Hendo in. Waite out.
Gibbs in. Duigan out.
Thomas in (my curve ball)
Make your call.
Understand where you're coming from with Thomas but I'd suggest we give him 12 months to settle in and find his place in the group and concentrate on getting some consistent game time.
Henderson in is a must. Leads from the front all the time...never thought a few years back when we received him in the Fev trade that he'd become the player he has.
Waite out is a must. Head-butting blokes against Melbourne of all sides is not leadership quality. If you're going to do it, do it against the top sides/tougher sides in the league. Not some nancy bottom club.
Understand where you're coming from with Thomas but I'd suggest we give him 12 months to settle in and find his place in the group and concentrate on getting some consistent game time.
I agree. He will show natural leadership by his performance on the ground if he is running well. He isn't too shy to send a compliment either. Thomas and Shaw were the only players to really dig deep in past finals or critical games, if the match was going away from the Pies. This "Die Hard" attitude is what we need with our friend Judd. Give him an official leadership role after his first season. ;) Keeps the spotlight off him.
How are teams going to find 4 taggers if we have Judd, Thomas, Murphy and Gibbs cutting it up in the middle of the ground ???
apart from Henderson I think there is no one that is captain
Too many introverted soft players at Carlton.
Stunningly poor recruiting.....
apart from Henderson I think there is no one that is captain
Too many introverted soft players at Carlton.
Stunningly poor recruiting.....
Don't let Kruddler read your post Mozzie ;)
apart from Henderson I think there is no one that is captain
Too many introverted soft players at Carlton.
Stunningly poor recruiting.....
I'm not sure who it was, either the leadership group or Mick...but when Waite head-butted that bloke against Melbourne, and missed our game against the Saints which we lost...he wasn't an auto inclusion into the side thereafter. Great to send a message that if you do the wrong thing, you WILL be punish. I'm going to say it was Mick more than any other influences though.
Andrew Walker or Kade Simpson.......AW is probably our best player and one of the teams leaders IMO, really matured and should have been AA.
Andrew Walker or Kade Simpson.......AW is probably our best player and one of the teams leaders IMO, really matured and should have been AA.
Both of these 2 would be considered leaders at any club. Not being biased, but being honest. Any club would explode at an opportunity to grab Walker or Simpson types. Walker for his natural creativity and X-factor. Simpson for his "do or die" work rate. Walker just has to be careful with his kick ins, and kicking across the face of goal in defence. If there is a small flaw to his game.
Understand where you're coming from with Thomas but I'd suggest we give him 12 months to settle in and find his place in the group and concentrate on getting some consistent game time.
If Judd was still there I'd say that'd be the way to go but I would like his influence there in leadership meetings and the like. He's getting very good money and these are the added responsibilities that come with the paypacket. Is he the highest paid player at the club?
AW is an interesting call. I think he'd be a good addition, probably a better choice that Gibbs at this stage.
Murphy, Henderson , Simpson and Tuohy for me.
In - Henderson, Jamison, Gibbs.
Out - Waite, Duigan.
Henderson in... no-one out.
Let Daisy settle in for a year, then bring him into the leadership group (with him performing to expectations) in 2015.
No to Gibbs. Want him to focus on his game.
Captain
Vice-Captain
Deputy Vice-Captain
No need to have any more than that, this "leadership group" thing is a load of crap !!
Captain
Vice-Captain
Deputy Vice-Captain
No need to have any more than that, this "leadership group" thing is a load of crap !!
Same!
Leaders of men will naturally stand out, they don't need a title. Anyone who thinks Judd still isn't a leader? Do you think if a young player came to Juddy with a problem he wouldn't help him?
Players speak about the extra time spent at leadership meetings and for what? I rather see them spending that recovering or working on skills or looking at their opponents for the next game. When I was playing basketball, I would always get to the game the week before and look at my match up and look at his favorite moves, see if his non dominant siode can get him out of trouble enough, that sort of stuff.
It slayed me this year when people were on Buddy, how many times they went for a smother only for some candy to be sold and the Buddy just waltzed around onto the left foot. If he's going to beat you make him do it on the right.
Captain
Vice-Captain
Deputy Vice-Captain
No need to have any more than that, this "leadership group" thing is a load of crap !!
Same!
Leaders of men will naturally stand out, they don't need a title. Anyone who thinks Judd still isn't a leader? Do you think if a young player came to Juddy with a problem he wouldn't help him?
Players speak about the extra time spent at leadership meetings and for what? I rather see them spending that recovering or working on skills or looking at their opponents for the next game. When I was playing basketball, I would always get to the game the week before and look at my match up and look at his favorite moves, see if his non dominant siode can get him out of trouble enough, that sort of stuff.
It slayed me this year when people were on Buddy, how many times they went for a smother only for some candy to be sold and the Buddy just waltzed around onto the left foot. If he's going to beat you make him do it on the right.
I dont necessarily disagree with the leadership structure, but team meetings are important.
Its during this time that you can work on strengths and weaknesses and what players did right and wrong and methods to improve that. Using your same scenario, it should be an older player advising the bloke stuffing this up with Franklin and telling him to force him onto his non preffered side or even give him the left foot but only from 60 out so that way his kick will drop short.
You cant control the ball, but you can control the avenues open to your opposition player and you want them to play to their weaknesses and not their strengths which is precisely what you are getting at, and its during meetings that the mental aspects of the game are worked on and I would hope that Mitch Robinson is the first player being talked to. Gets stuck in, but often gets caught up in the winning the ball thought process rather than the action-consequence to action thought process.
Good teams do! Bad teams meet.
I don't know your age but I will reference one film - The Life of Brian. Peoples Front of Judea, all that needs to be said.
@Raydan I will agree to disagree with you, but I have been part of two teams that have won titles, and in both circumstances team meetings were held and the mental aspects of the game were discussed.
As for your life of Brian comment, Im a Judean Peoples front type of guy instead of your Peoples Front of Judea!
;)
SPLITTER!
Good teams do! Bad teams meet.
How are decisions which impact the team made?
You can leave it to the coach but he may have bigger fish to fry. You can leave it to the captain but there are advantages to putting many heads together and it isn't good for development or ownership for all decisions to come from one point with no/little input from others.
Good teams do! Bad teams meet.
How are decisions which impact the team made?
You can leave it to the coach but he may have bigger fish to fry. You can leave it to the captain but there are advantages to putting many heads together and it isn't good for development or ownership for all decisions to come from one point with no/little input from others.
Of course you are going to have meetings to bash ideas around, but listen to what the players are saying now and it's the "endless meetings" that take over the day.
What happens when you have meetings too much? A team/organization becomes accustom to talking about problems rather than going out and fixing them.
Good teams do! Bad teams meet.
How are decisions which impact the team made?
You can leave it to the coach but he may have bigger fish to fry. You can leave it to the captain but there are advantages to putting many heads together and it isn't good for development or ownership for all decisions to come from one point with no/little input from others.
Of course you are going to have meetings to bash ideas around, but listen to what the players are saying now and it's the "endless meetings" that take over the day.
What happens when you have meetings too much? A team/organization becomes accustom to talking about problems rather than going out and fixing them.
:D
Disregarding the previous banter I think perhaps you might have gotten stuck on the idea from a business perspective where endless meetings are the manner in which productivity is decreased.
In football, the meetings actually serve for playing the game smarter which is something that our group of princesses seem to get wrong and have done for quite a few years now. It is required to fine tune the game and get the team functioning more as a unit. This is to keep in mind that the meeting is usually discussed in context reflecting on the game played previously, and what went right or wrong. The idea of having more people in there is so we can look at one incident (e.g. a coast to coast goal) and look at how the actions of people in the structure resulted in the ball travelling the distance quickly resulting in that goal and what can be done to prevent it. Usually it highlights a situation where a player gambles and helps them to think about the alternate course of action and how that can affect the team or took the easy option rather than the difficult option of running into position vs attacking the ball etc.
We have moaned in another thread where our team tends to gamble and lose vs when the Cats and Hawthorn do it they win. Meetings like this are usually the difference rather than actual talent level.
Its all worth it if the next time that same situation unfolds (common in team sports) that the player rather than taking the offensive gamble, takes the defensive gamble with a higher success rate. It doesnt mean you will prevent the goal all the time as either way there would be an element of risk involved, but it does serve to help make the decision that results in a goal less frequently. This same methodology can be applied later in terms of ball use, positioning etc, and hopefully result in more wins.
It all serves a purpose. I agree that meetings can sometimes by un productive but thats usually in a business environment and not a sporting environment. If anything sports teams probably dont meet and discuss things enough rather than too much. They are well tuned machines and most of the fitness, skill and work is done in pre season that will hold the team in good stead for the year. You will find that teams that fare better during the season proper will be the teams that have the least interupted preparation to the season and stay healthiest during the year, rather than the teams that work hardest during the season proper. There is no substitute for matches when it comes to fitness.
We will disagree totally on this one.
AFL players, well athletes in general are never the brightest bulbs in the pack (generally speaking, there are exceptions) Someone used Robbo as an example, so I'll continue along that path. Do you think the Robbo would benefit from sitting and talking about what to do, or going out and actually doing it? Muscle memory is the key and you do not get it by sitting in the lecture theater talking about things.
As I said meetings do help but too many meeting hurt the cause a better use of time for a professional AFL player would be to be on the park and running drills at half pace and 3/4 pace to build an understanding.
We will disagree totally on this one.
AFL players, well athletes in general are never the brightest bulbs in the pack (generally speaking, there are exceptions) Someone used Robbo as an example, so I'll continue along that path. Do you think the Robbo would benefit from sitting and talking about what to do, or going out and actually doing it? Muscle memory is the key and you do not get it by sitting in the lecture theater talking about things.
As I said meetings do help but too many meeting hurt the cause a better use of time for a professional AFL player would be to be on the park and running drills at half pace and 3/4 pace to build an understanding.
I used Robbo as the example, and no muscle memory will help if you practise the wrong method from the start.
Using Levi Casboult's kicking action for reference. I have no doubt he has practised it over and over again to result in a muscle memory that is no good for accuracy.
You can only reinforce teaching during a meeting. That doesnt mean having 5 of them a week, but you will touch on these things in the weekly review that we are talking about.
I suppose you can look at it like a group playing football or an organization which should have formalised structures.
You wouldn't dream about having 44 people working away with 1 appointed leader in many contexts. Is 6 players too much governance? Maybe but if crap hits the fan, you can't just leave it to chance that someone will take responsibility.
Surely a Forward, Midfield and Defensive leader are all that are needed in addition to the captain and VC or Deputy Capt.?
Surely a Forward, Midfield and Defensive leader are all that are needed in addition to the captain and VC or Deputy Capt.?
That's basically the structure cookie and why we have players like duigan and Waite in there...
Surely a Forward, Midfield and Defensive leader are all that are needed in addition to the captain and VC or Deputy Capt.?
That's basically the structure cookie and why we have players like duigan and Waite in there...
Captain, Vice Captain. That's it. Period. Irrelevant if they are in defence, midfield or forward area. If players are that dumb that they need 5-6 players telling them what to do, delist them. Classic example of too many chiefs not enough Indians. 2 voices on the pitch and runners can do the rest if needed. Anything else is just noise. Follow the game plan, give 100% and follow your captain to hell. Otherwise expect a spell in the 2s.
You guys understand that positions in the leadership group, and even the captaincy itself on many levels, are more honorary positions than real responsibilities, right?
