Analysis The Coach – Simon 'Standard Practice' Goodwin: It's time to go (for real this time)

[deeman87]

Yes. He has said it was cover for Gawn who had a broken toe. Not going with Grundy probably shows that the club were secretly p**sed about him meeting with other clubs. Grundy would have been the more obvious choice as sub if this was the reasoning.

Imagine not playing your sub when your only KPF is a totally cooked TMAC who did nothing all night and you have a direct replacement waiting. Yes Schache sucks. But decent chance we win if Schache comes in, all he had to do is kick 1 goal.

So furious I've been avoiding all football since fri night but this is totally absurd from Goodwin. If he was actually back up for Max then you give the vest to Grundy which is who it should've been. Who cares if he's talking to other clubs, he's a professional and if he comes in he'll give his all to try and get a premiership. This game was lost in the coaching box. (as well as shooting for goal of course)

What a waste, how Melbourne that you have the best def in the league, prob the best core 4 mid group and you go into the record book for losing finals. Well done dees, disgraceful.

 

[deeman87]

Also trading Clarry is totally ridiculous, we already have 4 picks inside 30. How about we try and take advantage of the prime of some of the best Dees of all time rather trading them and going back to being a laughing stock. Trading Clarry is just the stupidest thing, I know we're all trying to cope but fire Stafford, fire Goodwin, don't trade our best players.

 

[Crusty Demon]

Also trading Clarry is totally ridiculous, we already have 4 picks inside 30. How about we try and take advantage of the prime of some of the best Dees of all time rather trading them and going back to being a laughing stock. Trading Clarry is just the stupidest thing, I know we're all trying to cope but fire Stafford, fire Goodwin, don't trade our best players.

Making too much sense mate. Trading Clarry is next level nuff.

 

[jhong]

I want someone to ask our defence coach why with barely a minute to go , why was Fritsch in the Carlton goal square competing with 2 Carlton players ? Where were our key backs ? Don’t they Practice scenarios like this ? Not going to pick on McVee unfortunately getting on the wrong side and missing his attempt to punch the ball . Tommo was not close enough and May and Lever were nowhere . Also why , earlier when Dekonig(?) marked in the forward 50 the closest player was Bowey ? Quite rightly go after the mid and forward coaches but some (not all) of our defending was arrogance personified. Don’t care if they sack all the line coaches and start again .

 

[stEdy]

I haven't looked at the tape but I imagine with 2 minutes to go we set the field up to blast it long to the skinny side where we had amassed numbers to then put the clamps on it.

From memory Lever kicks long, Smith punches it to ground in a pack to ensure it isn't intercepted, there's a ground ball scramble that we eventually come away with through Viney who looks up and there's 2 forwards v 2 backs. He just needs to kick it to advantage boundary side and we probably hold on.

He hacks it, Blues intercept and take on 2 risky kicks across the ground that come off and open the whole ground up. They have an out number and kick the goal.

 

[00Stinger]

Honestly think that the board extended him thinking that if we won it all they'd look like geniuses or if we fell apart they just wanted to avoid the spotlight on the club next year.

Nothing to do with finishing in the top 4 three years in a row and winning a premiership during that time, you don't think?

 

[Bluelegs]

Nothing to do with finishing in the top 4 three years ina a row and winning a premiership during that time, you don't think?

I'm talking specifically about signing him up before the finals rather than waiting for the off-season. They were obviously happy enough with his performance and didn't want him to come under pressure if we had a poor finals series.

 

[stEdy]

Signing coaches before finals is stupid. Port did it too and it blew up in their face.

 

[00Stinger]

I'm talking specifically about signing him up before the finals rather than waiting for the off-season. They were obviously happy enough with his performance and didn't want him to come under pressure if we had a poor finals series.

Nah, I don't think any club (bar maybe one managed by a self centered flog like Kennett) would ever consider sacking a coach 24 months after winning a premiership where the club is still competing at a high level

For any one to think otherwise is utter stupidity.

