Coaching Staff Former Coach Ben "Truck" Rutten - Sacked for real this time - 21/8

[Bombermania]

It seems to be a relatively unpopular position but I don’t really think you can sack a coach after 2 seasons unless things are dire. Yes they are bad, but 18-26 isn’t the end of the world. However, in addition to the mess we have created this week - cheered on by many Essendon supporters and past players like Matthew Lloyd - we are going to have to make a decision re Rutten again next year even if he someone survives this. I don’t think he will be renewed next year so there’s certainly an element of ‘we have come this far we might as well move forward now’ and I understand that.

At the very least, even though it’s ideally too late, a well commissioned external review needs to be undertaken and the board should adhere to its recommendations however unpopular they may be.

Rutten's problem is this club is unable or unwilling to face up to its problems. The club only needs to read this forum and Blitz to know what needs fixing.

 

[Mootsy]

I’m not sure I understand this. We call for an external review, but Barham is holding a meeting tomorrow to decide what happens to Rutten?

Why not make some sound decisions based on the review.

There’s been a whole lot of not so rational contradictions in communications all week, my summary is, it’s probably complicated, lol.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

The board has committed to an external review that will plot the path forward, they should be all locked in padded cells until the findings of that are laid bare.

Sounds like the external review is just lip service at this point

 

[Tassieboy]

I hope Barham tenders his resignation immediately after the board meeting tomorrow. A leader should have empathy and the ability to have composure in times of difficulty. He failed both aspects literally in his fist two days as president.

But what’s the end result of that? Further endless power struggles and divisions?

 

[ghostdog]

This is a genuine question. At what point do we stop looking at the coach and start looking at the players and list management? A good club needs to be able to identify the exact problem. Why do we continuously end up with an attacking team that doesn't defend? Is it development or is it recruiting?

If it was another coach, then sure, but we literally got Rutten specifically for the purpose of his success with Richmond in building and implementing what is the best team defence in the modern era. Hardwick couldn't manage that for 6 years prior to it and he suddenly manages it in 2017? In the 18 years I have followed Essendon, we haven't been able to defend consistently. Why do so many coaches struggle to implement a sustainable team defence at Essendon? How did Worsfold and Rutten implement a good defensive system in the back half of 2018, only for it to unravel again in 2019? What is it that completely sucks the coaching ability away from coaches at Essendon in comparison to other teams?

At what point do we stop looking at coaches all the time and start looking at who we recruit? I can tell you with 100% certainty that we wouldn't have this conversation if our midfield comprised of Hewett, Oliver, Dunkley with the likes of Shai Bolton supporting them.

I can tell you the exact problem. EVERY year, we talk about building a defensive midfield by increasing the average height and weight of our midfield + looking for players that are contested in nature all over the ground. We then go ahead and recruit players that are front-runners. All cream and no cake. So how do we really expect coaches to implement a defensive game when we have no real "blue collar" players?

I was sucked into the coaching criticism of Worsfold, but Rutten's tenure made me re-think how the whole club operates. I realise that it isn't just a list management issue. The CONSTANT pressure around the club and the lack of faith in coaches makes every coach setup for failure. I've noticed it in 2018 and 2019, but every time a coach tries to teach our players consistent team defence, the games become a little boring and we don't do as well. Instead of pushing on with it, the supporters, ex-Essendon players, the media etc heap pressure on the coach because we're not winning a premiership. When the coach eventually has enough of the pressure, they let this team play free defenceless football that suits the list build and the wins start to come in the back half of the year. Then everyone says "why didn't they play like this at the beginning of the year? This team is at its best when it plays with flair and excitement blah blah". Then finals comes around and we get smacked because defence wins premierships. Then the very same people analyse the final and say "this team doesn't play a sustainable brand of football and doesn't defend". It makes me frustrated to see the very same Essendon media people contradict themselves.

I completely understand Woosha's criticism of the club's entitlement. This club does not have the patience for success. The reason why Essendon will always be setup to fail is because they don't believe in working hard to achieve a longterm goal. It's all about short term successes to paper over the cracks. The supporters will always bring up the last 18 years and the supporters themselves are not patient enough to think about the longterm goals, which makes them inclined to put pressure on the club to make irrational and reactionary short term decisions.

The only way I can see this cycle broken is to recruit players that are naturally contested so that we are forced to play a boring contested gamestyle that is reliable, but with zero entertainment value. Fill the side up with Hewetts and Hockings. Add Shiels and Stringers later. Unfortunatley, Dodoro doesn't build lists like that, so I don't see things changing unless he is removed. He has way too much influence at the club for coaches to overcome. If we don't address the real issues, then we will continue to churn through coaches like Richmond, Melbourne and Carlton of old with no hope for success.

