Unofficial Preview Sack Hinkley 2: Septic Portaloo

[Jack_1870]

Highlights Kochie this morning on AA. Was asked by Goodings, who came back on a plane with supporters from the game, what he thought of those supporter's concerns of dropping numbers re memberships, attendance and how they thought the club was in a bind because of a huge payout if Hinkley was sacked but also concerned about how much longer could the club afford dwindling crowds and memberships. That's when he brought up Eddie McGuire and apparently something he said a while back about supporters who decide to change clubs because theirs isn't performing well. Apparently Eddie said well if they change clubs then they weren't Collingwood supporters in the first place. Koch somehow linked this to if you stop attending games or cease membership because your team isn't going well then you weren't a supporter in the first place. Whilst he didn't say those exact words, it's definitely what he was getting at. Didn't refer to the coach at all which was the essence of the which I thought was a good probing question. Then made some comment that we can still make finals. To finish off the two hosts thanked him for being so accessible and fronting up which he lapped up saying we're not one of those clubs that shy away and bunker down. My thought to the last part was yes you front up every week apparently but you ****s**t your way around actually answering the question of the coach and your decision to extend his contract.

A Port supporter would never change clubs........but we may go dormant for a while........

 

[Coobk001]

The North Melbourne game proved that Ken is not the problem.

Two wins away from finals and 22 players with more than enough talent to get the job done, and our players squibbed. You can blame the coach all you like but Saturday night was a failure of desire. Can you imagine a Port team of the 90s, with finals beckoning, putting in a shift like that? No team with Tim Ginever would accept being dominated with a prize like finals on the line. His goal from hitting a WWT player late in the first quarter of the 1994 GF is a perfect example.

This group don't want it enough. Cashed up millennials content to play for their next contract and not the next premiership.

The quicker people here wake up to the fact that it is the desire of the playing group and not the coach that is our number one problem, the quicker things might start to change. Blaming the coach is letting the players off way too lightly.

Lol, 7 years worth of squads, heavy list turnover year after year, pushing some of our most talented players out the door, etc. It goes on and on, Ken has had 7 years to mould this group and if anything we're regressing.

The themes are far too recurrent to be anything other than a mixture of gameplan, culture and personnel. They say we're unpredictable, but these horror losses are the opposite. They are incredibly predictable.

And who is the man that ultimately in charge of all that? And of making the changes required to fix it? Well It's Ken, and he's had several years and failed.

Teague isn't some master coach, Bolton wasn't some horrendous coach. However you know what the difference is? The change itself. The change, the pressure release, the different perspective, the ruffling of a complacent group, all of that and more are the intangible benefits that come from a new coach, and we 100% clear as day require a new coach, it is incredibly obvious to the majority of our members and id say that it is most likely obvious to the board who are to gutless and financially hamstrung to do anything about it.

 

[finbarr]

We are completely rudderless.

 

[B0ydmental]

I have absolutely no doubt that insipid piece of s**t served up on Saturday was on the players. No doubt whatsoever.

But you know what Ken, Chad etc you carry the can for that. You prepare them, you educate them, you create the culture that allows it.

It happens once twice maybe a handful of times, maybe it's them. If it was exactly the same players every time with no list turnover yeah it's them.

It happens EVERY.SINGLE.*******.TIME there is any pressure or expectation applied then there are bigger issues.

Ultimately it continues and the players will pay the price. Some have already.

You sirs in coaching and admin are now having to pay the piper for multiple failures at multiple levels across a long period of time.

Yes we will still have young players if we make changes, yes we will still have some senior players who go.missing.

But we will have some clear air and some hope.

We were going to struggle at times this year and hey it's a journey on a mini rebuild but as a team and a club with something on the line and producing THAT steaming pile of....there MUST be short medium and long term consequences.

The time to stick fat and trust in your plan finally evaporated somewhere between hammers piss poor chase, Sam grays first three turnovers and smiling sideshow bobs tenth goal.

This is a great post, except I don't think they actually had player pressure on Saturday night. We weren't even near the contests.

