Every club I've ever been a part of, no matter the sport has always had 2-3 true leaders and others who show a bit. Name a Captain, VC, DVC and move on. 6 is too many, Captain leads with his deputies, stuff leading teams popularity choosing, the true leaders pick themselves.

I'm really sorry for all the Garland haters 

I wish Jetta was in there.

9 hours ago, mo64 said:

 I really don't care what the players do behind the scenes. If they don't offer much to improve our on-field results, they're not leaders.  

 

And what is done behind the scenes plays a huge role in improving on field results.

We, the supporters get a four quarter glimpse each week and a little insight at training  - but we have little insight as to the conversations and influence that go on both on and off the field. Yes, it is important that a leader has onfield impact but there is so much more to leadership than just that. Perfect example for me was Nick Maxwell - an just above average footballer in my opinion but talking to a Collingwood player, he cited him as the best captain/leader he had played under - streets ahead of Buckley. 

6 hours ago, McQueen said:

Given the club uses the Leading Teams process to select leaders, the omission of Dunn says quite a bit.

His peers don't rate him against the criteria.

Simple.

I wonder about the process. I wonder if players can opt out of the process (request not to be nominated for leadership)

If as you say his peers don't rate him then something has changed since last year where his peers did rate him.

A club's LG is hugely important.  They drive the culture, tone and standards at a footy club.

If you ever listen to former players, such as Archer or Brereton, you'll understand how important they are.

1 minute ago, ProDee said:

A club's LG is hugely important.  They drive the culture, tone and standards at a footy club.

If you ever listen to former players, such as Archer or Brereton, you'll understand how important they are.

Fair enough PD, but to have a group of leaders do you need to have a leadership group so called? In the days of Archer and Brereton did their teams have an officially known LG or did they just have a bunch of guys with leadership qualities, just as the Melbourne sides had under John Northey and Norm Smith?

1 minute ago, hemingway said:

Fair enough PD, but to have a group of leaders do you need to have a leadership group so called? In the days of Archer and Brereton did their teams have an officially known LG or did they just have a bunch of guys with leadership qualities, just as the Melbourne sides had under John Northey and Norm Smith?

I don't know if there was a "label", but everyone at a footy club is under no illusion as to who the senior players or leaders are.

EDIT: Archer has been quoted as saying that the LG is "far more important than who is named captain".

Edited March 9, 20169 yr by ProDee

10 hours ago, mo64 said:

"2 have spent the off season injured" - That doesn't disqualify you from the leadership group.

"One was there before they came" - Grimes was still selected by Roos and Co. last year, and yet wasn't deemed best 22 in round 1. 

And Cross wasn't offered another year to play on despite his performances. That was Roos and Co.'s decision.

As I said previously, with a struggling club, the title of being in the leadership group is a bit of a [censored]. Sure the captain has responsibilities off the field, but the rest will be chopped and changed every year.

 

Well the 2 injured is a problem - if they can't get on the park then they can't be the leaders the club wants them to be.

Grimes was captain when Roos arrived and they have slowly pushed him down the pecking order and treating him with respect.  Kicking him out of the captaincy and out of the LG would have been a huge mistake so they've done the right thing.

And while Cross has been terrific for us it was time for him to go.  He is still being a leader as a fitness coach with the players.

That leaves Dunn.  Hopefully the LG now stays the same as we have a settled and talented group of players.  I'm sure one or two will drop off here and there but I can see guys like Jones, Viney and McDonald being there long term.

10 hours ago, Curry & Beer said:

You don't trust your own eyes? When was the last time he was in your best players? I don't care what anyone says about off-field stuff, being an effective player on gameday is a critical ingredient to being in the LG. How do you command respect and inspire others if you are not pulling your own weight? It's also a bad look for the club to have substandard players representing us. If standing around looking like you're about to cry, generally showing zero passion and coughing up goals makes a leader then I guess he is General Patton. As mo64 has correctly pointed out, the fact that Grimes, Dawes and Lumumba were in there last year obviously shows the judgment of the overseers is not necessarily as sound as you purport.

Which is something Garland is in the eyes on the coaches and the players if they have selected him in the LG - he is obviously terrific off the field and plays his role as asked on the field as well.  Yes, he makes the odd error, but clearly he is doing plenty right in the eyes of the coaches.

I trust my own eyes, and I think you need to trust yours - the Garland detractors on here have blinded you to what he brings to our side. 

And Garland is not a 'substandard' player and I think it's pretty low of you to suggest as such.  Poor form Curry.

11 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

If he was such a liability in the eyes of the coaches and the players then he wouldn't be selected. 

I'll trust Roos, Goodwin, Macca and the players on this one. Good to see him straight back in the LG. 

You often run with the "I'll back the coaches in" as its a safe stance and easy to hide behind. 

I thought most of Currys post summed up many posters thoughts. 

Grimes was in the leadership group last year and wasn't gifted any games, I can only hope that same luxury in extended to Garland. 

Some questions raised by posters in recent weeks are 

- when did the highly versatile Garland do a lockdown job on a small defender and come out on top?

- when was Garland last in our best players/influence the result of a game?

- when getting beaten by Carlton (Garland  7 possessions , 1 tackle)and Essendon (13 possessions 4 tackles) two teams we should of easily accounted for what did Garland do to demonstrate on field leadership? 

People keep referring to "if he can recapture his form from a few years back", we have all been waiting for a while now. If he can great, if he can't he needs to be removed firstly from the team until he does and then from the leadership group at the end of the year. That needs to be consistent across the board if we are to improve as a side.

 

 

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

I don't know if there was a "label", but everyone at a footy club is under no illusion as to who the senior players or leaders are.