I want to back Rutten because I want the other areas fixed so that Rutten can truly have the faith and support of the club to build his own side. It's a disgrace that he is under this much pressure in his second year with a young and inexperienced list. Very symptomatic of a broken club with broken values.

Yep. Agree. I thought Rutten's observation in his final press conference was both self-reflection and criticism of the list - that "We were asking too much of them." I interpreted that to mean we don't have the cattle at the moment to meet the work demands that will imprive us. I hope the board realises this too.

 

[Lore]

But what’s the end result of that? Further endless power struggles and divisions?

Spill the lot, put it under administration until the external review comes in… and then maybe get truck to appoint the board coz that’s the thread we’re in so seems logical

 

[Albertross]

I hope Barham tenders his resignation immediately after the board meeting tomorrow. A leader should have empathy and the ability to have composure in times of difficulty. He failed both aspects literally in his fist two days as president.

The last week has been nothing short of an unmitigated disaster and it is all due to his actions. He should resign immediately.

 

[Doss]

The problem is, he’s ******* spot on.

And too many don’t want to hear it.

 

[ghostdog]

I hope Barham tenders his resignation immediately after the board meeting tomorrow. A leader should have empathy and the ability to have composure in times of difficulty. He failed both aspects literally in his fist two days as president.

Agree again. It's Barham's position that should be seen as untenable. Truck has held the line with dignity. It was Barham who created this fiasco.

 

[The Devils Advocate]

We have a choice here.

Cut out the cancerous boys club and move forward as a club.
Or
Fire truck, continue to **** our staff and players over like we have for 10 years.

 

[Tassieboy]

I do think Barham’s position is untenable, however, if running on the platform of an external review Rutten is sacked tomorrow. It will underscore that the ‘external review’ was really just window dressing.

 

[ghostdog]

I do think Barham’s position is untenable, however, if running on the platform of an external review Rutten is sacked tomorrow. It will underscore that the ‘external review’ was really just window dressing.

100%

 

[BomberManU]

The 'asking too much' comment was intetesting. Has he commented on not having the right players before?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Yep. Agree. I thought Rutten's observation in his final press conference was both self-reflection and criticism of the list - that "We were asking too much of them." I interpreted that to mean we don't have the cattle at the moment to meet the work demands that will imprive us. I hope the board realises this too.

Yeah nah. He was saying there’s no leadership at the club and so all the criticism and everything falls on the players.

It was his way of saying the board are a bunch of useless pricks, but in a bit of a subtle way.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I do think Barham’s position is untenable, however, if running on the platform of an external review Rutten is sacked tomorrow. It will underscore that the ‘external review’ was really just window dressing.

We already know it was as they already tried to replace him with Clarkson.

There’s no plan for any external review at all.

 

[Nifft]

Spill the lot, put it under administration until the external review comes in… and then maybe get truck to appoint the board coz that’s the thread we’re in so seems logical

How about this... the board and all management at the club are sent to an island to play squid games. Maybe send the coteries as well. They're told that if they can 100% work as a team they will all survive.

My guess is after one day it's more likely to devolve into something like Lord of the Flies.

 

[JayJ20]

It seems to be a relatively unpopular position but I don’t really think you can sack a coach after 2 seasons unless things are dire. Yes they are bad, but 18-26 isn’t the end of the world. However, in addition to the mess we have created this week - cheered on by many Essendon supporters and past players like Matthew Lloyd - we are going to have to make a decision re Rutten again next year even if he someone survives this. I don’t think he will be renewed next year so there’s certainly an element of ‘we have come this far we might as well move forward now’ and I understand that.

At the very least, even though it’s ideally too late, a well commissioned external review needs to be undertaken and the board should adhere to its recommendations however unpopular they may be.

I'd prefer to make the decision next year after the external review to give ourselves enough time to run a proper selection process. 2023 is likely already shot so we may as well set ourselves up for 2024 and beyond. Let's keep Rutten for some stability and make the necessary player changes over the off-season. Sacking him has a flow on effect over the off-season (eg trade period) that will set us back even more.

 

[Lore]

The 'asking too much' comment was intetesting. Has he commented on not having the right players before?

It’s not necessarily just a reflection of the playing list, mix of different type, positions, dispositions.

There’s also asking them to do things that they haven’t been properly developed to do due to other parts of the club being gutted, or injuries or whatever (Draper has only played 40 games and has played footy as a whole for about five years. Parish took until last year to learn to run smarter. Redman is only breaking out now. Francis? Like whose fault is that exactly, that they weren’t developed in those ways earlier?)

