Leppa sacked

Remove this Banner Ad

ManeMan said:
Agree with most of this other than the Lynchy appointment. I'd rather we avoid anyone involved in the media. Listening to Leigh during games comment on our players, particularly when the comments border on the negative or are innacurate, always irks me.
Click to expand...
Possibly. Leigh is good because he has the profile and he gets listened to down in Victoria. He's bad because he doesn't appear particularly supportive of us as a club. Lynchy - I don't know. But the board needs a football mind, and business/directorship experience... Media experience wouldn't hurt either, but perhaps not 'current' media experience. It's a tough one.

It can be done though. I hate Eddie as much as the next guy, but you can't argue that he hasn't done a great job for Collingwood despite, and in part because of, his ability to exert his media influence.
 
spotthedog1 said:
Possibly. Leigh is good because he has the profile and he gets listened to down in Victoria. He's bad because he doesn't appear particularly supportive of us as a club. Lynchy - I don't know. But the board needs a football mind, and business/directorship experience... Media experience wouldn't hurt either, but perhaps not 'current' media experience. It's a tough one.

It can be done though. I hate Eddie as much as the next guy, but you can't argue that he hasn't done a great job for Collingwood despite, and in part because of, his ability to exert his media influence.
Click to expand...

Yep, fair point about Eddie. He certainly has done a great job there. Remember too though, he also brings a lot of heat down on the club through his regular media gaffes. I'd say there are a fair few supporters who can't stand Collingwood purely because of Eddie's involment in the club. Given, he is a bigger figure in the media than either Leigh or Lynchy and neither of them are as likely to get themselves into hot water with their comments. He's a better commentator though and has an excellent knowledge of their list and all things Collingwood related. I find it a little unprofessional when Leigh comments errorneously/clumsily or negatively on our players during our games. Really, he should be THE content expert on our club in the media. Lynchy is even worse. Has no idea.

I'd rather we avoid anyone in a media role altogether.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

spotthedog1 said:
The board should oversee all aspects of the club, including football. Excluding executive directors (CEO, CFO, etc), they should run very little, if anything.

I agree with your overall thoughts, but disagree on some of the nuance. For most businesses, the business motive is to make money. For our club, that should not be the business motive. Our business motive should be to run an organisation to support a successful AFL club. This includes making money, but not as the primary purpose.

The board don't appear very united, and I suppose that comes from the slapshod way that the AFL pasted the board together a couple of years back. That said, boards should have unity of direction, but I don't believe that boards should always agree... That's usually the sign of a passive board, and successful boards will regularly disagree on some issues.

As to whether our board is good at their jobs. Perhaps not hugely - they don't appear to be doing spectacularly... But which one/s are performing badly? It's not likely that they all are... Wiping the entire board out is usually a last resort. Who goes? Everyone? Sharpless? Lethal? Swann? The Non-Execs? I don't know. I'm not involved, so don't know what needs to be done to increase the functionality of our board. It's a complex issue and can't be dumbed down to "kill them all and let God sort them out".
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct in your observations, based on my board experience. We have an oversight role, but employ experts to run the show. And pay them a lot of $$$ to do so.

The idea that a board should be unanimous is ridiculous. Why have different minds with different experiences involved if this is the case.

Some of the stuff being written here is pure rot. I mean- the coach is unaware that results are being used to judge his performance??? Who would have thought. Where did this radical idea come from??? Seriously.

As I said above, I have great reservations about this secret ballot stuff. Why was one needed? I'd like this spelt out. For this the chair is responsible. If it's a 4 to 3 vote who cares. Spell it out. At the end of the day there's an AGM when everyone eligible gets a say.

Elsewhere here someone said that we have developed a knack of not only not developing players, we actually take them backwards. This is easily observable- numerous examples are available.

Whoever we get must set rock-solid standards. Everyone runs and tackles, not just Robbo. Everyone puts their body on the line as required. Everyone gets fit- no opportunities for jokes about Subway, or coach's observations that we ran out of puff in the last quarter- in Round 23. If any player is unable to meet these basics, look elsewhere.

No excuses about injuries- every side has them, just ask the Dogs. No excuses about how badly the AFL has treated us in the draw. Just get on with it.

