by Dutchy » Sat Dec 07, 2019 9:58 am
by Lightning McQueen » Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:27 am
Dutchy wrote:its good that they have come to their senses and changed their mind, but I think most are still astounded about the original decision.
by Booney » Mon Dec 09, 2019 9:59 am
Brodlach wrote:I’m happy for everyone to jump on the Hate Port bandwagon but they tried something, didn’t work so they reverted. No big deal IMO
by Booney » Mon Dec 09, 2019 10:01 am
amber_fluid wrote:Where’s Booney?
He still in Bali?
What’s his thoughts on one captain and in particular it being Jonas?
by LMA » Mon Dec 09, 2019 6:38 pm
Bum Crack wrote:mots02 wrote:Dutchy wrote:Ollie being sacked as Captain, due to his Manager sounding out other clubs in the trade period?
At least it will make it easier for him to leave next year
He'll be in the blue and white hoops next year
by whufc » Tue Dec 10, 2019 7:42 am
by Booney » Tue Dec 10, 2019 7:49 am
whufc wrote:Common sense at Port has prevailed, the biggest mistake would have been to remained stubborn and kept the co-captains.
by UK Fan » Tue Dec 10, 2019 9:06 am
Booney wrote:whufc wrote:Common sense at Port has prevailed, the biggest mistake would have been to remained stubborn and kept the co-captains.
This.
Anyone being critical of the club for trying something they thought would help the club and then upon finding that it's not working ( or not being accepted ) and reverting back to the original plan is just firing shots from the cheap seats.
Also, anyone suggesting ( as I've read elsewhere ) that the club making football decisions based on member feedback is a perilous state to be in is off the mark, members are the club, those in positions of power are just custodians for a period of time, the members are, typically, there for life and in Port and other older clubs, generations.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by Dutchy » Tue Dec 10, 2019 9:39 am
by mots02 » Tue Dec 10, 2019 9:50 am
Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
by heater31 » Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:01 am
Then why change it?Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
by Booney » Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:33 am
Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
by Dutchy » Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:44 am
Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
Not like you to be misleading when it comes to Port. Koch did not say "It was a success" at all. Koch said "It worked" (it certainly wasn't the reason we missed finals action) but the feedback from the members was that we/they preferred the one captain model and through consultation with members, the football department and the clubs leaders it was decided to go back to the one captain model for our 150th anniversary celebration season.
by Booney » Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:46 am
Dutchy wrote:Booney wrote:Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
Not like you to be misleading when it comes to Port. Koch did not say "It was a success" at all. Koch said "It worked" (it certainly wasn't the reason we missed finals action) but the feedback from the members was that we/they preferred the one captain model and through consultation with members, the football department and the clubs leaders it was decided to go back to the one captain model for our 150th anniversary celebration season.
Same thing, if it worked then it was successful.
My recollection was members gave negative feedback before the decision, yet they still went against this feedback. Sounds like footy dept overrode the Admin, but now its been reversed.
by Dutchy » Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:52 am
by Lightning McQueen » Tue Dec 10, 2019 10:57 am
Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
by Booney » Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:24 am
Lightning McQueen wrote:Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
They played in the same team 10 times during the year for a 5-5 record, wins against Eagles (away) and Geelong, then thrashings of Adelaide, Sydney and Freo paint a good picture but the belting we copped from the Kanga's, the dismal effort against the Dogs at home then Brisbane at home evened it out, the losses to Brisbane and Richmond early in the season were about on par to where we're at.
They tried it, I'd say it was a neither here nor there result, I'm glad it's shelved.
by whufc » Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:46 am
Booney wrote:Lightning McQueen wrote:Dutchy wrote:Then Kochie yesterday claimed that having the duel captains was a success!
They played in the same team 10 times during the year for a 5-5 record, wins against Eagles (away) and Geelong, then thrashings of Adelaide, Sydney and Freo paint a good picture but the belting we copped from the Kanga's, the dismal effort against the Dogs at home then Brisbane at home evened it out, the losses to Brisbane and Richmond early in the season were about on par to where we're at.
They tried it, I'd say it was a neither here nor there result, I'm glad it's shelved.
I'm not sure on field success is the only measure of whether the leadership model worked or not, in fact it's probably one of several that would need to be considered.
Did the next generation of leaders benefit from the leadership of the two captains and the vice captain?
Did dual captains allow the two leaders to move into the role with less pressure from external ( media ) sources?
Did having dual captains prepare them both better for the role in the future as individuals if they have the opportunity?
Me, I think the captaincy, whilst an honour at (almost) any club isn't as much about game day as it is about setting standards in training, preparing yourself as best you can to perform on game day, being the conduit between playing group, coaching and the club, being the "front man" for media etc. Beyond tossing the coin I don't think captains do the bulk of their work on field, it's done off field much, much more than the 2 hours they play on weekends.
by Booney » Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:54 am
whufc wrote:I love any crack i can get at Port but i cant see how they have done to much wrong on this one. They tried a co-captaincy (not like other clubs havent tried this either), they have then done their annual review and for one reason or another decided it wasnt the best option moving forward and reverted back to a common model. Once again i think there would be so many things clubs try each year (training methods, gym methods, strategies etc) that dont work and they revert back after a year that go unnoticed.
by mots02 » Tue Dec 10, 2019 11:57 am
Booney wrote:whufc wrote:I love any crack i can get at Port but i cant see how they have done to much wrong on this one. They tried a co-captaincy (not like other clubs havent tried this either), they have then done their annual review and for one reason or another decided it wasnt the best option moving forward and reverted back to a common model. Once again i think there would be so many things clubs try each year (training methods, gym methods, strategies etc) that dont work and they revert back after a year that go unnoticed.
Pretty well summed up.
I guess we can differentiate between who can look at things objectively with the PAFC and those who can't.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |