Certified Legendary Thread Sack Hinkley 13 - Another Crack At This

[240volt]

Our season effort that gets us in a position to make inroads into finals just doesn’t have that extra intensity required.
There can only really be three reasons.
Coaching group not good enough
Playing group not good enough or a combination of both.

 

[Steve Dore]

Who’s Taper ?

Search results for query: *

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Chewy316]

So we (allegedly) removed the 6-month payout clause while also possibly simultaneously only pushing back his salary payments?

I'm not exactly sure of what happened. I know that money was moved around, but I'm not sure as to the particulars.

I also know that there was at one point whereby if they were to sack Ken whilst he was under contract, discussions were had such that some employees of the Club were prepared to defer part of their own salaries as a means of balancing the books in the immediate.

 

[bow and arrow]

While watching the preliminary final this year it was very apparent how the players lacked polish with their forward 50 entries and ball movement through the corridor. The players really need to work on their skill execution over summer because we've seen how lack of polish cost them a grand final appearance.

Well, quite a few of us have been saying that since 2015 and nothing has changed in that space. Tell me what Ken has done about it. And don't tell me it's not his responsibility. IT IS!

On SM-S711B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[El_Scorcho]

You're conflating a few situations and putting the pieces together of an incomplete puzzle to come up with a full version of events.

Financially the club have not been in a position in 2018, 2019 or 2021 to sack him due to his contractual situation - a making of their own doing.

But in 2022 he had 1 year left on his contract, though depending on how much money the club pushed back of his contract during covid means it may have been more than a year's pay. So the club was not necessarily in a position to pay him out, but they also weren't going to stand in his way if another club wanted him. Essendon did come after him very late on in the process, but by then Ken had already committed to 2023 at Port and so it was never a realistic opportunity.

Any notion that the Club have not sacked him because they were vetoed at the time is false, because they've never even gone to the AFL to request his sacking in the first place.

I simply don't believe the financial stuff. I just don't believe they couldn't have made it happen if the will was there. St Kilda and North sacked coaches with longer than a year on their contracts in the same era.

The will simply wasn't there and they fought tooth and nail to protect the status quo. They never wanted him sacked or to be held accountable for sacking him when he failed. The long, bullshit 2017 extension was simply a way they could shrug their shoulders and say there is nothing they could do when after the disastrous 2018 and 2019 seasons. We heard the same thing in 2022. They aren't stupid, they engineered these situations so they could keep the boys club in their jobs for as long as possible.

 

[Chewy316]

I simply don't believe the financial stuff. I just don't believe they couldn't have made it happen if the will was there. St Kilda and North sacked coaches with longer than a year on their contracts in the same era.

The will simply wasn't there and they fought tooth and nail to protect the status quo. They never wanted him sacked or to be held accountable for sacking him when he failed. The long, bullshit 2017 extension was simply a way they could shrug their shoulders and say there is nothing they could do when after the disastrous 2018 and 2019 seasons. We heard the same thing in 2022. They aren't stupid, they engineered these situations so they could keep the boys club in their jobs for as long as possible.

The Board are literally answerable to very little people - not anyone who would want to get rid of them that's for sure even if Hinkley were to leave. Hence, I disagree with the notion that keeping Hinkley is a way for the Board and the high level officials at the Club to remain employed.

The North and St. Kilda situations are very different to Port's situation - so I don't know why you have consistently brought them up. They're simply not an apples to apples comparison.

 

[JimmyBC]

The reality is there's never been a serious push to get rid of him, a lone voice here and an unsure board member there having a grumble to someone doesn't equate to actual pressure on his position.

 

[PowerLil]

The reality is there's never been a serious push to get rid of him, a lone voice here and an unsure board member there having a grumble to someone doesn't equate to actual pressure on his position.

It's incredible to think that's the case given our history and the grand vision and eventual entry into the AFL. The current administration should hang their heads in absolute shame.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

I'm not exactly sure of what happened. I know that money was moved around, but I'm not sure as to the particulars.

