improved if the Pies want to return to being competitive with the ladder leaders. As I understand it, there was an accepted risk of injuries in 2014, players should be coming from a much higher base this preseason so that injury risk is considerably deminished. It is what it is, the club either matches the leading teams or falls by the way.
Don't buy it personally and IMO last year wasn't an accepted risk at all....If it was, than I'm disappointment.

I understand the running capacity of the squad may have been needed to improve, but I don't buy into the torn ha,string just makes you stronger basket. No expert in this at all but won't accept it as "we were prepared for these injuries" also.

All will be revealed in 2015 I guess, or are we accepting another degree of risk with substantial injuries preparing us for 2016.
 
The club has already said a number of times that the preseason program was completed before Eade took the GC job, so Pert is probably just sitting in Eade's office playing bin basketball while zooming around the place on a wheelie chair.

I know I would.

Also, who cares? Pert is super competent, and isn't a total psychopath so why is this even an issue? I'm personally glad he's the one in the interim role.
 
Quality fred. :thumbsu:

No doubt the next article we see will be titled, "Gary Pert drunk on power sacks everybody and run's the place by himself".
 
Don't buy it personally and IMO last year wasn't an accepted risk at all....If it was, than I'm disappointment.

I understand the running capacity of the squad may have been needed to improve, but I don't buy into the torn ha,string just makes you stronger basket. No expert in this at all but won't accept it as "we were prepared for these injuries" also.

All will be revealed in 2015 I guess, or are we accepting another degree of risk with substantial injuries preparing us for 2016.

I'd cop us being the most unfit team league wide for a 5-10% increase in overall skill level and structure. We are the length of the Flemington straight behind the best in those two areas...

Edit: On Pert stepping in to fill the breach if we don't want to consider promotion from within I'm struggling to find a better candidate. Despite my hesitance on Pert in general.
 
Last edited:
Perty is only doing it so he can assign Trav extra track work for making him walk so far from his car park spot last year.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Why it is accepted that we needed to increase our running loads?
What happend in the previous regime?
The club invested heavily into Buttifant and even built an altitude room to support his ideals.
 
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/co...-injury-concerns/story-fndv8g1a-1227112543281



Is anyone worried Pert has too much control over the football dept. ?
It's not good practise to have a CEO interfere with the football dept. in such a controlling manner.
What's the bet they don't replace the manager's role until Pert can fully leave his imprint on the football dept. if he hasn't already.

We should be worried he's the most hated man at the club by a mile so expect some more players to want out if he is controlling everything
 
The Cloke parking incident was an example of the power Pert is drunk with.
At the end of 2011 he couldn't control Swan, Wellingham (he was suspended internally that year) & some others and went on a personal crusade without board member approval at the time to the AFL about recreational drugs.
He also had a major blue with Pickering regarding Swan and a television appearance that had to be cooled by Walshey.
 
We have no Football manager since Eade left.

The alternative is to have no one in the role or appoint an existing staff member in the interim period.

Who better to fill this interim role from within, remembering it's a basically admin role ?
 
The Cloke parking incident was an example of the power Pert is drunk with.
At the end of 2011 he couldn't control Swan, Wellingham (he was suspended internally that year) & some others and went on a personal crusade without board member approval at the time to the AFL about recreational drugs.
He also had a major blue with Pickering regarding Swan and a television appearance that had to be cooled by Walshey.
Was he wrong?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Why it is accepted that we needed to increase our running loads?
What happend in the previous regime?
The club invested heavily into Buttifant and even built an altitude room to support his ideals.
It seems the under Buttifant, in his last season or two, we lacked the endurance to run games out, and the club took a new direction under Davoren that they now say was always going to take 2 seasons to come about (how convenient).

Let's just hope we see some results this season because last year we went backwards again in endurance, if anything.
 
What a thread.
Men-on-Film-2-Snaps.gif
 
Don't buy it personally and IMO last year wasn't an accepted risk at all....If it was, than I'm disappointment.

I understand the running capacity of the squad may have been needed to improve, but I don't buy into the torn ha,string just makes you stronger basket. No expert in this at all but won't accept it as "we were prepared for these injuries" also.

All will be revealed in 2015 I guess, or are we accepting another degree of risk with substantial injuries preparing us for 2016.

Every player went through exactly the same training and I doubt we had any more soft tissue injuries than any other club.
.
Elliott - hamstring match day injury.
Freeman - hamstring match day injury.
Sinclair - hamstring coming off a disrupted preseason.
Karnezis - hamstring coming of pre-existing OP.
Marsh - hamstring happened in the 3rd quarter of the final H&A VFL game.

Add Reid's quad injury to that, preseason match day injury.

Who did I miss?

The majority of the other injuries were either pre-existing or just bad luck (Gault - broken collarbone; Broomhead - broken wrist; Fasolo - pre-existing foot injury; Brown - shoulder; Seedsman - pre-existing hip injury; Scharenberg & Macaffer - ACLs; Oxley - ankle; Maxwell - calf/ankle; Ball - back; White - broken finger; Adams - finger; Hudson - shoulder; Lynch - broken leg) so I don't see how this in any way equates to an increased running program being a bad thing.

If you can show me how the program actually contributed to those injuries I'm happy to admit I'm wrong.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom