No Oppo Supporters St.Kilda sack Brett Ratten

[DougalHoward]

Joey about to talk about his thoughts on triple m. No doubt he’ll be in favour.

Is there a podcast?

 

[George]

George how do you think the club handled Ratts’ sacking old mate?

View attachment 1541127

You wanna have a crack too do ya big shot?

 

[Darkhour]

Yes, he said that, he also publicly came out, along with Ratten, and said Ratten's job was safe. Not to mention that Bassat also said that Ratten's job was under threat a month before the announcement of his sacking. So in July it was safe, new information came out, and in September it wasn't safe anymore. We waited a month to tell Ratten that and then gave a dead man walking four days to save his job, according to Bassat.

It continues a long history now of mixed messaging from the president and he needs to handle it better.

I am glad we corrected the mistake and think we are actively trying to improve which is good but I don't know what part of this whole situation you think is professional.

It's politics.. as a leader, you're not going to come out prior to a review and tell the media that your coach's job is specifically under review (not that I can remember him specifically saying this or see any reference to it). That would have been even worse for the club. The presser from a communications and business point of view is all you need to know. The Pres and board wern't happy with the teams football performance and everything was on the table.

Yes they stuffed up with renewing Ratts when they did, but they've taken accountability of that and took the time behind closed doors figuring out what they need to do which is why they have acted swiftly and decidely once Ratts sacking was announced.

 

[austinnn]

There’s a concept called “task-relevant maturity” which comes from High Output Management by Andy Grove of Intel.

It basically says that anyone joining a new org or going into a new role has low task-relevant maturity because they don’t know the context and what’s expected of them. In that situation they need to be micromanaged to build up their maturity to the point where they can take ownership and need less management. It’s a very effective framework for considering how to manage people.

Clearly you can’t just say to a bunch of 18 year olds - or even probably 25 year olds who don’t know what an elite environment looks like - “take ownership”. They don’t know what they don’t know. You can only effectively give someone ownership once they have enough maturity to take it, before that your responsibility is to coach them up to that maturity.

That's pretty interesting and I wonder how it would go in a more seasoned team. We had a few experienced players but not that many. No doubt it would have been worth trying at Hawthorn when Rath was there with so many players there having already succeeded, but we have a vastly different make up.

Besides that, I think it's a strange model to bring into a footy club. Footy squads are made up of 40 boys and young men, most of whom have only ever known a more traditional autocratic model of leadership since their junior days and have probably really only been given the bare bones if leadership tools - even though more and more clubs are going for more consultation, I think most of our players are just looking for someone to show them the way to realise their potential as sportsmen and get an edge over their opposition as a team.

Most of them are smart enough to keep their mouths shut and their ears open but the stuff they are listening to has to be decent quality, not just motivation speak.

 

[George]

It's politics.. as a leader, you're not going to come out prior to a review and tell the media that your coach's job is specifically under review (not that I can remember him specifically saying this or see any reference to it). That would have been even worse for the club. The presser from a communications and business point of view is all you need to know. The Pres and board wern't happy with the teams football performance and everything was on the table.

Yes they stuffed up with renewing Ratts when they did, but they've taken accountability of that and took the time behind closed doors figuring out what they need to do which is why they have acted swiftly and decidely once Ratts sacking was announced.

The review began in July. Bassat told Ratten in July his job was safe. By September., Bassat knew Ratten was going to be sacked. Instead of telling Ratten in September, in October (specifically, 3 and a half weeks after he knew) he told Ratten about it. Come on man, it's not difficult to understand.

 

[Darkhour]

On another note, and I apologise if this has already been posted, but Lyon's qualities as Coach are again exemplified in this vid..

 

[Darkhour]

The review began in July. Bassat told Ratten in July his job was safe. Bassat knew Ratten was going to be sacked by September. In October, he told Ratten about it. Come on man, it's not difficult to understand.

Comon man you're acting like everything you hear in the media is the absolute black and white truth. Were you in the private meetings between Ratts, Lethers and Bassat? Did you get the scoop from Bassat that after reading the football dep review, he instantly knew he had to sack Ratts there and then.? It was a pretty delicate matter and Basset and co needed to make sure they were going to make the right decision before going down that path.. It's not that hard to comprehend..

 

[George]

Comon man you're acting like everything you hear in the media is the absolute black and white truth. Were you in the private meetings between Ratts, Lethers and Bassat? Did you get the scoop from Bassat that after reading the football dep review, he instantly knew he had to sack Ratts there and then.? It was a pretty delicate matter and Basset and co needed to make sure they were going to make the right decision before going down that path.. It's not that hard to comprehend..

The media? This is all on public record from the club. I'm listening to the club.

Why did Bassat wait until four days out from making Ratten's sacking public to tell Ratten if he knew about it a month earlier?
Why did Bassat bother to have Ratten try and save his job if he knew he was getting sacked anyway?
Why did Bassat tell Ratten in July that his job was safe if he didn't know for sure, as the review hadn't determined that yet?

If any of what they said externally was different to what was happening internally, why did they lie to their supporters?

It was handled poorly. It was unprofessional. Those outside of the club that have genuine concerns about it are justified given the timeline of events.

Every one of us are glad that we made the move and replaced Ratten but I don't think blindly defending the club is a good thing. We need to do better and hopefully we can.

I've tried to explain it enough so I'm done, I don't think you'll come around no matter how long we go around in circles.

 

[austinnn]

The only reservation in my mind is the list and the lack of genuine top end talent.

Say Rossy does his job, we finish 4 or 5 which doesn't give us DP's to get elite talent meanwhile the list isn't good enough to win the ultimate prize.

Genuine no man's land with no one at fault.

Then we trade one of our players who gained external value but Ross and the list feels we can replace or cover and we get that FRDP, maybe more than one: Ross's football will enhance the market value of most of our players.

A lot of players on our list are in the perfect age bracket to be traded to another club and still have a good career at a second club.

I don't see a problem there.

 

[Darkhour]

The media? This is all on public record from the club. I'm listening to the club.

Why did Bassat wait until four days out from making Ratten's sacking public to tell Ratten if he knew about it a month earlier?
Why did Bassat bother to have Ratten try and save his job if he knew he was getting sacked anyway?
Why did Bassat tell Ratten in July that his job was safe if he didn't know for sure, as the review hadn't determined that yet?

If any of what they said externally was different to what was happening internally, why did they lie to their supporters?

It was handled poorly. It was unprofessional. Those outside of the club that have genuine concerns about it are justified given the timeline of events.

Every one of us are glad that we made the move and replaced Ratten but I don't think blindly defending the club is a good thing. We need to do better and hopefully we can.

I've tried to explain it enough so I'm done, I don't think you'll come around no matter how long we go around in circles.

Yes, even the football club is a form of media also and is political. You alongside the rest of the media can't be expected to know or understand the inner machinations of the Pres and co every moment.. it's just simply not needed except i.e. when the review findings are released and at a typical AGM etc... and again you're assuming too much as black and white truth and questions discussed and explained.. unless you've got concrete evidence of misdeeds that you can post and share, then it's all assumption and finger pointing.

 

[George]

Yes, even the football club is a form of media also and is political. You alongside the rest of the media can't be expected to know or understand the inner machinations of the Pres and co every moment.. it's just simply not needed except i.e. when the review findings are released and at a typical AGM etc... and again you're assuming too much as black and white truth and questions discussed and explained.. unless you've got concrete evidence of misdeeds that you can post and share, then it's all assumption and finger pointing.

Lol now that is reaching if I've ever seen it. You do you mate. All good.

 

[SteeleSaints]

The review began in July. Bassat told Ratten in July his job was safe. By September., Bassat knew Ratten was going to be sacked. Instead of telling Ratten in September, in October (specifically, 3 and a half weeks after he knew) he told Ratten about it. Come on man, it's not difficult to understand.

Pardon my intrusion, but I dont recall any of the media outlets suggesting Ratten was told his job was safe throughout the review?

 

[Darkhour]

Pardon my intrusion, but I dont recall any of the media outlets suggesting Ratten was told his job was safe throughout the review?

All good. The only media article I remember was from Purple but i don't really believe much of what he said. Regardless, the official line from Bassat's club press release was that it was an entire football dep review and even then, people are free to change their mind based on further evidence at hand. Nothing nefarious.

 

[George]

Pardon my intrusion, but I dont recall any of the media outlets suggesting Ratten was told his job was safe throughout the review?

I didn't say they did.

 

[Sully111]

Bassat and Ratten mentioned publicly when the review was announced that the review would look at the football department and how it operates and that given Ratten's 2 year extension he would be safe from the review. They both came out at different times over the week it was announced and mentioned this.

Bassat indicated in the presser that the review had been finished a month ago yet 4 days before he sat there and told us that, Ratten was told that his job was on shaky ground and it wasn't looking good. Those are Bassat's words at the press conference announcing his sacking. They knew about it for a month but decided to tell Ratten four days out from the announcement.

