No Oppo Supporters 2023 General AFL Discussion - incl. AFL Grand Final

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Every man and his dog could see that those players should have been assessed. There is zero downside to doing the assessment unless they fail. The doctor clearly choose to avoid the possibility of that consequence.

We're talking about players' lives here. $100k is a small price to pay for negligence in the name of winning a game of footy.
And yet the AFL didn't consider it to be a form of "cheating."

Why else would they have sent those players back out there? For shits and giggles? Of course not, it was because they wanted to win. Breaking the rules in order to win is exactly what cheating is. They got off way too lightly.
 
I reckon that "best available" is rubbish, or should be. I worked a long time in industry and you recruited the best fit to both the job description and the organisation and that's what a sporting team should do. The only time to deviate is when there just isn't one of those available or they are prohibitively expensive. As far as the draft is concerned you might need to pick your second need first to get the best quality but pick your needs.
I managed people for all those years and insisted that getting the best out of people was using their strengths and developing to cover their weaknesses.
Running Magor for a while at HB to help develop his defensive skills isn't a bad thing in itself but leaving him there might well be.

100% . You hire people for the skills you need.

"Everyone meet Jacob The Plasterer, he was by far the best applicant"
"But we needed an electrician"
"Best Available"

Batman Facepalm GIF by WE tv
 

Log in to remove this ad.

100% . You hire people for the skills you need.

"Everyone meet Jacob The Plasterer, he was by far the best applicant"
"But we needed an electrician"
"Best Available"

Batman Facepalm GIF by WE tv
PREACH

Stockpiling best available talents is fine for a couple of years if you're at the start of a long rebuild, you can afford to sort through the best, afford to lose some, have valuable assets at the trade table.

But when you're in or approaching a flag window, that will last a few years, you go for needs so the window doesn't slam shut in a few years when you've got a great VFL midfield but no quality tall defenders coming through (for example).

The logic for some is that you can easily trade for needs later (ha!), or because some positions take longer for players to develop in, you shouldn't bother drafting them now (go figure that logic out).
 
Last edited:
Port fined 100k , that's over the top


How? all the protocols and all of the controversies around concussion, had to be a massive punishment, if the AFL were serious it would be a million and suspend some of it.
 
So have I, I've also been overruled by my boss on a couple of hires.

They left after 3 months.

Thanks boss.
We had a CEO employing his replacement (many years ago). He wanted out very quickly. The HR Director advised strongly against taking this particular candidate but the CEO overruled him. The new bloke almost sent us broke in a very profitable industry and was very openly fired by the regional director 2 years later after starting a price war. We all knew he was an idiot. At least yours didn't lose $90million. Early 1980's.
 
Sounds like Brendon Gale has turned down head of footy AFL job; Caro has mentioned Harley's name amongst others

 
Sounds like Brendon Gale has turned down head of footy AFL job; Caro has mentioned Harley's name amongst others

Interesting character is Harley. Seems to really enjoy his job. Maybe the boy's club isn't so attractive.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Interesting character is Harley. Seems to really enjoy his job. Maybe the boy's club isn't so attractive.

Harley is a smooth operator. I reckon he had positioned himself to take over from McLaughlin but the inside OB club in the AFL wanted an internal candidate.

I doubt he will be with us in 12 months. If so, Charley 'Corporate' Gardiner would be primed to take the reins. If that is the case then I still am hoping Horse takes over Gardiner's role as Head of Footy.
 
Harley is a smooth operator. I reckon he had positioned himself to take over from McLaughlin but the inside OB club in the AFL wanted an internal candidate.

I doubt he will be with us in 12 months. If so, Charley 'Corporate' Gardiner would be primed to take the reins. If that is the case then I still am hoping Horse takes over Gardiner's role as Head of Footy.
Not a bad succession plan there Unc.
 
Harley is a smooth operator. I reckon he had positioned himself to take over from McLaughlin but the inside OB club in the AFL wanted an internal candidate.

I doubt he will be with us in 12 months. If so, Charley 'Corporate' Gardiner would be primed to take the reins. If that is the case then I still am hoping Horse takes over Gardiner's role as Head of Footy.
The thing I like about those three is that they seem to do their jobs without interfering with each other. The essence of effective organisation. I have no idea if Charlie would make a good CEO, but I'm not crazy about the ex-coach becoming head of football over the new coach. Awkward and takes a lot of self-discipline.
 
The thing I like about those three is that they seem to do their jobs without interfering with each other. The essence of effective organisation. I have no idea if Charlie would make a good CEO, but I'm not crazy about the ex-coach becoming head of football over the new coach. Awkward and takes a lot of self-discipline.

if anyone I reckon Horse would be ideal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top