What Exactly has Grant Thomas Done Wrong

[Napier_Street]

I am not a St Kilda supporter and frankly dont care about them one way or another. But I am totally bemused by the hysteria over Grant Thomas.

It seems his lack of playing credentials will always make him fodder for the armchair media critics.

But what exactly has he done wrong since taking over the job at St Kilda.

From an impartial point of view - it would appear that the guy is doing a fantastic job in redefining the culture of what was a basket case football club. He has off loaded the old saints through trades or retirements and is casting his young side into a solid, singular unit.

They are not prancing around getting ahead of themselves over the Wizard Cup and I bet Thomas has made damned sure no Saints player is satisified with that result with a whole home and away season to come.

The saints are looking very impressive and the heat is not coming from their legion of high level draft picks but rather from the old timers - Gherig, Guerra, Hamill, Harvey, Thompson etc. ONly good coaching can achieve that.

And what about the draft picks - I am an Essendon supporter and still waiting for our numerous early draft picks to show something other than puppy fat. At St Kilda, they are confident young footballers who are all getting game time.

Thomas always comes accross as an astute and sensible thinker - he shows humility and and never allows the criticism to ruffle his feathers.

I rate him as a particularly impressive coach - and to be honestm the fact that he hasnt played AFL means jack.

Buckenara, Knights, Merret, Judge, Watson - well they were all Champion players with extensive AFL careers - lot of good it did for their coaching careers.

Get off Thomas' back I say.

 

[The Fireman]

hhmm commonsense post, your in the wrong forum Napier.

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by Napier_Street


I rate him as a particularly impressive coach - and to be honestm the fact that he hasnt played AFL means jack.

He has played AFL.

 

[labrooy]

It is a hard question to answer. I guess it comes down to his ability to use the resources available to him.

From what I have seen over the past two years Thomas appears to be far more reactive than proactive. That is, rather than make moves to catch the opposition on the hop he will wait until his team is in trouble.

An example occured during the 2002 season. Having drawn a game with the Kangaroos (from memory) by using the flood he tried exactly the same tactics against Collingwood. It took until half time, with the Saints about 8 goals behind, for him to change tactics. Then after matching Collingwood for the first part of the third quarter inexplicably reverted back to the flood and ended up being done by about 14 goals.

Since then I have seen nothing that indicates Thomas has changed his ways. The only difference between then and now is that he has a much better team, personnel wise. However as Port Adelaide has shown us if you don't make the running in finals you lose.

 

[CharlieG]

Re: Re: What Exactly has Grant Thomas Done Wrong

Originally posted by hotpie
He has played AFL.

83 games, which puts him ahead of premiership coaches such as Tom Hafey and Allan Jeans, and probably more that I simply haven't thought of.

Thomas is... different. He will NEVER shake the image of having white-anted Blight out of the job, whether that is how it happened or not. His methods - such as the captaincy rotation, which I dislike - are unorthodox. We'll wait and see, although I believe he will be a premiership coach. Not because he is one of the best coaches going around, but because he has ended up with potentially one of the most talented sides I've seen.

 

[Napier_Street]

Well there you have it - he played 83 games yet the media gives the impression his background is in ice-skating!!!

As for being reactive during game day coaching - I dont see the saints often enough to comment - but one thing is for sure, he was being proactive against Sydney a season or so ago when he played the 18 man defence!!!!

 

[labrooy]

Originally posted by Napier_Street
As for being reactive during game day coaching - I dont see the saints often enough to comment - but one thing is for sure, he was being proactive against Sydney a season or so ago when he played the 18 man defence!!!!

It was Sydney was it? Doesn't matter, it proves my point. Having worked against a team that wasn't expecting it he tried against a team that was and had no fall-back position when it failed.

 

[Cyclops]

Re: Re: Re: What Exactly has Grant Thomas Done Wrong

Originally posted by CharlieG
Thomas ...will NEVER shake the image of having white-anted Blight out of the job, whether that is how it happened or not

Very true. It appeared that he did so with the cooperation of Caro and Butterrs. That really stuck in my craw, the way the Saints bribed Blight out of retirement and threw him to the wolves when he stuffed up badly.

He wasn't alone down there, most of the blokes that recruited him and worked with him are still there, including Thomas.