Last night I got around to watching the game, well, the first half. Yes, the players themselves fluncked this. We saw Ken quite animated and moving around a bit too. I think he was pinning this one on the Rucks. But, I saw 2 things, First, why on earth is Lycett in the 2s? Surely this is beyond punishing him for not following orders in a game, in which he starred I might add. Not playing Lycett in that game which was so critical it mattered, was stubborn Ken. And it shows no one is prepared to call him out and stop the little sook. To the detriment of our making finals. Goldy deserved 3 points from what I saw, amazing performance

Next, coaching- what on earth was with our Zone? The entire first half we were out of position at EVERY contest. Something happened and broke badly on Saturday night. WHat I have seen often is that teams get 4 goals up fast, and towards the end of the 1st q we get into a better zone, or start a zone, and it tightens up. Well this game we started that way and it didn't work. And we didn't change a darned thing. Did Ken think if we won the ruck then we would pull it back? Because if that was his game play then leaving out Lycett and relying on a 3 gamer, in that game, in that context, is IMO a sackable offence by itself

Its been 3 rebuilds. Ken has to go

The players brought the fail, but they were broKEN from the first bounce and handicapped thereafter.

 

[Us against the rest]

It’s not even motivation. These guys have had a plethora of flawed, ever changing gameplams drummed into their heads for far too long. There’s no identifiable system, no familiarity, no repetition or anything identifiable that they’ve been able to bed down as their style. The players are completely confused, they play like they’re completely confused, and on the weekend they simply looked like they’d had enough.

This.

 

[MrMeaner]

It’s not even motivation. These guys have had a plethora of flawed, ever changing gameplams drummed into their heads for far too long. There’s no identifiable system, no familiarity, no repetition or anything identifiable that they’ve been able to bed down as their style. The players are completely confused, they play like they’re completely confused, and on the weekend they simply looked like they’d had enough.

Yep. Every week, the plan is to nullify the opposition, not to play our own, well-established way. We are constantly messing around with team balance and tactics. What is clear is that there is absolutely no strategic thinking. It is all reactive, attempting not to lose.

 

[Del165198]

"iTs tHe PlAyErS!"

Never mind that other than a handful of players the entire squad has been replaced under Ken's tenure.

Just a big ****ing coincidence that these players don't want to try, like the same last lot hey?

 

[Us against the rest]

This is a great post, except I don't think they actually had player pressure on Saturday night. We weren't even near the contests.

Last night I got around to watching the game, well, the first half. Yes, the players themselves fluncked this. We saw Ken quite animated and moving around a bit too. I think he was pinning this one on the Rucks. But, I saw 2 things, First, why on earth is Lycett in the 2s? Surely this is beyond punishing him for not following orders in a game, in which he starred I might add. Not playing Lycett in that game which was so critical it mattered, was stubborn Ken. And it shows no one is prepared to call him out and stop the little sook. To the detriment of our making finals. Goldy deserved 3 points from what I saw, amazing performance

Next, coaching- what on earth was with our Zone? The entire first half we were out of position at EVERY contest. Something happened and broke badly on Saturday night. WHat I have seen often is that teams get 4 goals up fast, and towards the end of the 1st q we get into a better zone, or start a zone, and it tightens up. Well this game we started that way and it didn't work. And we didn't change a darned thing. Did Ken think if we won the ruck then we would pull it back? Because if that was his game play then leaving out Lycett and relying on a 3 gamer, in that game, in that context, is IMO a sackable offence by itself

Its been 3 rebuilds. Ken has to go

The players brought the fail, but they were broKEN from the first bounce and handicapped thereafter.

May be Lycett has stood up to Ken and told him how it got done at WC, hence his punishment.
Let's be honest if it were because he was carrying an injury he wouldn't of lined up for the Maggies.

 

[shewho]

Yes, 7 years worth of squads, heavy list turnover year after year, pushing some of our most talented players out the door, etc.

It goes on and on, Ken has had 7 years to mould this group and if anything we're regressing.

The themes are far too recurrent to be anything other than a mixture of gameplan, culture and personnel.

And who is the man that ultimately in charge of all that? It's Ken.

Teague isn't some master coach, Bolton wasn't some horrendous coach. However you know what the difference is? The change itself. The change, the pressure release, the different perspective, the ruffling of a complacent group, all of that and more are the intangible benefits that come from a new coach, and we 100% clear as day require a new coach, it is incredibly obvious to the majority of our members and id say that it is most likely obvious to the board who are to gutless and financially hamstrung to do anything about it.

The gameplan is good enough to beat the best- we've shown that. Whatsmore, we've shown it in dry conditions and wet.

The personnel are good enough to beat the best- we've shown that.

Inconsistency like we have can only be due to one thing- inconsistency of application.

I blame Ken if we are not pumped up enough to beat sides we should mid season, like the game v Western Bulldogs. It's his job to get them pumped up for that.

But late season, when we are 2 wins from finals, and the players deliver that crap......- that is 100% the playing group. No coach should need to pump up the team when they are so close to getting a prize like finals.

