Before you all jump up and down, I pose this question based on Bailey being at ground level with the players during the game. There are a few coaches adopting this style now but it led to me wondering who is making the moves and directing the play.

Clearly Bailey appears content that his game plan ( and I confess I don't know what it is ) is functioning and he appears to concentrate on short discussions with players entering and exiting the ground. Then at intervals line coaches address their groups and Bailey then addresses the team. However it beggars the question of who is actually in charge in the box and responsible for match ups etc. Bailey cannot be doing this job from the boundary when most of the time he doesn't even have headphones on and even if he tried, it would be nearly impossible to manage from ground level.

It may actually be no different to him being in the box, with a designated assistant in charge of match ups and Bailey concentrating on sending messages to individual players as they go on and off. With the speed of the game and with rapid interchanges the role of the head coach must have changed dramatically from a few years ago.

I think that it's part of player development. Dean is wanting to give the players, especially young players, immediate feedback on what they're doing well and not so well.

As Viney said, we haven't concentrated a huge amount on tactics etc, since the focus is still on player development. Bailey will receive all the important information from assistants in the box. But it's better for him to speak to, say, Luke Tapscott when he comes to the nech to give him feedback on positioning, ball use etc, so that he can immediately go back out and use that information to learn.

It's better than waiting until the review a day or so later and not be able to try it out for another week.

That said, if it was 2015 and we were in a preliminary final, I'm undecided as to whether or not it's still the right thing to do.

Surely we're all happy with the progress under Bailey? As much as we want finals he wants development. He's using benchmark indicators on games required individually and as a group. So far he hasn't put a foot wrong. Hang on to Scully and he's a genius.

Surely we're all happy with the progress under Bailey? As much as we want finals he wants development. He's using benchmark indicators on games required individually and as a group. So far he hasn't put a foot wrong. Hang on to Scully and he's a genius.

I seriously do not think it is his fault if Scully should leave.

He has made all the right moves there

If Scully leaves it will be for the money pure and simple.

I would suggest that the system would work like this.

Bailey can see what is going on from ground level but I would agree you would get a better picture from up in the box. He would be making his own moves from what he can see at ground level but would also be getting input from up above.

Although I havent experienced it I know someone who has regularly sat in the StKilda box both with Grant Thomas and Ross Lyon and the assistants are firing off suggestions to the head coach at the rate of knots - some of which are acted on - some which aren't. Some of the suggestions are to tell a player that he should be standing two foot off his opponent and to the left. Other suggestions are to make actual player moves. The head coach will pull what he likes from the discussions and either relay the message to the runners himself or tell someone else to phone it down.

I think that with Bailey on the boundary it would work no differently except that he is getting the assistants feeds through his earphones and he is able to discuss what he wants with a player directly as they come off.

I see it as having massive advantages being able to talk to a player face to face and from the few things i have heard the players say in the press last year - they seem to like the contact with coach mid game as well.

I seriously do not think it is his fault if Scully should leave.

He has made all the right moves there

If Scully leaves it will be for the money pure and simple.

The issue with Scully is largely beyond the scope of the Coach unless there are issues with the players development or performance.

The responsibility for the Scully outcome really rests with Stynes, Schwab and Harrington. And given the AFL rules, their cards in this game may have been largely marked or played without their control.

The issue with Scully is largely beyond the scope of the Coach unless there are issues with the players development or performance.

The responsibility for the Scully outcome really rests with Stynes, Schwab and Harrington. And given the AFL rules, their cards in this game may have been largely marked or played without their control.

Spot on I doubt there is anything more that can be done by the MFC.

If he should go it will be because the AFL wants sucess at GWS above everything else.

The issue with Scully is largely beyond the scope of the Coach unless there are issues with the players development or performance.

The responsibility for the Scully outcome really rests with Stynes, Schwab and Harrington. And given the AFL rules, their cards in this game may have been largely marked or played without their control.

i was thinking about Tom Scully during the 2nd half yesterday, hoping he was in the stands watching and listening to that game.