Last- no more game plans where a 33yo ex-champ is able to kick 9 goals without a hand being laid on him.
 
Last edited:
Interesting to hear Hammo surmise that the secret ballot may have been used to prevent the result from being leaked to the media.

Whilst this creates more disturbing questions, it is the most reasonable reason I have heard to explain the boards actions.
 
Tassie4ever said:
You are absolutely correct in your observations, based on my board experience. We have an oversight role, but employ experts to run the show. And pay them a lot of $$$ to do so.

The idea that a board should be unanimous is ridiculous. Why have different minds with different experiences involved if this is the case.

Some of the stuff being written here is pure rot. I mean- the coach is unaware that results are being used to judge his performance??? Who would have thought. Where did this radical idea come from??? Seriously.

As I said above, I have great reservations about this secret ballot stuff. Why was one needed? I'd like this spelt out. For this the chair is responsible. If it's a 4 to 3 vote who cares. Spell it out. At the end of the day there's an AGM when everyone eligible gets a say.

Elsewhere here someone said that we have developed a knack of not only not developing players, we actually take them backwards. This is easily observable- numerous examples are available.

Whoever we get must set rock-solid standards. Everyone runs and tackles, not just Robbo. Everyone puts their body on the line as required. Everyone gets fit- no opportunities for jokes about Subway, or coach's observations that we ran out of puff in the last quarter- in Round 23. If any player is unable to meet these basics, look elsewhere.

No excuses about injuries- every side has them, just ask the Dogs. No excuses about how badly the AFL has treated us in the draw. Just get on with it.

Last- no more game plans where a 33yo ex-champ is able to kick 9 goals without a hand being laid on him.
Click to expand...
Agree with most of what you've said, but I have to say, I had no issue with the secret ballot. Secret ballots are regularly used in circumstances where issues addressing key personnel (directors or senior management) are made. This fits that perfectly.

If they didn't use a secret ballot, it's no problem if Leppa is fired, but what if he stayed? Can you imagine the mind games of Swanny or Lethal chatting with Leppa saying "I had your back Leppa, but Ross didn't - he wanted you gone!". You end up with staff working for board members, not the club. Secret ballots are so that people can't do that.

In a perfect world, of course you wouldn't need them, but if you have board experience, you should know there's just as much office politics at play on a board of directors as in the bullpen.
 
jason pm said:
with Justin Leppitsch and Simon Black confirmed outs as well as probably Gary O'donnell and Shane Woewodin who would be doing the end of season exit interviews/assessments of the players?
Click to expand...
Danny Daly's massive bald head perhaps
 
brizrider said:
Lol! I really don't get why people worry about stuff like that so much. He's a big boy, he's getting half a million bucks a year to coach a professional footy team. I'm sure he can handle getting told the news over the phone.
Click to expand...
And getting a fully paid year off on gardening leave, without all the attention and scrutiny of being an AFL coach.
 
Nick Lions said:
On one of your points. You pointed out the that the board should run all aspects of the club. Including football. I agree, but would like to add that one thing the board should be most worried about is running a successful business. Ie; making money. Something they have failed to do continually. They aren't united, nor are they any good at their jobs. Get them out.
Click to expand...
Just what we need. ..... More movement & turmoil !
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I know I’m a bit late to the party on this, and others might have said the same, but…

Some stuff that Leppa said during press conferences was just concerning to hear. Like after the St Kilda game, saying the goal posts had moved, saying something like – ‘I thought my KPI’s were to introduce and play young talent, now three weeks ago it shifted to wins and losses’…first of all, wins and losses makes the board sound superficial – I think what he’s really referring to there is on-field performance as a whole. And the way he presented himself at the conference, he seemed to be implying that on-field performance wasn’t originally a part of his KPI’s – his KPI’s were just to introduce and play young talent. Which is just ridiculous. If that was the case, then any of us here on BigFooty could have met the KPI’s of the Lions coach, if all we had to do was play young kids. It just seems incredible to me that Leppa would present things in that way.

Being young and playing young kids doesn’t give you a licence to go out and lose by 10 goals every week, concede 160 points, appear to lack effort and struggle with a game plan, and say that it has nothing to do with your coaching. The way he made it seem that the board shifted the goalposts was just unfair to the board.