As for his coaching, he hasn't been convincing as a game day coach, and fellas were still hopping on the turps and getting sacked with messy details leaking everywhere as recently as last year.

Hopefully that has changed and he can lead them to some sort of success.

 

[FuManchu]

Apparently he has shafted 3 coaches at St Kilda, pretty well known that he got Blight the heave ho. They all tried to exclude him from the coaching box during games, but the admin backed up cornflakes, he was there snitch, letting them know hopw the coaching box was functioning. Conflict of Interest I hear? No his names not Eddie!

 

[Savatage]

Originally posted by FuManchu
Apparently he has shafted 3 coaches at St Kilda,

hmmm and these 3 are???

 

[JeffDunne]

Maybe if people stuck to facts then he might get the credit he deserves.

Shafted 3 coaches? Tim Watson resigned. Stan Alves was sacked not by Thomas because of an infatuation with Watson.

Blight was a unanimous board decision. The golf course and attitude shafted Blight.

 

[Grimfang]

Originally posted by FuManchu
Apparently he has shafted 3 coaches at St Kilda, pretty well known that he got Blight the heave ho. They all tried to exclude him from the coaching box during games, but the admin backed up cornflakes, he was there snitch, letting them know hopw the coaching box was functioning. Conflict of Interest I hear? No his names not Eddie!

Yes, Blight's failure to do the necessary things like proper preparation for and review of games, along with poor player management had nothing to do with his getting the bum's rush.

 

[amazonstud]

A lot of football people are still upset about the role Thomas had in the Blight sacking and then opting to take the job on himself when better credientialled coaches were or are available. Perosnally I think that Grant Thomas is not a very good coach. He is a management double speak expert and not very good at tactics and it is always someone else's fault when the team does not achieve.

He is known for making brash statements and then double tracking his way out of them. It was only last season when he said that if the Saints didn't make the finals he would consider he had failed as a coach. When queried on this at the end of the season he changed the subject immediately.

Thomas sees himself as a player manager and coach, similiar in style to an English soccer manager, and this has caused some friction at the Saints. He has been out voted on the board about the various roles he wished to have but to give the Saints management credit they did not buckle although giving some ground and appointed Matt Rendell to the football operations role.

It has been reported that he has ignored the advice of his assistants when coaching and his game plan has been uninspiring and he has been slow to react when the opposition changes tactics. Now to their credit the Saints brain trust have identified this problem and surrounded him with some people with good football brains and backgrounds and it appears that he is paying attention to their advice. Whether or not he will be content to let others have a bigger say in proceedings as the season drags on we will have to wait and see.

The Saints have some very good players on their list and will cause a lot of excitement during the season. That's great news for the Saints fans and good luck to them. Whether or not another coach could get more out of the playing list will be debated at the end of the season and at that time we might have a better idea if Grant Thomas is a good AFL coach.

If the Saints don't make the 8 this year then it will be interesting to see if the club starts to look around.

 

[FuManchu]

Originally posted by JeffDunne
Maybe if people stuck to facts then he might get the credit he deserves.

Shafted 3 coaches? Tim Watson resigned. Stan Alves was sacked not by Thomas because of an infatuation with Watson.

Blight was a unanimous board decision. The golf course and attitude shafted Blight.

This was the culture down at St Kilda, read Stan Alves book, especially about grand final night 1997, when a board member came up to him and said that because he got them into the grand final, that they'd have to put up with alves for another year.

You don't have to sack a coach to have undermined him, its the support the board gives you as a result of what the white ant has done. Ask watson how comfortable he was with Thomas in the box, not very, same too with Blight. Blight may have deserved what happened, but its how you go about your business that earns you respect, apparently Thomas didn't earn that respect from those he evetually undermined.

 

[coffee man]

What has he done wrong:

1. Lost Hall
2. Lost Everit

 

[JeffDunne]

Originally posted by coffee man
What has he done wrong:

1. Lost Hall
2. Lost Everit

They are two of the better things he's done.

FuManchu, speak to Watson, he'll give you a different account of Thomas. Timmy wanted to quit mid-year, I believe he had a heart to heart with Pagan who told him he was out of his league. It was Thomas who convinced him to stay on until the end of season. It was also Thomas who was all for Blight. As for Alves, that was primarily Plymtons doing. He was infatuated with Watson.