 

[Crusty Demon]

Nah, I don't think any club (bar maybe one managed by a self centered flog like Kennett) would ever consider sacking a coach 24 months after winning a premiership where the club is still competing at a high level

For any one to think otherwise is utter stupidity.

The timing of his signing is what some people are baffled by. I guess it shouldn't matter and the club was thinking it will give a boost to the team pre-finals. But it's interesting that the two clubs out in straight sets, announced extensions to their coaches pre-finals. Maybe nitpicking a little bit, and hindsight is wonderful, but I can see why people are baffled by it. Not at all surprised we extended him. This sport hold onto their coaches for far too long. Not saying we should sack Goody, but he should be under a lot more pressure to keep his job after these finals.

 

[Lord Nev]

The timing of his signing is what some people are baffled by. I guess it shouldn't matter and the club was thinking it will give a boost to the team pre-finals. But it's interesting that the two clubs out in straight sets, announced extensions to their coaches pre-finals. Maybe nitpicking a little bit, and hindsight is wonderful, but I can see why people are baffled by it. Not at all surprised we extended him. This sport hold onto their coaches for far too long. Not saying we should sack Goody, but he should be under a lot more pressure to keep his job after these finals.

I can tell you the second hand information I've heard is that the board are putting the finals losses squarely on the players, not the coach.

 

[Crusty Demon]

I can tell you the second hand information I've heard is that the board are putting the finals losses squarely on the players, not the coach.

Well I don't entirely agree with that. It's a combination of the two. But the buck always stops at the coach. Can't sack a playing group, and the bulk of this playing group won a premiership less than 2 years ago! How's the motivation? Strategies? Lack of game day moves? Selections? Yes, the players are definitely partly to blame with execution and by the sounds of it effort at training etc, but the coach is responsible if issues are arising, particularly the same issues.

 

[Johnny Karate]

Nah, I don't think any club (bar maybe one managed by a self centered flog like Kennett) would ever consider sacking a coach 24 months after winning a premiership where the club is still competing at a high level

For any one to think otherwise is utter stupidity.

Saying “I didn’t see the need to extend him before finals” isn’t the same as saying he should be sacked.

 

[00Stinger]

The timing of his signing is what some people are baffled by. I guess it shouldn't matter and the club was thinking it will give a boost to the team pre-finals. But it's interesting that the two clubs out in straight sets, announced extensions to their coaches pre-finals. Maybe nitpicking a little bit, and hindsight is wonderful, but I can see why people are baffled by it. Not at all surprised we extended him. This sport hold onto their coaches for far too long. Not saying we should sack Goody, but he should be under a lot more pressure to keep his job after these finals.

The signing was an effort to try and galvanize the club and shield it away from Bartletts bullshit

 

[Crusty Demon]

The signing was an effort to try and galvanize the club and shield it away from Bartletts bullshit

Yeah I can see that. It didn't work in the end. We should absolutely have a coach fighting for his job next year.

 

[Lord Nev]

Well I don't entirely agree with that. It's a combination of the two. But the buck always stops at the coach. Can't sack a playing group, and the bulk of this playing group won a premiership less than 2 years ago! How's the motivation? Strategies? Lack of game day moves? Selections? Yes, the players are definitely partly to blame with execution and by the sounds of it effort at training etc, but the coach is responsible if issues are arising, particularly the same issues.

The coach also won a premiership less than 2 years ago. It can't be all praise to the players and all criticism to the coaches.

The reality is the players are only required to be at the club 15 hours per week, there's only so much the coaches can do in that time. Apparently since the premiership there's been too many happy to just clock on and clock off and not put in extra.

I'm not saying Goody and co are perfect, I expect there will be change this offseason, but I'm saying the context is important and it's just a bit lazy to go straight for the coach.

 

[00Stinger]

Yeah I can see that. It didn't work in the end. We should absolutely have a coach fighting for his job next year.