All this "Sack Hinkley" stuff is blinding us to the real problem- a group who are incapable of getting the best from themselves on a regular basis.

 

[finbarr]

Yep. Every week, the plan is to nullify the opposition, not to play our own, well-established way. We are constantly messing around with team balance and tactics. What is clear is that there is absolutely no strategic thinking. It is all reactive, attempting not to lose.

The alarm bells went off in this years first showdown. When faced with a hefty injury toll Hinkley chose to play two negating small forwards rather than throw caution to the wind and go tall. When he picked Aidyn Johnson, who was unfit, overweight, and lacking in form, I think a few noses at the club were put out of joint.

 

[finbarr]

Hinkley getting up and out of his chair and walking around the box after North Melbourne goals was very interesting. I’d love to hear a body language expert’s opinions on this.
To me he looked a man who knows he’s under enormous pressure and who knows exactly when the cameras would be on him. I think he’s cooked and he knows it.

 

[B0ydmental]

This is another example of the coaches/club not seeing something the rest of us could see. The rest of us could see that an in form Lycett would have been a better option than the 5th gamer to play on Goldstein.

Not only did playing Ladhams on Goldstein fail, the coaches have now made things worse by publicly saying things about Ladhams that should have only been expressed to him privately. It's incredible: we have a decent ruck division for the first time in years, and the coaches are seemingly determined to piss them all off.

Need to understand this about Ken, he will DESTROY a player for his own stubborn benefit. Either physically or mentally. The guy is a 'path

Name all our past Ruckmen under him and you'll see how he ran them into the ground when other back up options were available. And then he didn't do this on Saturday refusing to do what was critically important in playing Lycett because he as a senior coach had a spat and couldn't resolve it after 3 weeks. Remember, Kens entire game strategy was based around our getting first clearance. Ken is one of those friends we all have we see gets angry at their 8 year old kid and has a hissy fit about something because they are are mentally immature

 

[B0ydmental]

We were never gonna drop Ladhams after his game last week, but the fact remains that Lycett simply should never have been dropped. Whilst pushing toward finals we had to get our best side on the park and keep it there. Staggering.

Be ruthless. If Steve Smith is available will Lubaschange keep Smith's spot because he scored 59 runs last night?

 

[Magus]

The gameplan is good enough to beat the best- we've shown that. Whatsmore, we've shown it in dry conditions and wet.

The personnel are good enough to beat the best- we've shown that.

Inconsistency like we have can only be due to one thing- inconsistency of application.

I blame Ken if we are not pumped up enough to beat sides we should mid season, like the game v Western Bulldogs. It's his job to get them pumped up for that.

But late season, when we are 2 wins from finals, and the players deliver that crap......- that is 100% the playing group. No coach should need to pump up the team when they are so close to getting a prize like finals.

All this "Sack Hinkley" stuff is blinding us to the real problem- a group who are incapable of getting the best from themselves on a regular basis.

Bloody millenials hey? Sack em all. That'll see us right.

 

[B0ydmental]

Our very first forward movement on satdy was straight to a forward 50 only populated by Robbie Gray and a couple defenders.

In a side including Dixon, Marshall, Ryder, Ladhams, Westhoff...

The stage was set from there.

Within 25 seconds of the opening bounce Dixon was at the D50 line by the boundary. He does this EVERY single week if the ball does not come right to us. He goes to the right hand side

Does he think he is Nick Reiwolt? Is he just dumb? Is he instructed? Either way he's dumb to do it or put up with it

I think Lycett must be the only one who has told Ken a home truth. He hasn't been out for 3 weeks, including the do or DIED game last weekend, because of instruction in a game he still starred

 

[snozulu]

I really need some good news. Hurry up and get rid of him.

 

[B0ydmental]

The North Melbourne game proved that Ken is not the problem.

Two wins away from finals and 22 players with more than enough talent to get the job done, and our players squibbed. You can blame the coach all you like but Saturday night was a failure of desire. Can you imagine a Port team of the 90s, with finals beckoning, putting in a shift like that? No team with Tim Ginever would accept being dominated with a prize like finals on the line. His goal from hitting a WWT player late in the first quarter of the 1994 GF is a perfect example.

This group don't want it enough. Cashed up millennials content to play for their next contract and not the next premiership.

The quicker people here wake up to the fact that it is the desire of the playing group and not the coach that is our number one problem, the quicker things might start to change. Blaming the coach is letting the players off way too lightly.

