Certified Legendary Thread Sack Hinkley 12 - Finals Are Scary

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

So that's Florent as well as Sicily on Ken's Xmas card list. eccchhhhh
 
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

how does that sit with the daddy figure Ken talk? genuinely weird comment if true
 

Log in to remove this ad.

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.
Says more about the board.
Why would his job hinge on one game.. he should be sacked regardless
 
Its actually quite sad that the players have more motivation to win a final when Daddy donuts job is on the line than to win a premiership.

we beat the hawks due to the pressure and defensive game, when we won the pressure vs swans was non-existing, which says to me the players felt all of the pressure to win drop due to hinkleys job not being on the line anymore.
 
Oh my ... it's a child care centre
A very apt turn of phrase. Goes with ‘nursemaid’.

Something else CD admitted to me in that conversation was that his own priority had always been to “look after Ken Hinkley”.

I piped up and told him he was wrong, that his job was to “look after the Port Adelaide Football Club”.

My reckoning is that this started with KT who recruited both CD and, before him, Hinkley.

Looking back I can see that KT was so terrified twelve years ago almost exactly when Leon Cameron stood him up, and all we had left was Eade. KT had convinced himself he couldn’t go through the agony and angst and uncertainty of another coaching search. Ever again. Hence Hinkley being chased down long-distance and being given a job complete with family on hand for 12-plus years … minus interview.

KT turned out to be weak, Koch followed suit, and we are where we are.
 
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.
I wanted more than nothing, the generic “family reason” is well known, my assumption was it was kids embedded in school in SA, which is I’m sure what Carr has said publicly.
 
Oh my ... it's a child care centre
Sounds like it, doesn't it?

Just

Finish Him Dhiego Lima GIF by UFC
 
Its actually quite sad that the players have more motivation to win a final when Daddy donuts job is on the line than to win a premiership.

we beat the hawks due to the pressure and defensive game, when we won the pressure vs swans was non-existing, which says to me the players felt all of the pressure to win drop due to hinkleys job not being on the line anymore.
Says alot doesn't about the spuds that are currently managing the pafc :-(
 
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.
Lost confidence in themselves individually or how they were collectively asked to play?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

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.
Or confidence in Hinkley.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top