Also the acknowledged overly-complex gameplan when they tried to add layers to the team offence last pre-season that just didn’t seem to work and had to strip it back and simplify it.

I think he has commented on the last point before — certainly some of the players have.

 

[frodos gardener]

I hope Barham tenders his resignation immediately after the board meeting tomorrow. A leader should have empathy and the ability to have composure in times of difficulty. He failed both aspects literally in his fist two days as president.

I don’t want to be that guy who is always defending Barham but I will share what I think about people like that. I worked for a guy similar a few years ago and got along pretty well with him, however, he was driven by results and relationships with people were a commodity to help get those results. He would not hesitate to step on someone to get the job done either. So basically, a campaigner, but a useful one if a tough task required it. I think that’s what Barham’s like. If the club is going to really change then he is the sort to make it happen and probably leave some bodies along the way. I’m not saying he WILL be successful but he’s more likely to be than a diplomatic type who tries to keep everyone happy and gets nowhere.

 

[Doss]

Agree again. It's Barham's position that should be seen as untenable. Truck has held the line with dignity. It was Barham who created this fiasco.

Not Barham alone though.

That entire board is rotten. Sheedy an honourable mention. Even Simon Madden, who I’ve met several times and think is a genuinely lovely guy (not to mention one of the best Essendon players of all time), he must go.

 

[justlookingaround]

Seems to me that the support of the players is just about the only bargaining chip Rutten has got.
In that it would be a very unpopular move among the players that could spark an exodus.
But, like Barham said, he's out to set a line in the sand. Who knows what's gonna happen?

 

[JayJ20]

I don’t want to be that guy who is always defending Barham but I will share what I think about people like that. I worked for a guy similar a few years ago and got along pretty well with him, however, he was driven by results and relationships with people were a commodity to help get those results. He would not hesitate to step on someone to get the job done either. So basically, a campaigner, but a useful one if a tough task required it. I think that’s what Barham’s like. If the club is going to really change then he is the sort to make it happen and probably leave some bodies along the way. I’m not saying he WILL be successful but he’s more likely to be than a diplomatic type who tries to keep everyone happy and gets nowhere.

You're giving him way too much credit. He really thought he could get Clarkson from one conversation when North and GWS have been consulting with him for over a month. That to me seems like an impulsive, reactionary and overly ambitious person. His risk assessment is severely lacking if he couldn't anticipate for it to end the way it did. People like that lack the insight to be successful in a management role.

 

[Lore]

I don’t want to be that guy who is always defending Barham but I will share what I think about people like that. I worked for a guy similar a few years ago and got along pretty well with him, however, he was driven by results and relationships with people were a commodity to help get those results. He would not hesitate to step on someone to get the job done either. So basically, a campaigner, but a useful one if a tough task required it. I think that’s what Barham’s like. If the club is going to really change then he is the sort to make it happen and probably leave some bodies along the way. I’m not saying he WILL be successful but he’s more likely to be than a diplomatic type who tries to keep everyone happy and gets nowhere.

I’m good with change. Change to what?

Change to Hird? Change to Clarkson? Change to another Worsfoldesque ex-premiership coach that we can chew up and spit out? Or maybe a new rookie coach?

The problem is that the change we need is the stuff the guy we already have is talking about. We need change in the sense of clearing out all the bullshit in-between, funding it properly, getting back to the basics of being a good, great, and successful football club with a marketing arm, rather than a lucrative marketing firm operating under the guise of a non-profit community club.

 

[WindyHillWarrior]

Yep. Agree. I thought Rutten's observation in his final press conference was both self-reflection and criticism of the list - that "We were asking too much of them." I interpreted that to mean we don't have the cattle at the moment to meet the work demands that will imprive us. I hope the board realises this too.

Any good organisation would conduct an exit interview and explore that feedback, too.

If Truck is let go, I have no faith that da boyz will do this or look to learn from any of it

 

[frodos gardener]

You're giving him way too much credit. He really thought he could get Clarkson from one conversation when North and GWS have been consulting with him for over a month. That to me seems like an impulsive, reactionary and overly ambitious person. His risk assessment is severely lacking if he couldn't anticipate for it to end the way it did. People like that lack the insight to be successful in a management role.

I didn’t take that away from his presser. He implied the board was too late in speaking with Clarko, ergo it’s something he had wanted to do earlier, but that he was only able to have the conversation when he was appointed President. Do I think he stuffed up? Yeah I do. What happened to Rutten was disgraceful and has left me feeling pretty flat about it all.

Maybe I am giving him too much credit - it’s just from what I’ve heard about him is that he is a hard worker and has the personality type to get things right but he will probably do it in a way where he’ll not be doing it with compassion, to say the least.