Yes but NO

Ken's gameplan was to win the first clearance. He built a zone that would win the ball movement that we saw North use. This is fine to start with this, but raises 4 questions which lie at the heart of Ken

1. Why did Ken risk the season by not playing Lycett when the entire game plan was built upon winning the Ruck? Good form of a 4 gamer is not good enough reason to roll this dice

2. Why did Ken not accept that it wasn't working and change up the zone to go at least man on man temporarily. He normally makes a change around the 20 minute mark when other teams get the fast start, all those groundhog day match the opposition for equal scores after the immediate slaughter games

3. Why did the players not abandon that zone- something so clearly broken and destructive? Was it Fear of punishment for being the first- and potentially only- one to not follow the gameplan? Did they see what happened to Lycett and think they don't want to be in the 2s and buried like Ken does to his non butt lickers? This suggests a coach who has personality type that is a 'cist or 'path type person, plus a total lack of leadership in the playing group, a fearful fractured playing group that is afraid of something. Timid like a puppy who peed on the floorboards hiding in the corner. Sat vs 'Roos was the players peeing the carpet, but why did they. I'd love to know whats happened in their heads

4. Where is the club board leadership in this? How could they let Ken keep Lycett out if that was going to be the game plan? How can Koch not come out and say "the coach has the full support of the board" (unless he is walking next week which is possible)

 

[LP7_]

Be ruthless. If Steve Smith is available will Lubaschange keep Smith's spot because he scored 59 runs last night?

Smith was out injured. Lycett was out ‘on form’. Bit different.

 

[Lockhart Road]

Hinkley getting up and out of his chair and walking around the box after North Melbourne goals was very interesting. I’d love to hear a body language expert’s opinions on this.
To me he looked a man who knows he’s under enormous pressure and who knows exactly when the cameras would be on him. I think he’s cooked and he knows it.

This sounds to me exactly like what body language experts call ‘Hitler In The Bunkerism circa late April 1945.’

Alyx I can imagine engineering a Nobel Prize Winning GIF titled ‘Hinkley In The Boxism Saturday 17 August 2019.’

 

[B0ydmental]

I really need some good news. Hurry up and get rid of him.

The good news is we actually have a good list. Check those #1 in competition stats. And we have some great youngsters. Problem is they are like a puppy that is afraid of peeing on the carpet and being berated

A new coach will fix this in no time, even if just letting the players play naturally at first before integrating his strategy into that

This is what is making the current situation, and 5 years without finals, so difficult to bear

 

[Ford Fairlane]

The first thing I've followed on Twitter in a long time.

Wouldn't it be funny if it is Rucci?

 

[Iwish]

This time next week might be an interesting time here in adelaide.

 

[shewho]

Bloody millenials hey? Sack em all. That'll see us right.

We are sitting on the best list we've had since 2004. Ken has attracted players of good quality at a time when others couldn't. He has made hard choices regarding trades at a time others wouldn't. The list building side of coaching is a tick for Ken.

He has backed the young blokes with mixed success- Rozee and Duursma have been amazing. Butters and Marshall have gone missing at important times. It's impossible to be definitive, but I don't think the young ones have a lot to do with our inconsistency.

It's a mindset thing. The mindset of the modern footballer/ millennials is "me first". If they are safe and secure with people blowing smoke up their arse on a regular basis, that seems enough for them. It's miles away from the mindset of Port players in the 70s, 80s and 90s.

Replace Ken and you are not fixing the real problem. We will just get another coach who will have a team that look like world beaters one week and crap the next.

I am not necessarily against sacking Ken. If these entitled footballers see the man they worked closely with suffer the humiliation of sacking and realise that it's because their efforts weren't consistent or desperate enough, that could change the mindset. Also, we are in this position because Ken didn't get his team up mid season when it's fair to blame the coach for a lack of desperation in the squad.

But what I'm saying is that if players can't motivate themselves two games out from finals to put in a desperate performance to clinch the prize, the number one problem lies with them, not the coach.

 

[TeeKray]

> Coach leaves #1 ruckman in the SANFL
> Junior ruckman toweled up by top shelf ruckman
> Junior ruckman asked to tag top shelf ruckman with no success
> Junior ruckman thrown under the bus on Monday

 

[Alberton Proud]

I'm just couting down the days to the club's announcement that Hinkley is gone. That will be a happy day for me and a lot of supporters.

The club is rolling out the line that Port can mathematically make the finals. That's just pi**ing off the supporters even more.

This is the thing

There really is no difference in just falling into or just missing out on the finals

It's the prior conga line of **** ups, poor decisions, repeated mistakes and disconnect that the supporters are railing against

Sack the mother now and just get on with it