Certified Legendary Thread Sack Hinkley 12 - Finals Are Scary

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not really. I didn’t ask for specifics but got told I am a pelican. I’d have a chuckle at how many here have liked certain posts about Jordan Hinkley for example and then don’t hesitate to pile on me for questioning Carrs ambition. The hypocrisy and hypersensitivity on this board is hilarious.
I'm not commenting on whether he should have called you a pelican, but you did ask for specifics. He said it was for family reasons, but you weren't happy with that and demanded that he tell you what other information he had.
 
Yeah id suggest tomorrow at the absolute earliest but more likely Wednesday to Friday.

If we get to Saturday then it is time to get very worried

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app
If we get past B & F then forget it - he'll be staying... and if he stays then I won't be going to any games in 2025 - Done with it...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Not really. I didn’t ask for specifics but got told I am a pelican. I’d have a chuckle at how many here have liked certain posts about Jordan Hinkley for example and then don’t hesitate to pile on me for questioning Carrs ambition. The hypocrisy and hypersensitivity on this board is hilarious.
Yeh Jordan is a full grown adult and a nepo hire with no evidence of competence at his job, whereas Carr's kids are still kids but feel free to flap flap flap chap

pelican-yawn.gif
 
Koch is too gutless to sack him.

It will be a mutual parting of the ways where Hinkley can ride off into the sunset after all the happy clappers laud him at the B & F.

It will be sickening the way this plays out.
 
They're probably waiting for the membership auto renewals on the 10/10/24 to go through before announcing he is here to stay. They deep down would have to know that KH staying is going to receive significant member backlash.
 
They're probably waiting for the membership auto renewals on the 10/10/24 to go through before announcing he is here to stay. They deep down would have to know that KH staying is going to receive significant member backlash.
Would make sense. Ken-related cancellations are pretty fresh in the memory of the club. When I cancelled last year within 15 minutes of seeing he got an extension I was asked “was it because of his extension?”
 
Koch would love CD to formally sack him, then feign surprise and outrage at CD leaving for Collingwood moments later.

Trouble is if CD was going to Collingwood, he drags it out for as long as possible until we're stuck with Ken for another year.

Meanwhile Ken does exactly what he's done for the last 12 years.
 
They're probably waiting for the membership auto renewals on the 10/10/24 to go through before announcing he is here to stay. They deep down would have to know that KH staying is going to receive significant member backlash.

You know, general corporate dysfunction being what it is, there probably is someone senior at the club who thinks that way, but I wonder (hope??) there is also someone who questions the need to make a "nothing to see here" announcement that only draws more attention to a controversial issue. It's not like that'll attract any new members. Most player review stuff is generally private so why not also the coaching review stuff (save a sanitised version for members day Feb 2025 by which time most of us will have completed the necessary therapy sessions). Just maybe get someone other than Ken to write the laudatory PR listing all the Great Achievements of 2024 and purge-paraphrase out all the harderys and learningZ.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What I would like to know is, what really happened after Tredrea's comments of Hinkley being untenable, to going from the box to being anchored to the bench.

Chewy316 can you enlighten me here.

It's roughly 18 months since that untenable comment happened, so my memory isn't brilliant, but I was led to believe that during the week leading into the round 4 game against Sydney, the directors had a meeting and it was decided that Ken was to be sacked if they lost to Sydney - it was a last chance saloon type of thing, and it was made clear to the footy department that things had to change quickly otherwise jobs were going to be lost. And so, the decision was made to put Ken down on the bench and to try a few different things structurally.

They won that game, another 12 after that on the trot, and the rest is history.
 
It's roughly 18 months since that untenable comment happened, so my memory isn't brilliant, but I was led to believe that during the week leading into the round 4 game against Sydney, the directors had a meeting and it was decided that Ken was to be sacked if they lost to Sydney - it was a last chance saloon type of thing, and it was made clear to the footy department that things had to change quickly otherwise jobs were going to be lost. And so, the decision was made to put Ken down on the bench and to try a few different things structurally.

They won that game, another 12 after that on the trot, and the rest is history.
Thanks for that, I was wondering if he was told, it's nice to know Ken's not running everything down there. ;)
 
Last edited:
What I would like to know is, what really happened after Tredrea's comments of Hinkley being untenable, to going from the box to being anchored to the bench.

Chewy316 can you enlighten me here.


he muttered something about being "kicked out of the box" in a presser didn't he? the media span it as "Ken moved to be closer to his boys" but I'm sure he literally said he was kicked out in a presser right??

edit: an SEN article from the time says "Hinkley moved to the bench in Round 4 – out of the Virgin lounge as his players mockingly referred to the coaches box." :eek: that's a juicy one
 
Yet here we are, openly taking pot shots at Ken and his family but not allowed to question why Carr won’t leave SA. Double standards
You didnt question why ... You just straight out attacked him and his character

Just take it back, and move on
 
Last edited:
It's roughly 18 months since that untenable comment happened, so my memory isn't brilliant, but I was led to believe that during the week leading into the round 4 game against Sydney, the directors had a meeting and it was decided that Ken was to be sacked if they lost to Sydney - it was a last chance saloon type of thing, and it was made clear to the footy department that things had to change quickly otherwise jobs were going to be lost. And so, the decision was made to put Ken down on the bench and to try a few different things structurally.

They won that game, another 12 after that on the trot, and the rest is history.
It's just mind-blowing how many times he has been on the cusp of getting sacked only for us to somehow jag a victory (in some bizarre way) and save his arse. I've never known anyone to be as kissed on the old fella as much as him.
 
What I would like to know is, what really happened after Tredrea's comments of Hinkley being untenable, to going from the box to being anchored to the bench.

Chewy316 can you enlighten me here.

In a conversation I had with CD about three months ago I asked this question.

His answer was that the shift of Hinkley from box to bench resulted from the senior players, having lost badly despite wearing the bars in a home showdown, called a mid-week meeting with the coaching panel to admit they had lost confidence in themselves on-field - in a home game in front of a home crowd.

The upshot was Hinkley being removed from the box (where he had done nothing for x years) down to the bench where he might be able to contribute by inserting some self-confidence face-to-face to the players as they came on and off the bench.

This worked … for 13 matches.
 
In a conversation I had with CD about three months ago I asked this question.

His answer was that the shift of Hinkley from box to bench resulted from the senior players, having lost badly despite wearing the bars in a home showdown, called a mid-week meeting with the coaching panel to admit they had lost confidence in themselves on-field - in a home game in front of a home crowd.

The upshot was Hinkley being removed from the box (where he had done nothing for x years) down to the bench where he might be able to contribute by inserting some self-confidence face-to-face to the players as they came on and off the bench.

This worked … for 13 matches.

Oh my ... it's a child care centre
 
In a conversation I had with CD about three months ago I asked this question.

His answer was that the shift of Hinkley from box to bench resulted from the senior players, having lost badly despite wearing the bars in a home showdown, called a mid-week meeting with the coaching panel to admit they had lost confidence in themselves on-field - in a home game in front of a home crowd.

The upshot was Hinkley being removed from the box (where he had done nothing for x years) down to the bench where he might be able to contribute by inserting some self-confidence face-to-face to the players as they came on and off the bench.

This worked … for 13 matches.
Gee I'm surprised he's still coach but as others have said, he's a lucky son of a b**** with some last minute wins.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top