 

[Fred]

Originally posted by JeffDunne
They are two of the better things he's done.

FuManchu, speak to Watson, he'll give you a different account of Thomas. Timmy wanted to quit mid-year, I believe he had a heart to heart with Pagan who told him he was out of his league. It was Thomas who convinced him to stay on until the end of season. It was also Thomas who was all for Blight. As for Alves, that was primarily Plymtons doing. He was infatuated with Watson.

Doubt if you'll convince those that don't want to know.

 

[samm]

Originally posted by coffee man
What has he done wrong:

1. Lost Hall
2. Lost Everit

and thanki god for that!!!

both were losers at st kilda. both were trouble makers!

st kilda has been better off without them!

 

[FuManchu]

Originally posted by JeffDunne
They are two of the better things he's done.

FuManchu, speak to Watson, he'll give you a different account of Thomas. Timmy wanted to quit mid-year, I believe he had a heart to heart with Pagan who told him he was out of his league. It was Thomas who convinced him to stay on until the end of season. It was also Thomas who was all for Blight. As for Alves, that was primarily Plymtons doing. He was infatuated with Watson.

Having listened to both Watson and Alves on the radio, you get another impression of Thomas, when the blight thing went down, both spoke about "people" in the coaching box, they wouldn't elaborate, when Caro put names up for comment, they wouldn't elaborate on his name.

If Thomas did convince Watson to stay on , was that in the clubs best interests, or was he jockying for position come the of the year.

But to be honest, I really don't give a rats about Thomas, why people hate him and his coaching ability, because he will be judged by what he does from this point forwards. Just remember, he wouldn't be the first to get to the top by "other" means, and if he falls on his sword one day, I'm sure he recognise how it happened. Its a cuthroat business run by huge egos, he's in the mix.

 

[ComicStoreGuy]

Alves's book did it mention Thomas? Can't remember that, but I know our president at the time(Plympton) shafted him.

Blight was worth a shot, but didn't have the hunger to coach. The current board(not Thomas) made the right move to get rid of him.

Ask Watson if he wanted to step down, the answer is yes.

So which coaches did GT get rid of? Tony Jewel? Ken Sheldon? Allen Killagrew?

 

[MightySaint]

Originally posted by coffee man
What has he done wrong:

1. Lost Hall
2. Lost Everit

Not sure if this is a ****take, but getting rid of number 2 especially was the best thing he has done so far.

 

[Munga]

Originally posted by MightySaint
Not sure if this is a ****take, but getting rid of number 2 especially was the best thing he has done so far.

99% of saints supporters are glad those two are gone.
GT is criticised only because he is/was an easy target. As time goes by and the saints keep getting stronger (hopefully), those numbskulls will drop off, except Pat Smith, although we did turn him last week.

 

[McAlmanac]

The Fat Controller's judgement day is a couple of years off yet - it's how much he can achieve with this squad which will determine his status as a coach.

You don't have to be Bart Cummings to have some measure of success with million dollar yearlings.

 

[Jimmy]

as long as they keep winning i am happy...the young players seem to be blossoming now

not too sure about the rotating captaincy thing...that can be done with just the one captain and having a few helping out...

go sainters!!!

 

[Hearts to hearts]

The ridicule has had nothing to do with Thomas' playing record, it was his lack of a coaching record that created the problem. He is seen, rightly or wrongly, to have engineered himself into a prime coaching job, with great talent at his disposal, with nothing like the credentials that any other club would have demanded. (Although the Saints appointed Watson too, so their recruitment criteria were already different to the norm.) Then after being appointed he said lots of silly things - only Frawley has been in the same league for foot-in-mouth. And showed an alarming lack of tactical nous on gamedays - probably matched only in recent history by Watson and Shaw.

You could hardly have found anyone except Thomas and Butters happy with his appointment at the start. Now the Saints have won a few games last season and practice matches this year, some people are happy to overlook all his perceived shortcomings, while others will always insist that whatever he achieves with his list, an experienced coach could have achieved faster/better.

Not sure why the whole thing generates so much passion, except perhaps that the appointment process and his comments since make him seem like such a smartarse many objective observers would love to see him fall over. The draft advantages get up people's noses too, and St Kilda seems the biggest beneficiary so lots of people would like to see that not come off too successfully either.