EDIT: Archer has been quoted as saying that the LG is "far more important than who is named captain".

That might depend on who your captain is. Wayne Carey was an outstanding footballer and on-field leader but I doubt he showed leadership qualities for much of the remaining 165 hours of the week. I suspect in Archer's eyes, the work done by the leadership group off-field was considered to be just as or more important than what Carey showed on-field.

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

That might depend on who your captain is. Wayne Carey was an outstanding footballer and on-field leader but I doubt he showed leadership qualities for much of the remaining 165 hours of the week. I suspect in Archer's eyes, the work done by the leadership group off-field was considered to be just as or more important than what Carey showed on-field.

While they played hard off the field they also talk of being very hard trainers with stringent standards. 

12 hours ago, Seraph said:

Interesting selections. 

I'm surprised to see Garland still in there, but it shows how much he does behind the scenes I suppose. 

Massive rap for Gawn to be in there, he has taken huge strides this year (figuratively). 

Max is clearly standing in a massive hole. And Viney standing on the mound.

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

I don't know if there was a "label", but everyone at a footy club is under no illusion as to who the senior players or leaders are.

EDIT: Archer has been quoted as saying that the LG is "far more important than who is named captain".

So if all the players know who the leaders are on the field, why the need to have a named leadership group if there are natural leaders on the field - my previous point was whether named leadership groups foster unity or create division.  

5 minutes ago, ManDee said:

Max is clearly standing in a massive hole. And Viney standing on the mound.

Maxxy is kneeling and Viney is in high heels.

Love this leadership group - really think they have got it right.

1 minute ago, hemingway said:

So if all the players know who the leaders are on the field, why the need to have a named leadership group if there are natural leaders on the field - my previous point was whether named leadership groups foster unity or create division.  

I'll let you ponder that mate.

2 minutes ago, hemingway said:

So if all the players know who the leaders are on the field, why the need to have a named leadership group if there are natural leaders on the field - my previous point was whether named leadership groups foster unity or create division.  

The leadership is so important off the field - many issues off field for the entire playing group are taken to the leadership group and the leadership group bring back issues to management/coaches - I like the idea that if you transgress you are sanctioned by your peers ( the leadership group)

Just now, chook fowler said:

Maxxy is kneeling and Viney is in high heels.

Love this leadership group - really think they have got it right.

 

2 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

You often run with the "I'll back the coaches in" as its a safe stance and easy to hide behind. 

I thought most of Currys post summed up many posters thoughts. 

Grimes was in the leadership group last year and wasn't gifted any games, I can only hope that same luxury in extended to Garland. 

Some questions raised by posters in recent weeks are 

- when did the highly versatile Garland do a lockdown job on a small defender and come out on top?

- when was Garland last in our best players/influence the result of a game?

- when getting beaten by Carlton (Garland  7 possessions , 1 tackle)and Essendon (13 possessions 4 tackles) two teams we should of easily accounted for what did Garland do to demonstrate on field leadership? 

People keep referring to "if he can recapture his form from a few years back", we have all been waiting for a while now. If he can great, if he can't he needs to be removed firstly from the team until he does and then from the leadership group at the end of the year. That needs to be consistent across the board if we are to improve as a side.

 

 

Of course I'll back the coaches in.  It's not a safe stance, it's the truth.  They are paid to do it and I have no idea what goes on behind the scenes or what the instructions are on match day.  

If you can pull up the stats on Garland getting beaten by a small forward then go for it.  I think it's rare that I walk away from a game feeling like he was beaten defensively.  He might make the odd mistake or miss a target but then I can forgive him for that.

Garland's job isn't to influence the result of a game - it's to shut down his man.  He does that regularly with minimal fuss or fanfare.  It's clearly what the players and coaches respect about him, as do I.

As I mentioned above as well Grimes has been slowly shifted out of the leadership group after being captain.  He has gone from co-captain, to leadership group and then to just being part of the team.  They've treated that transition with respect.

5 minutes ago, nutbean said:

The leadership is so important off the field - many issues off field for the entire playing group are taken to the leadership group and the leadership group bring back issues to management/coaches - I like the idea that if you transgress you are sanctioned by your peers ( the leadership group)

Thanks Nut that's a good and clear reason. 

It's a pretty good time to be Colin Garland right now, a 3 year extension, and now elevated to the leadership group.

Well done Col, great rewards! Not bad for an 'ordinary player' if you believe what you read on here. Clearly the people

that run the club have a much better handle on his importance to the group and onfield standing.

3 hours ago, nutbean said:

I wonder about the process. I wonder if players can opt out of the process (request not to be nominated for leadership)

If as you say his peers don't rate him then something has changed since last year where his peers did rate him.

I doubt Dunn opted out of the nomination process considering he was quite adamant that it was something he had been working on improving in the lead up to his VC appt.

I'd be willing to put it down to how the team culture has developed particularly over the past 12 months but mainly the off-season. 

Leading Teams process would need to remain fluid and move with the team dynamics with regards new standards, player development and how they meet and or exceed those new standards.

I reckon Dunny has been left in the wake of the other group members.

Case in point on what a strong leadership group does

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-03-10/they-did-not-meet-those-standards-crows-stand-down-pair

If they are the best leaders of that group right now - then that is the measure.

I groan when I see LGs that have "potential leaders" included.

3 hours ago, ProDee said:

A club's LG is hugely important.  They drive the culture, tone and standards at a footy club.

If you ever listen to former players, such as Archer or Brereton, you'll understand how important they are.

The players you mentioned played at clubs with outstanding on-field leaders.

Every team has a leadership group, but you never hear anything about them aside from the premiership team.

Clubs with top end talent will allow their leaders to drive the standards. Clubs with lesser talent will be driven by the coaches.