Yeah nah I can't buy that at all

Sacking the coach would be a great way to destabilize the club again. Utter madness

 

[Crusty Demon]

Yeah nah I can't buy that at all

Sacking the coach would be a great way to destabilize the club again. Utter madness

Never suggested we do.

 

[00Stinger]

Never suggested we do.

then what does 'fighting for his job mean?'

 

[Crusty Demon]

then what does 'fighting for his job mean?'

Where in fighting for his job, does it say sacking? How often do you see players all of a sudden stink it up once a contract is signed!? Why can't coaches be the same? Goody stunk it up since his extension. Giving him targets to hit next season after 2 failed finals campaigns, surely would be more beneficial to the club than to extend him? I think we're a chance to make history with the most finals losses in a row. So if we go 0-2 in finals next year yet again, you'll be happy that we didn't put targets in place that he has to hit to get another extension?

 

[00Stinger]

Where in fighting for his job, does it say sacking? How often do you see players all of a sudden stink it up once a contract is signed!? Why can't coaches be the same? Goody stunk it up since his extension. Giving him targets to hit next season after 2 failed finals campaigns, surely would be more beneficial to the club than to extend him? I think we're a chance to make history with the most finals losses in a row. So if we go 0-2 in finals next year yet again, you'll be happy that we didn't put targets in place that he has to hit to get another extension?

So you are saying he should be fighting for his job but that has nothing to do with being sacked? I don't know what the hell that means then and I'm not sure that you do either tbh

 

[Tulip]

The timing of his signing is what some people are baffled by. I guess it shouldn't matter and the club was thinking it will give a boost to the team pre-finals. But it's interesting that the two clubs out in straight sets, announced extensions to their coaches pre-finals. Maybe nitpicking a little bit, and hindsight is wonderful, but I can see why people are baffled by it. Not at all surprised we extended him. This sport hold onto their coaches for far too long. Not saying we should sack Goody, but he should be under a lot more pressure to keep his job after these finals.

I don't think there are too many similarities between Goodwin and Hinkley, tbh. At least not yet. Goodwin has won a flag, which is the big thing, whereas Hinkley has never made a GF and has been there far longer. Hinkley actually has a talented young list but it was clear they were running on fumes as soon as their winning streak finished. Goody entered 2022 with a finals record of W5, L1. That is not W5, L5. He was always going to be extended, but that record has to be sitting positively at the end of next year or I want him out.

 

[Crusty Demon]

So you are saying he should be fighting for his job but that has nothing to do with being sacked? I don't know what the hell that means then and I'm not sure that you do either tbh

I just explained it. If you can't understand the difference between sacking a coach now, and having him wait for an extension until targets are hit, then that's on you mate. It's pretty simple stuff. I wouldn't have extended his contract pre-finals. Was dumb. Now we lost both finals, I still wouldn't extend his contract. I'd have targets he'd have to hit next season to earn that extension. It's not that hard really..

 

[pjfairbairn]

I just explained it. If you can't understand the difference between sacking a coach now, and having him wait for an extension until targets are hit, then that's on you mate. It's pretty simple stuff. I wouldn't have extended his contract pre-finals. Was dumb. Now we lost both finals, I still wouldn't extend his contract. I'd have targets he'd have to hit next season to earn that extension. It's not that hard really..

Yep, agree. And if we had a shit year next year, maybe it's only a 12 month extension. And if somebody else wants him, we weigh up our offer next to theirs. There was no need to rush it in before the end of this season.

 

[Bluelegs]

Nah, I don't think any club (bar maybe one managed by a self centered flog like Kennett) would ever consider sacking a coach 24 months after winning a premiership where the club is still competing at a high level

For any one to think otherwise is utter stupidity.

Say we didn't sign him prior to the finals and he went into next year ooc while simultaneously falling out of the top 8 would you give him a mulligan and sign him up? If you signed him up would you give him one year or two?

The board decided they didn't want to play that scenario out and that they didn't want any real pressure on his position for at least two years and signed him up early. That could absolutely prove to be a mistake.