- Jul 15, 2014
- 21,831
- 42,026
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea, LA Lakers, Western United
It can be an apprenticeship for Wines. The thing that Wines has though is a good midfield ability. He’s the guy that the younger midfielders can emulate, and on that alone I agree with Port’s decision to make him captain. Jonas though is obviously the better choice. He is one of my favourite non-Richmond players as he is not only a great defender, but one of the most level-headed guys in the AFL. I believe he’ll make not only a good captain for Port Adelaide, but also a good co-captain with Wines.Very good point.
With the last point, I think people are forgetting how poor Boak was as a captain the last few years, he inspired nothing.
I would’ve like Jonas to be the sole captain but I think honestly they’ve done it to appease Wines for his big contract and potential, a.l.a Cripps. They want him to be the captain but they know he doesn’t have the on-field leadership (same as Boak) that Jonas absolutely does as a tough as nails, defensive general.
However, I think they are doing it to let Wines grow as he is the future of the club and hopefully elevate his game to elite.
That being said I would’ve gone Jonas captain and Wines vice not both captains. As long as it’s discussed and put forward that Jonas will be doing the on-field leadership work all season that’s really who the players will be listening to on game day.
Yeah exactly, not a huge issue. I don’t know why some Port supporters are getting angry about this because the two players they chose seem to have the character to become great co-leaders of the club. Neither of their personalities are abrasive and too domineering, meaning that they’ll probably be able to co-lead the club well. Remember that they’ll be guided and trained on how to become leaders as well with Port’s available resources and not just be thrown in the deep end. With how things have been going post-2014, why wouldn’t Port’s supporters be happy with it? Leadership was the main issue for Port Adelaide in the last few seasons IMO, so a drastic but calculated change in leadership sounds like a great idea. If you look at who they picked, it doesn’t sound like they just randomly drew the names of two guys out of a hat.You echo my thoughts. Many Port people are losing their s**t over this, but it doesn't bother me in the slightest. We have been flaky for the last 4 years and our supporters are massively frustrated. If the players/coahes/board think it's the best thing for the team to win games, why not do it? If we continue to be s**t at football, 2 Captains is the last thing I'm going to blame.