I also know that there was at one point whereby if they were to sack Ken whilst he was under contract, discussions were had such that some employees of the Club were prepared to defer part of their own salaries as a means of balancing the books in the immediate.

That's genuinely hilarious.

They asked people to defer their salary to sack him and yet they re-sign him. My sides.

 

[Chewy316]

That's genuinely hilarious.

They asked people to defer their salary to sack him and yet they re-sign him. My sides.

Umm, no.

The discussion re partial deferral of salary was had earlier this year when they were weighing up Ken's future.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

Umm, no.

The discussion re partial deferral of salary was had earlier this year when they were weighing up Ken's future.

That wasn't exactly clear from what you replied.

Re-signing him for 2 seasons without a clear plan to fund the sackening is also hilarious.

I am unsurprised Hinkley has bamboozled the collection of idiots running the club.

 

[JimmyBC]

THEY WERE GONNA SACK HIM BUT HE WON A GAME & CRIED!!

 

[Chewy316]

That wasn't exactly clear from what you replied.

Re-signing him for 2 seasons without a clear plan to fund the sackening is also hilarious.

I am unsurprised Hinkley has bamboozled the collection of idiots running the club.

Do you think every Club works out how to make the finances work to sack their coach at the same time they're in the process of negotiating an extension with them?

 

[240volt]

That wasn't exactly clear from what you replied.

Re-signing him for 2 seasons without a clear plan to fund the sackening is also hilarious.

I am unsurprised Hinkley has bamboozled the collection of idiots running the club.

The last paragraph says it all, idiots running the club.
You can’t fix stupid.

 

[Duck Farmer]

lol - would you like to take a pay cut to pay for Hinkley's golden parachute?

I've heard it all now.

 

[Chewy316]

lol - would you like to take a pay cut to pay for Hinkley's golden parachute?

I've heard it all now.

It's not a pay cut and I have no idea how you possibly even came to such a conclusion.

 

[Launchpad McQuack]

Do you think every Club works out how to make the finances work to sack their coach at the same time they're in the process of negotiating an extension with them?

Every club wasn't offering a historically unsuccessful coach a new contract.

There's no point comparing the Club decision-makers to other clubs. No other club has made the decisions to be in this situation in the history of the league.

 

[TazD]

So Richo and Kochie are good on the business side of things but are also being outperformed by perennial basket cases in North and St Kilda as evidence by them being able to payout their underperforming coaches.

Haven't seen so many storylines clash since Elon on twitter yesterday.

 

[Duck Farmer]

It's not a pay cut and I have no idea how you possibly even came to such a conclusion.

The voices in my head told me.

 

[SureBuddy]

The only way he gets sacked is if the media actually turn on him. It is the only way it happens these days, across all sports around the world. Until that happens, he will remain in the position.

 

[240volt]

Forgetting about the serious part of this thread some of the posts are comedy gold.

 

[Chewy316]

The only way he gets sacked is if the media actually turn on him. It is the only way it happens these days, across all sports around the world. Until that happens, he will remain in the position.

And a succession plan would not involve a sacking.

 

[Butters and Pepper]

Just do the succession plan now - club to say how good Carr will be, say absolutely nothing about Hinkley, but serve donuts to journalists at media conference.

Ken will have hissy-fit and quit

No monetary payout.

Simples!

 

[PowerLil]

I know for a fact that the Club do not want a repeat of the hysteria surrounding Ken's future in 2025, and the Club have made it very clear to Ken that they don't want him carrying on like a buffoon or reaching the point of tears in any interview.

I've actually been stewing on this since you posted it Chewy. How could they let Ken get away with that interview after the St Kilda game? He should have been sacked straight after it.

 

[Chewy316]

I've actually been stewing on this since you posted it Chewy. How could they let Ken get away with that interview after the St Kilda game? He should have been sacked straight after it.

Well you're not going to sack a coach after a win mid-way through a season.

I don't think it was as bad as many made it out to be on here. Certainly not a sackable offence in isolation that's for sure.