So much potential talent running around the MCG yesterday.....It would be hard to leave the MFC IMO

I hope he has signed nothing yet, as he has told Stynesy. He will miss this club if he leaves, regardless of the coin.

It'd be hard to leave a team that gets to play at the MCG in front of such a passionate crowd of supporters.

We made some serious noise.

How does this thread get hijacked to a "Scully" thread when I was discussing coaching at ground level.

It'd be hard to leave a team that gets to play at the MCG in front of such a passionate crowd of supporters.

We made some serious noise.

correct....that was why i originally thought of him...our supporters have been starved of top line Footy, the want a piece of it.

Bailey knows it, and i hope Tom feels it

Last year CC was on the dugout duties. He's not there? Bailey is, to give direct instructions & feedback.

There would be a host of coaches who could be delegated, and Bails is in contact via the headset.

Most likely Mark Williams would be running the board upstairs is my guess. He's had experience coaching a team of his own and is our 'ball movement' coach. I think he'd be taking input from the 3 line coaches.

Coaching at ground level and coaching from the box have obvious advantages and disadvantages. I'm happy with Bailey been at ground level however I think it wouldn't be the worst idea to see him move upstairs for patches of games as well. Why not mix it up?

I think that it is brilliant having Bails on the bench. Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure ya'll will ), but I believe our change of fortunes last season pretty much directly correllate with the time Bails started coaching from the bench. For my money I think that there has to be some good in talking to the players face to face.

I think that it is brilliant having Bails on the bench. Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure ya'll will ), but I believe our change of fortunes last season pretty much directly correllate with the time Bails started coaching from the bench. For my money I think that there has to be some good in talking to the players face to face.

This year we're really young & inexperienced.

I'd hope he coaches most of the year from the bench, helping keep the composure & confidence going. To me, this year is a crucial/transitional year.

This year we're really young & inexperienced.

I'd hope he coaches most of the year from the bench, helping keep the composure & confidence going. To me, this year is a crucial/transitional year.

Exactly DL. And I potentially don't mind it moving forward either, because if it work, it works.

That said, if it was 2015 and we were in a preliminary final, I'm undecided as to whether or not it's still the right thing to do.

That's what I was thinking. It works for now... but will it stay that way? I imagine what would be ideal is if he can go to the box and let the leaders in the team start doing the talking to the younger players. Right now, and especially since Bruce and JMac left, they're in short supply, and usually if they're Beamer, Green or Jamar they're too busy wheezing their way through the game to instruct.

Before you all jump up and down, I pose this question based on Bailey being at ground level with the players during the game. There are a few coaches adopting this style now but it led to me wondering who is making the moves and directing the play.

Clearly Bailey appears content that his game plan ( and I confess I don't know what it is ) is functioning and he appears to concentrate on short discussions with players entering and exiting the ground. Then at intervals line coaches address their groups and Bailey then addresses the team. However it beggars the question of who is actually in charge in the box and responsible for match ups etc. Bailey cannot be doing this job from the boundary when most of the time he doesn't even have headphones on and even if he tried, it would be nearly impossible to manage from ground level.

It may actually be no different to him being in the box, with a designated assistant in charge of match ups and Bailey concentrating on sending messages to individual players as they go on and off. With the speed of the game and with rapid interchanges the role of the head coach must have changed dramatically from a few years ago.

No doubt you raise a very interesting question. It is my opinion that the major person involved in strategy and execution is West, with no doubt assistance fron Royal, Williams and Viney.Also others would have imput being Mahoney & O'Donnell. Actually, last year I was near the coaches box - and West seemed to be making most of the calls to Bailey.West seems to have a great scope of reading a game.A very important cog in our Football department right now.

I have a joke going that rather than talking to other coaches, when he puts on the headphones he is listening to avant-garde Jazz or obscure Scandinavian rock n roll or maybe one of those books on tape.

I know it is very much like the STIG but.....but some say that on really warm days, he sheds his skin like a snake, and that for some reason, he is allergic to Richmond supporters... all we know is, he is called bails.

Edit - Spelling