The captain doesn't tell the side what to do, the coach does.
Everyone is expected to show leadership when it's their turn to go. Everyone is expected to support their mates on the field when it's needed. In no way, shape or form is it up to any one player or even group of players to do this every single time it is needed.
#makingfartoobigadealofthis
Surely a Forward, Midfield and Defensive leader are all that are needed in addition to the captain and VC or Deputy Capt.?
That's basically the structure cookie and why we have players like duigan and Waite in there...
Captain, Vice Captain. That's it. Period. Irrelevant if they are in defence, midfield or forward area. If players are that dumb that they need 5-6 players telling them what to do, delist them. Classic example of too many chiefs not enough Indians. 2 voices on the pitch and runners can do the rest if needed. Anything else is just noise. Follow the game plan, give 100% and follow your captain to hell. Otherwise expect a spell in the 2s.
Football is more than just the 2 hours out on the ground on Saturday arvo.
@Nath
Surely the Capt. is the coaches on-field rep who ensures that the team does as the coach wants and follows his orders, as well as having off-field duties as the public face of the team etc.?
The remaining members of the leadership group I thought also had some on-field duties like marshalling the defence in line with team instructions, as well as off-field duties regarding culture etc.
Sure, every player is expected to show leadership but surely the role of the leadership group is to set the examples for this and to pick up the slack when it happens?
Basic principle - without leadership you have a rabble and not everyone will be a good leader. Some will be a lot better than others.
@Nath
Surely the Capt. is the coaches on-field rep who ensures that the team does as the coach wants and follows his orders, as well as having off-field duties as the public face of the team etc.?
You'd think so, but the coaches orders change all throughout a game, so realistically the Captain is just out there playing football waiting for the coach to tell him to do something different, just like every other player on the field.
The remaining members of the leadership group I thought also had some on-field duties like marshalling the defence in line with team instructions, as well as off-field duties regarding culture etc.
However did our backline manage to function in 2013 then? It had no member of the leadership group other than Nick Duigan, who hardly played. Nope, they were all expected to manage things themselves and multiple people showed leadership in any given game.
Sure, every player is expected to show leadership but surely the role of the leadership group is to set the examples for this and to pick up the slack when it happens?
I think you'll find that anyone in the best 22 who doesn't do this too often will find themselves no longer in the best 22 quite quickly. Whether they're in the leadership group or not.
Basic principle - without leadership you have a rabble and not everyone will be a good leader. Some will be a lot better than others.
Fair enough, but it still doesn't change the fact that the players are responsible for playing the game and the coach is responsible for managing the players.
I think most posters here are confusing showing 'leadership' with being 'inspirational'.
Our leadership group isn't responsible for managing squat, they're ideally the most inspiring players you have on your team because that inspiration should fire the rest of the players up.
Whether an inspirational player is in the leadership group or not has no relevance on whether they are inspirational, though. Just ask Chris Judd.
Nath, part of a true leader's makeup is to be inspirational. If you are not inspirational you are not a true leader.
I think you are confusing leaders with managers.
Nath, part of a true leader's makeup is to be inspirational. If you are not inspirational you are not a true leader.
I think you are confusing leaders with managers.
I'm not confusing leaders with managers, my whole point was to explain that our players aren't responsible for managing a single thing so why do you even need a leadership group?
See my example of Chris Judd. He is inspirational in everything he does but is no longer a part of our leadership group. Why do you think that is? I'd suggest its because Chris Judd knows that he can be inspirational without having to have any sort of title and that the title itself is only there to pump up the tyres of the player with said title.
In a purely football sense, if a player can only be inspirational if they're given a title, then they're not really inspirational and don't deserve the title anyway.
So what is the point of it at all?
@Nath
A leadership group serves as a focal point for players - a clearly identified group they can look to, especially in times of crisis, to help individuals or the whole team face whatever challenge that may be presenting itself. Sure, others outside of that group may have leadership qualities and may well be able to fend for themselves so to speak - Juddy as you say is pretty self-contained and can inspire himself.
