Wallace - gone

Remove this Banner Ad

No doubt Wallace has a bit of arrogance and believes strongly in philosphy's about the game and his coaching ability.

This is required by any coach to be successful at the highest level.

If you listen to him on foxfooty and 3aw and read his HS columns he knows his stuff and is widely regarded as the best available coach out there.

Rightly or wrongly he propably felt a bit slighted by Adelaide merly suggesting he come over for an interview with 6 other candidates and throw his hat into the ring.

Compare this to Hawthorn and Richmond who are actively persuing him and it is more a case of them trying to convince him they are the best club for him.

IMO a strong club like Adelaide should have done whatever it takes to secure him, the fact that you havent will come back to haunt you.
 
Originally posted by ****
I personally don't see how that would have made a difference.

Some people have been saying for the last 2 years that Craig has been promised the job. If Mark Mickan was caretaker coach right now people would still be questioning the process and would still be saying Craig is a shoe-in, just like they were before Ayres left. I just don't see what difference that would have made.

Giving Craig the chance to coach at least gives some indication of how he will go about it. Sure, I don't think the Crows should put too much emphasis on his 9 weeks as caretaker but if you have the chance to have a look at him and see how he handles the media, how he goes about training, how he promotes youngsters, how he reacts tactically in games then why not?

Did Sydney do the wrong thing by appointing Roos as caretaker? Did the Bulldogs do the wrong thing by appointing Wallace as caretaker? Did the Kangaroos do the wrong thing by appointing Pagan as caretaker?

Of course not. This is common practice and I can't believe now - after the event that some people are being critical of this. Appointing second in charge is the obvious and right thing to do. And that's why it is such a regular occurrence.


****
Click to expand...

have to say again **** - i agree!
 
Originally posted by understudy
No doubt Wallace has a bit of arrogance and believes strongly in philosphy's about the game and his coaching ability.

This is required by any coach to be successful at the highest level.

If you listen to him on foxfooty and 3aw and read his HS columns he knows his stuff and is widely regarded as the best available coach out there.

Rightly or wrongly he propably felt a bit slighted by Adelaide merly suggesting he come over for an interview with 6 other candidates and throw his hat into the ring.

Compare this to Hawthorn and Richmond who are actively persuing him and it is more a case of them trying to convince him they are the best club for him.

IMO a strong club like Adelaide should have done whatever it takes to secure him, the fact that you havent will come back to haunt you.
Click to expand...
Excellent:)
 

Log in to remove this ad.

****, you make great sense on this subject, as always!

Originally posted by understudy
Rightly or wrongly he propably felt a bit slighted by Adelaide merly suggesting he come over for an interview with 6 other candidates and throw his hat into the ring.
Click to expand...
If that is indeed how he felt, then my answer would be "wrongly". Sure, a coach needs to have an ego, and self-confidence, and maybe arrogance. They also need to have a sense of reality and professionalism. And going in to a job application process with the expectation that you will be treated as "No 1 preferred candidate" from the outset, and dropping out when you're not, is neither realistic no professional. (IF that is what Wallace felt)

Originally posted by understudy
Compare this to Hawthorn and Richmond who are actively persuing him and it is more a case of them trying to convince him they are the best club for him.
Click to expand...
There is no reason to assume that Richmond and Hawthorn have pursued Wallace any more vigorously than Adelaide.
 
Originally posted by arrowman
There is no reason to assume that Richmond and Hawthorn have pursued Wallace any more vigorously than Adelaide.
Click to expand...

Despite what you have actullay read in the press and what has actually taken place you mean?
 
Originally posted by understudy
Despite what you have actullay read in the press and what has actually taken place you mean?
Click to expand...
I also read the press reports on Monday that Wallace had signed with Richmond.

What I have seen reported is that (1) Wallace has had meetings with Adelaide and Richmond, and he's set for Hawthorn this week. (2) Wallace pulled out of the Adelaide job early this week, citing family preferences. (3) Adelaide called him and offered to come to Melbourne to meet him, he declined.

What would qualify as "pursuing him vigorously" after he has said he no longer wishes to be considered? Blank cheque?
 
Originally posted by arrowman
I also read the press reports on Monday that Wallace had signed with Richmond.

What I have seen reported is that (1) Wallace has had meetings with Adelaide and Richmond, and he's set for Hawthorn this week. (2) Wallace pulled out of the Adelaide job early this week, citing family preferences. (3) Adelaide called him and offered to come to Melbourne to meet him, he declined.

What would qualify as "pursuing him vigorously" after he has said he no longer wishes to be considered? Blank cheque?
Click to expand...

FFS family prefencecs? source that please? No. 3 source again?

Seems to me you are making presumptions here to suit your view that wallace didnt want adelaide. From what i can gather he had an open mind and you failed to pursue him.

Trigg - yeah just come over for a chat and WE MAY consider you?

Not good enough.
 
I read in the same place that wallace had declined the adelaide job because of family preferences - can't remember off the top of my head but I remember reading it.

Trigg - yeah just come over for a chat and WE MAY consider you?
Click to expand...

aren't you also making assumptions here too understudy?

