wakojako
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 15, 2020
- 6,417
- 10,376
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I think that's our best bet. Jlo gets a top assistant, and we can take a look at Pyle first hand to see if he has got what it takes to be a coach.
Coach Justin Longmuir
- Thread starter Unique Name
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
royale with cheese
Abnormal
- Mar 19, 2023
- 1,351
- 1,813
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Banned
- #10,552
Somewhat sad to think we had a brilliant coach under our nose and who was likely the main driver for that brilliant 2010 season.
- Aug 25, 2011
- 25,113
- 75,843
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Coney Island Warriors, SFFC, Hajduk
Jesus, hope we don't have to suffer another 22 years of this s**t Bobby.
Chris Scott has had time to develop as a coach though. He walked into a system that delivered him a premiership in his first year. This has bought him time to ride the ups and downs of a coaching development cycle.
Often coaches get that honeymoon period and also bring in lots of new energy and ideas, which can dissipate over time. After a few years (or less) they can hit the wall for whatever reason and the more substantial that early success is (like having a premiership in the back pocket) the more it’ll allow them to ride out the down years. These struggle years can often be gold for their development as a coach.
The club needs to do something about that, not just accept it as a fait accompli.
- Aug 25, 2011
- 25,113
- 75,843
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Coney Island Warriors, SFFC, Hajduk
I'm not even sure he's got 22 months.
Would need to be offered something like head of coaching to work alongside JL.
A fair concern, but he may still be a better option than another rookie coach.
He can be asked to outline his strategy for avoiding another ugly start to the season, and a shuffle of assistants to support.
I don't think it is all on Longmuir. The nature of rookie coaches is that they require a learning curve. The club needs to consider how well they have supported that. My rating would be low.
Agreed - however, I was talking about Richmond. Different kettle of fish. Huge club and Hardwick is highly regarded there, as he should be.
Wobbly Punt
All Australian
- Feb 24, 2020
- 654
- 2,848
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I've been critical of Longmuir but I was actually pretty happy to see the change in approach on Saturday. Skills and luck played a huge part in us not being level or even ahead at quarter time and I liked that we finally saw a different approach with the ball and it was an aggressive one. Yes it wasn't suited to the conditions but I was OK with him sticking with it to get it worked on for future games.
I'll also give JL2 some credit for seeing past the odd mistake that Walker makes and sticking fat with him. He was dam good defensively on a very dangerous guy on the weekend and showed why we need him back there. His mistakes are ball breaking and I get that brings him some scorn but he was excellent in his primary role on Saturday. That scorn would be better directed at guys who half arsed their defensive efforts on the weekend that cost goals, not on a guy who defended really well but had a couple of terrible mistakes with the ball.
Unfortunately all that positivity for JL2 for me was thrown out the window with his use of Erasmus and Sturt. Completely indefensible to leave Schultz and Banfield out there given their performances. Hughes was OK again but he was also a better candidate for the sub off (as was Brodie frankly) to see how Ras went in the middle. This just points to a coach who is just so far away from where we need him to be it's become funny.
The ongoing affection JL2 shows for Banfield in particular is criminal now. He's a top bloke and always looks like he's trying hard but it is now a full MONTH of football without a tackle, as a "pressure forward". In that time - 3 pressure acts. The guys delivering messages can get pressure acts, to not have more than 1 a game is appalling. It's not fair picking Banfield either as the poor guy is getting hate he doesn't deserve. There is just no rational excuse I've heard for picking him. If there is one please share it so it can ease my own frustrations. Please stay away from "he wasn't the worst out there" or "he kicks goals" or any of the defensive stuff because none of that holds any water.
I've read somewhere else that we should have grabbed JVR in the draft. I wouldn't have minded if they'd gone Amiss and JVR actually but drafting is not JL2's remit so thats for another thread. However, the fact we have someone a fair bit like JVR rotting away in the ressies in Treacy is certainly JL2's fault. He's more of everything over Banfield and, as has been stated before, in Treacy's one poor game this year he applied more pressure and laid more tackles than Bailey has in a month. He's seen as a tall and Bailey isn't but Bailey gives us KP defensive numbers and HB attacking ones so playing Treacy in his spot would cost nothing. The better option in my view would be Emmett but there's also Corbett and a fast rising Kuek (not yet) who are all also better options. JL2 is actually picking the 8th best option out of 9 as a B22 forward. Schultz's excellent game against GC has taken away from the fact he's been largely terrible in the others, including the last 2. I'd be picking Emmett and Corbett or Treacy this week and dropping BB and Schultz to try to give us more scoring power. Our defensive work won't drop away much. I'm betting we see both those guys survive and Sturt will be out.
Once again I give JL2 credit for the change of plan, albeit very late after a good 16 games of data over this year and last showed us his plan wasn't working. We still saw something different against Brissie and despite the scoreboard I think we looked better Saturday than we have at any other stage this year other than the GC 2nd half. But the selection idiocy has to change. Bailey is the current poster boy for it but there are other examples too. If, as I expect, Sturt gets dropped this week and Schultz and Banfield remain then in my opinion there is no further proof required that JL2 is completely out of his depth and we should let him finish the year but start working on other options for both he and, if it were me, for Bell too.
