News Tom Jonas sole captain for 2020

Remove this Banner Ad



there it is

So close to my idea from 5 months ago

I've got an idea for the 2020 TVC.

A player walks into the locker room, walks up to his locker and it shows the back of a jumper hung up on it. The Port panel with a No.1 on it.

Then the player puts on his jumper, and turns around facing the camera. He's wearing the Prison Bars.

(Insert player saying tagline here) and we are off to the races. Who the captain is however, who knows.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

After reading KT’s letter and seeing the leadership group unchanged, I’m now feeling that the club doesn’t believe it was in error nor that there’s any real value to the captain wearing #1. This whole exercise is just paying lip service while nothing has really changed internally.

Co-captains is dead in name but alive in spirit.

We need change. Stability be damned.
Gotta try to get them customers to shut the * up and hand over some money whilst trying to run a footy club the way a proper Melbun club would.
 
Unfortunately all 18 clubs are the same when it comes to PR stuff. They are all controlled somewhat from head office. We are no different to other clubs who don't like admitting to mistakes look at our neighbours in fact look at gill when people challenge their decisions. We would like to think we are different but unfortunately we are not anymore not since the afl started controlling us. But we are no worse than any other club when trying to control narrative we just have been making too many bad choices the last few years compared to a lot of clubs.
 
I’d say it harks back to the events just after the decision.

Co-captains as a concept was already unpopular, but after Wines did his shoulder wakeboarding, Jonas decided the best course of action amidst the criticism of Wines was to tweet a picture of himself skiing:

View attachment 790275

I mean, read the ****ing room.

The club was already clearly out of touch with the members, then one captain (with a recently-inked 5-year deal in his pocket) jeopardises his season and the other doubles down on the out-of-touch quotient spectacularly.

Meanwhile, the club has its hand out for much-needed membership cash and has its propaganda minion guilting dissenters into stumping up their hard-earned regardless of their feelings on the wider shitshow unfolding before them.

It all unfolded like an episode of Curb Your Enthusiasm.

In light of recent developments (public criticism of PA choice of captain), was this thumbing the nose to the fans or specifically to Kane Cornes for his public criticism of Ollie? It was certainly also in solidarity with Ollie. Public support for a team mate.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
In light of recent developments (public criticism of PA choice of captain), was this thumbing the nose to the fans or specifically to Kane Cornes for his public criticism of Ollie? It was certainly also in solidarity with Ollie. Public support for a team mate.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
More like thumbing his nose to the media, who like this board drive speculation to become fact.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
This from Keith Thomas,

But despite this relentless drive forward, we have this year again been reminded that traditions and icons are important to clubs of substance.
They remind us of our history, our values, and indeed very often they help to define us.
Some are deemed so significant, that they must be protected and nurtured against the pull of time.
A single captain, wearing number 1 on their back, is one of those icons for the Port Adelaide Football Club.


The point is you should not need to be reminded Keith, you and the Chairman and his Board should have realised the significance of one Captain wearing the no 1 guernsey and the importance it had to many Members. Reverting back to a single Captain wearing the number 1 is akin to trying to get the toothpaste back into the tube. The damage is done, a tradition destroyed and no amount of words is going to rectify that.

This from David Koch,

...and Koch admitted it was as much a marketing or romantic decision to return to one captain after just one season when he said “frankly the model doesn’t change” in terms of how the club’s leadership will operate internally.

So, if the model doesn't change why break with tradition in the first place David?

This also from David Koch,

It’s not all about listening to the fans, it’s about listening to our people and making a decision on what is best for the club as a whole.


Spin, spin spin David. It is almost as if you are permanently in some sort of flak deflection and face saving mode. So how do you differentiate between 'the fans' and 'our people'. Aren't the fans part of 'our people'? Talk about never tearing us apart, judging from that statement you have already divided the Club into the people you listen to and the fans.
 
FAR-WEST FOOTY



On podcast format:

I'm not sure how clear my spoken English is, though.


That co-captaincy balls up highlighted Hinkley's abysmal man management skills GP, our two most famous and successful coaches in Fos Williams and John Cahill had that ability in spades, and in the overall context of successful teams that is just as important as any game plan.

They could both instil confidence in average players to play to the absolute peak of their ability, eg a number of the Magpie premiership teams over the years under both coaches included players who were literally plucked from obscurity in the reserves, or brought back from country leagues just to play a role for that one big game, and it worked more often than not.

I have often wondered why in soccer the head banana is described as the manager and not just the coach, maybe with the above I have answered my own question. :thumbsu:
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I have often wondered why in soccer the head banana is described as the manager
We call it "coach" ("treinador" or "técnico") here. The manager ("gerente") is responsible for the roster. I believe in England, the manager is also the head coach.
 
Last edited:
for those that went to the meeting with Matthew Richardson (and the other club reps) that night. Were the TJ comments disrespecting the membership raised?
Didn't go but yes they were.

Misaligned self generated public posturing - Examples “little battler club”, language that AFL is a hard task with the implication we should be happy just to be to be a part of it, member disquiet called “white noise”, social media dept. making light of our losses, “playing the youf”, underwhelming thanks to Matthew Broadbent.
* MR then takes up a marker, wheels the whiteboard around into view and takes up the scriber’s position. We’re asked to start contributing issues, feelings, topics relating to our thoughts and feelings towards the club. AND AWAY WE GO… here follows a breakdown of topics discussed in rough order, there was quite a bit of jumping around between topics and level detail, as you can imagine with 12-14 contributing to the discussion from both sides:

  • Language and messaging from the club is poor: examples of Tom Jonas: “white noise” (i.e. member complaints about the co-Captaincy), David Koch: “Lil ole battling Port Adelaide”, Ken Hinkley: “Someone has to lose”… etc. **This is a repeated topic through the meeting, as other events and messaging around them come back to this.** Social media posts after losing to Fremantle, the Broady announcement and others that escape me.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top