That’s one example – the Adelaide press conference was another one (lack of AFL concessions meaning we lose by 138 points).

Anyway, it’s over now. I like a lot of what I saw of Leppa, but some things were concerning, especially the way we played in some of our huge losses. I hope he can find a job elsewhere.
 
So I assume that given our season and the review that led to Leppas sacking, all of the assistant Coaches should now be moved on, along with those departing of their own accord?
If we had a game plan it was totally missing and this group with all their varied experiences sent out the same crap week in week out.
I was given a very golden opportunity to join the inner sanctum this year in a game in Melbourne and whatever game plan was suggested was slightly less than you would find at a mildly successful suburban footy club.
So the millions of dollars per season spent on a football department could only serve up a veiled game strategy?
Now football is a simple game at its essence, but the AFL has become very scientific with advancements each year. How then can such a group of coaches come up with something so lame, that it really only contained three individual points of difference and one plan B option if the opposition got on top.
Seriously, all that planning and meetings for so little creativity and individualising the enemy and their strengths.
Problem then was one player given a specific role to play, almost did the complete opposite and as soon as the other team started to dominate, plan B was never enacted at any point.
That means only one of three things,
1. Our list was too inexperienced or dumb to follow the very basic of instructions.
2. Our coaches just flew by the seat of their pants throughout the game and made it up on the spot.
3. The players didn't really care and whatever messages the coaches were portraying just wasn't getting through.
Either way, the entire footy department needs cleaning out and we need to build not the list of players but put in place the best available, prepared to find us the formula for success.
We don't have the time to stuff it up again....
 
Back2Back2Back said:
Caro being Caro:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/afl...ons-tear-into-each-other-20160829-gr3opu.html

Two big things I wasn't aware of that she's written about there - apparently 'most' of the players wanted Leppa gone, and Lambert has clashed with a bunch as well???
Click to expand...

I rarely read Caro Wilson - she may be the Chief Football Writer for The Age but she almost never actually writes about the playing of the game (unlike her counterpart Robbo who, although a bit of a buffoon, does). Caro is not much more than a gossip columnist concentrating on background scandals and petty politics; she could equally be the Chief Darts Writer, or Cage Fighting or Archery writer without having to know anything about the sports involved.

That particular article looks like she's just thrown a number of darts with the hope that a couple will stick.

One of the few times I actually agree with Eddie . . .
 
Last edited:
Ray Button said:
I rarely read Caro Wilson - she may be the Chief Football Writer for The Age but she almost never actually writes about the playing of the game (unlike her counterpart Robbo who, although a bit of a buffoon, does). Caro is not much more than a gossip columnist concentrating on background scandals and petty politics; she could equally be the Chief Darts Writer, or Cage Fighting or Archery without having to know anything about the sports involved.

That particular article looks like she's just thrown a number of darts with the hope that a couple will stick.

One of the few times I actually agree with Eddie . . .
Click to expand...
So some people will hate me saying this, and while I don't like Eddie he does EVERYTHING to promote his club and bash others down into the ground. The fact that one of those is my beloved Lions does hurt a lot, but you have to give the man credit where credit is due.
 
Most succinct summary I've seen about why he needed to go.

Fox Sports said:
THE coach was sacked after overseeing one of the worst defences in league history and the team nearly finished below a side that was half a VFL team and half a group that finished 15th the year before. That’s the short version. Brisbane conceded 79 more goals than any other team in the AFL, allowing a total of 2872 points to be kicked against them. When standardised for differences in season length over the history of the VFL/AFL, that’s the fifth worst performance ever. The argument from Justin Leppitsch was “well, at least we’re scoring”, but the Lions still had the fifth-worst attack in the competition, so barely.

WHEN you finished basically level with a team that had 12 players wiped out for the season, you’re in a deep pit. Justin Leppitsch had to go given the disaster and the next coach has a formidable challenge but a decent young spine to build around. Very few players enhanced their standing — Dayne Zorko among the small number. Tom Rockliff’s captaincy is questionable but they can only get better.
Click to expand...
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Leppa sacked

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top