I'll also give JL2 some credit for seeing past the odd mistake that Walker makes and sticking fat with him. He was dam good defensively on a very dangerous guy on the weekend and showed why we need him back there. His mistakes are ball breaking and I get that brings him some scorn but he was excellent in his primary role on Saturday. That scorn would be better directed at guys who half arsed their defensive efforts on the weekend that cost goals, not on a guy who defended really well but had a couple of terrible mistakes with the ball.
Unfortunately all that positivity for JL2 for me was thrown out the window with his use of Erasmus and Sturt. Completely indefensible to leave Schultz and Banfield out there given their performances. Hughes was OK again but he was also a better candidate for the sub off (as was Brodie frankly) to see how Ras went in the middle. This just points to a coach who is just so far away from where we need him to be it's become funny.
The ongoing affection JL2 shows for Banfield in particular is criminal now. He's a top bloke and always looks like he's trying hard but it is now a full MONTH of football without a tackle, as a "pressure forward". In that time - 3 pressure acts. The guys delivering messages can get pressure acts, to not have more than 1 a game is appalling. It's not fair picking Banfield either as the poor guy is getting hate he doesn't deserve. There is just no rational excuse I've heard for picking him. If there is one please share it so it can ease my own frustrations. Please stay away from "he wasn't the worst out there" or "he kicks goals" or any of the defensive stuff because none of that holds any water.
I've read somewhere else that we should have grabbed JVR in the draft. I wouldn't have minded if they'd gone Amiss and JVR actually but drafting is not JL2's remit so thats for another thread. However, the fact we have someone a fair bit like JVR rotting away in the ressies in Treacy is certainly JL2's fault. He's more of everything over Banfield and, as has been stated before, in Treacy's one poor game this year he applied more pressure and laid more tackles than Bailey has in a month. He's seen as a tall and Bailey isn't but Bailey gives us KP defensive numbers and HB attacking ones so playing Treacy in his spot would cost nothing. The better option in my view would be Emmett but there's also Corbett and a fast rising Kuek (not yet) who are all also better options. JL2 is actually picking the 8th best option out of 9 as a B22 forward. Schultz's excellent game against GC has taken away from the fact he's been largely terrible in the others, including the last 2. I'd be picking Emmett and Corbett or Treacy this week and dropping BB and Schultz to try to give us more scoring power. Our defensive work won't drop away much. I'm betting we see both those guys survive and Sturt will be out.
Once again I give JL2 credit for the change of plan, albeit very late after a good 16 games of data over this year and last showed us his plan wasn't working. We still saw something different against Brissie and despite the scoreboard I think we looked better Saturday than we have at any other stage this year other than the GC 2nd half. But the selection idiocy has to change. Bailey is the current poster boy for it but there are other examples too. If, as I expect, Sturt gets dropped this week and Schultz and Banfield remain then in my opinion there is no further proof required that JL2 is completely out of his depth and we should let him finish the year but start working on other options for both he and, if it were me, for Bell too.
- Nov 7, 2018
- 1,985
- 6,356
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
I'd go as far as saying, if JL selects Banfield in the 23 this week, his papers should be stamped.
There is no justifiable reason why Banfield should be playing in front of Sturt, Treacy, Emmett or Corbett.
None.
Snuffaluphagus
Moderator
- Sep 10, 2015
- 21,750
- 73,768
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Moderator
- #10,570
I hadnt checked but 3 PRESSURE ACTS IN A MONTH. I thought you must have meant only averaging 3 which would be bad enough. If he plays again this week I'll probably join the JL doom train. That's inexcusable
Snuffaluphagus
Moderator
- Sep 10, 2015
- 21,750
- 73,768
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Moderator
- #10,572
Where did you get 3 pressure acts from, I checked after being dumbstruck, I think he had 12 on the weekend
Yep. Said everything I was thinking & more. Look at Sturts TOG & the fact he was dragged despite creating 2 shots on goal says JL doesn’t rate him & he’s going back to Peel while Banfield will be retained & Treacy can’t even get a look.
It’s utterly insane.
I really hope JL isn't dumb enough to see that pressure act scorecard and keep JOM in the team because of it.
Yes, it's bloody good to tackle and pressure, but if you've got more pressure acts than clearances (and you're playing in the middle) it might just be because you are second to the ball.
Agree with the above poster that there is no justifiable reason why Banfield should be getting a game - a little bit like Henry early in the season. If we bring in Treacy for Banfield, and Erasmus for Hughes, at least we are getting games into guys that might just have a higher ceiling.
Yes, it's bloody good to tackle and pressure, but if you've got more pressure acts than clearances (and you're playing in the middle) it might just be because you are second to the ball.
Agree with the above poster that there is no justifiable reason why Banfield should be getting a game - a little bit like Henry early in the season. If we bring in Treacy for Banfield, and Erasmus for Hughes, at least we are getting games into guys that might just have a higher ceiling.
- Status