My reading between the lines is that Wallace didn't want us - fine I don't want a coach that is not 100% behind my club
 
Source for both is Trigg yesterday. Now, I know what you'll say - Trigg is lying. Personally I don't think it's very credible that Trigg, whatever you think of his bias, is up for fabricating a direct quote from Wallace.

As for the rest, a negotiation with someone who won't deal with you unless they are guaranteed No 1 position isn't a negotiation, it's a capitulation. No-one is entitled to that sort of treatment and you are actually insulting Wallace to suggest that he was that small-minded and unprofessional.

It would be no less a breach of good, professional practice than would be promising the job to Craig.
 
Originally posted by understudy
Trigg - yeah just come over for a chat and WE MAY consider you?
Click to expand...

Seems to me you're the one making presumptions.

The only thing the Crows failed to do was make Wallace an offer before going through the whole process. Fair enough too. He's no Dennis Pagan, Mick Malthouse or Leigh Matthews. It has to be established whether he is the best person to 'build' a successful team. On evidence with Bulldogs his list management didn't take them forward, as they were on a slow decline. Obviously in our position we need someone to build a future rather than have short term impact.

Wallace was in the mix. No decision had been reached. If he is not interested in going through the process then what can we do?

As I said he is not THAT good that he should be signed up, no questions asked.


****
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Um, and all of this is assuming that Wallace was such a standout that he deserved preferential treatment in the first place. There's only one coach in the AFL at the moment who would be entitled to that status.

St Kilda hired Malcolm Blight without following a proper selection process and look what happened there.
 
Originally posted by ****
Seems to me you're the one making presumptions.

The only thing the Crows failed to do was make Wallace an offer before going through the whole process. Fair enough too. He's no Dennis Pagan, Mick Malthouse or Leigh Matthews. It has to be established whether he is the best person to 'build' a successful team. On evidence with Bulldogs his list management didn't take them forward, as they were on a slow decline. Obviously in our position we need someone to build a future rather than have short term impact.

Wallace was in the mix. No decision had been reached. If he is not interested in going through the process then what can we do?

As I said he is not THAT good that he should be signed up, no questions asked.


****
Click to expand...
I believe we decided to talk to everyone on some sort of list - then do the stuff - then have a think and then make a decision - whether we actually sounded outguys like matthews, malthpouse, pagan etc is highly improbable

I think the other clubs have prioritised a shortlist and made a big effort to got the one at the top of the list.

the trouble is who will be left after the others have gotten in 1st?
 
Originally posted by ****
Seems to me you're the one making presumptions.

The only thing the Crows failed to do was make Wallace an offer before going through the whole process. Fair enough too. He's no Dennis Pagan, Mick Malthouse or Leigh Matthews. It has to be established whether he is the best person to 'build' a successful team. On evidence with Bulldogs his list management didn't take them forward, as they were on a slow decline. Obviously in our position we need someone to build a future rather than have short term impact.

Wallace was in the mix. No decision had been reached. If he is not interested in going through the process then what can we do?

As I said he is not THAT good that he should be signed up, no questions asked.


****
Click to expand...

While you make some very good points, there was a problem with Adelaide in Wallace's mind - the interim coach situation. He had been burnt once before by an interim coach in Sydney and he has gone on record saying that he doesn't need that situation again.

Adelaide were fair dinkum about Wallace, but couldn't make any firm commitments because they wanted to go through a proper process. This included the auditioning of an interim coach in Craig, and that required time. A stupid unfair illogical process, which has eliminated the best candidate IMO

Having said that, we have to move on. I would hope that they would seriously consider Eade who's CV includes taking a team from a non- football state into a GF and it took a genius such as Matthews to emulate that feat. He's also a brilliant match-day tactician, and he did leave the Sydney list in very good shape for the next guy.

The big fear is that they will appoint the guy whose CV is similar but not as successful as Peter Rhode's was before he got the Bulldogs job.

Oh happy days. :(
 
Originally posted by macca23
While you make some very good points, there was a problem with Adelaide in Wallace's mind - the interim coach situation. He had been burnt once before by an interim coach in Sydney and he has gone on record saying that he doesn't need that situation again.

Adelaide were fair dinkum about Wallace, but couldn't make any firm commitments because they wanted to go through a proper process. This included the auditioning of an interim coach in Craig, and that required time. A stupid unfair illogical process, which has eliminated the best candidate IMO

Having said that, we have to move on. I would hope that they would seriously consider Eade who's CV includes taking a team from a non- football state into a GF and it took a genius such as Matthews to emulate that feat. He's also a brilliant match-day tactician, and he did leave the Sydney list in very good shape for the next guy.

The big fear is that they will appoint the guy whose CV is similar but not as successful as Peter Rhode's was before he got the Bulldogs job.

Oh happy days. :(
Click to expand...
Now macca23, you know as well as I do that there is a bit more to the Wallace story
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

George Kramer
Strategy Finals gone, what do you want to see?
2 3
Replies
67
Views
2K
Jeffcrowe
J

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top