But, even in AFL footy teams, each and every members of a group definitely would not have strong leadership qualities even if they know their individual role well and are normally good at doing it. Some need that extra bit of inspiration in times of duress, provided in a way that the club wants, from a group who the club thinks is best equipped to provide it. Not all people are comfortable with a leadership role and I certainly think Juddy is one who prefers to just get on with it.
Leadership is a lot more than leading the 22 that run out onto the ground for 120min each week.
It's about leading, teaching, encouraging, rebuking and disciplining a group of 44 for every minute that the players are at the club (along with the coaches of course!). Training, eating, meetings, weight sessions, recovery, you name it.
Personally I would go with a 6 man leadership group. 2 forwards, 2 mids, 2 defenders. Pick a captain and VC from this group.
If you understand that MOST of these guys responsibilities happen away from game day, it makes a lot more sense why people like Duigan can (and should) be a part of the group !!!!
Nath, part of a true leader's makeup is to be inspirational. If you are not inspirational you are not a true leader.
I think you are confusing leaders with managers.
I'm not confusing leaders with managers, my whole point was to explain that our players aren't responsible for managing a single thing so why do you even need a leadership group?
See my example of Chris Judd. He is inspirational in everything he does but is no longer a part of our leadership group. Why do you think that is? I'd suggest its because Chris Judd knows that he can be inspirational without having to have any sort of title and that the title itself is only there to pump up the tyres of the player with said title.
In a purely football sense, if a player can only be inspirational if they're given a title, then they're not really inspirational and don't deserve the title anyway.
So what is the point of it at all?
Judd stated that his reason for not wanting to continue to be captain was that he didn't want to be dealing with what players did off field.
He was happy to perform the on field duties and used the example of what happened with Robinson off season as something he didn't think he needed to be dealing with as captain.
This has been the big change in leadership at football clubs in recent years, past captains weren't responsible for disciplining team mates for their off field behaviours, that was the domain of coaches and other officials.
Nath, part of a true leader's makeup is to be inspirational. If you are not inspirational you are not a true leader.
I think you are confusing leaders with managers.
Bullseye, Fluffy Biscuit the 2nd.
Inspiration is a big part of true leadership. Especially the ability to inspire the best from folk in a common direction toward a common goal.
To manipulate the William Arthur Ward quote a little... "The mediocre leader tells. The good leader explains. The very good leader demonstrates. The true leader inspires.
And I've always loved this one from Peter Drucker... "Leadership is lifting a person’s vision to high sights, the raising of a person’s performance to a higher standard, the building of a personality beyond its normal limitations."
A football team is a peer system, not a business or administrative entity. Discussing it from a management perspective is not irrelevant.
Better examples are groups where management was totally absent or went missing.
For example The Aints, negative leadership group. Think Lord of the Flys or Clockwork Orange. Anarchy, destruction and isolation.
Geelong, a positive leadership group. Think Gallipoli or The Rats of Tobruk. Inclusive, unifying and harmonious.
Either way, we're not going to abandon the leadership group in favour of just a captain and second in charge.
So who should be in it? Our current crop is:
Murphy
Simpson
Waite
Carrazzo
Duigan
Either way, we're not going to abandon the leadership group in favour of just a captain and second in charge.
So who should be in it? Our current crop is:
Murphy
Simpson
Waite
Carrazzo
Duigan
Murphy, Simpson & Carrazzo get a yes, Duigan & Waite get a no.
Either way, we're not going to abandon the leadership group in favour of just a captain and second in charge.
So who should be in it? Our current crop is:
Murphy
Simpson
Waite
Carrazzo
Duigan
Murphy, Simpson & Carrazzo get a yes, Duigan & Waite get a no.
Agree. Add in Hendo. No need for anymore.