Really poor.

It's business.

Things changed for them. Ratten was a peripheral at that point.

I think when they extended him they were thinking of Ratts. They said they wanted to give him clarity and support. They were trying to do the "right thing" by him.

I believe that there was then a shift in thinking. Bassat went f*ck* it... Club first. Whatever it takes.

 

[George]

Regardless, the official line from Bassat's club press release was that it was an entire football dep review and even then, people are free to change their mind based on further evidence at hand. Nothing nefarious.

So why did Bassat wait a month after finding out Ratten was going to be sacked before telling him?

Lmao, you can only spin it so much. They said he was safe, this came out directly from the club. Not the media.

 

[Sully111]

So why did Bassat wait a month after finding out Ratten was going to be sacked before telling him?

Lmao, you can only spin it so much. They said he was safe, this came out directly from the club. Not the media.

They got it wrong. They made a mistake.

 

[George]

It's business.

Things changed for them. Ratten was a peripheral at that point.

I think when they extended him they were thinking of Ratts. They said that wanted to give him clarity and support. They were trying to do the "right thing" by him.

I believe that there was then a shift in thinking. Bassat went f*ck* it... Club first. Whatever it takes.

What is wrong with saying that it could've been handled a lot better?

They knew he was getting sacked a month before they went and told him. Why? Why bother to put him through a fake process of trying to save his job if they already knew he was gone?

I don't understand how any of what they did is professional at all.

They got it wrong. They made a mistake.

Why tell Ratten in July that his job was safe if the review hadn't been completed yet? They knew he was getting the arse a month before they told him. Why not be transparent with him?

These are all fair questions and the flipping and flopping from the club has opened themselves up to criticism and IMO rightly so.

Lets hope they can be more honest and upfront with their staff and the supporters from here on.

 

[Mowman]

They got it wrong. They made a mistake.

If only they had listened to gringo2011 and held off signing him

 

[Sully111]

Why tell Ratten in July that his job was safe if the review hadn't been completed yet? They knew he was getting the arse a month before they told him. Why not be transparent with him?

These are all fair questions and the flipping and flopping from the club has opened themselves up to criticism and IMO rightly so.

Lets hope they can be more honest and upfront with their staff and the supporters from here on.

I just think they got it wrong, for all the right reasons. They wanted him to feel supported.

Anyway... There's no question the made errors along the way.

 

[Darkhour]

So why did Bassat wait a month after finding out Ratten was going to be sacked before telling him?

Lmao, you can only spin it so much. They said he was safe, this came out directly from the club. Not the media.

Again... show us all the evidence you are talking about..

 

[triggering bro]

What if Bassett was happy to cop the 6 month 200k payout for stability, keep the sponsors & supporters happy, & was always considering sacking Ratts after trade period if the year continued to deteriorate in the second half of the year? 200k perhaps a small price to pay!

 

[Darkhour]

I just think they got it wrong, for all the right reasons. They wanted him to feel supported.

Anyway... There's no question the made errors along the way.

Exactly.. they've already owned the mistake of signing him when they did, but at 8-3 it was looking good.

 

[George]

I just think they got it wrong, for all the right reasons. They wanted him to feel supported.

Anyway... There's no question the made errors along the way.

I believe that they wanted him to feel supported and focus on getting us into the finals so re-signed him when they did because at the beginning of the year that's what they told him they'd do, give him some certainty that one way or another he'd know what the future looked like.

In July the club announced that there would be a review of the football department and in one of the clubs pressers pre or post game during that time the club said that Ratten would be safe from the review. My question is that if Ratten obviously wasn't safe, why tell him that he was, given the review hadn't determined that at that stage?

So then we get to September, where in last weeks press conference Bassat says that he knew Ratten was unlikely to continue. My question to that is why didn't Bassat communicate that to Ratten then and there, as opposed to waiting until the Sunday before they sacked him (3 and a half weeks after they knew), as Bassat explained in the same presser last week.

If they knew back in September that Ratten was not going to continue on, why did they on October 9th give him 4 days to try and "save" a job he was getting sacked from?

If all of what the club have told us so far is untrue or different in some way - why did they lie to their supporters?


I am over the damn moon that we rectified the issue of Ratten coaching us next year and seem fairdinkum about becoming a serious side again, but my goodness the mixed messaging over the last few months is really poor. We need to do a lot better.

 

[austinnn]

Basset sung this to Ratts before he boned him .......

Awesome tune! Thanks for brightening up this rainy day