1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

If you genuinely think that if Fyfe handled that SEN interview poorly that it would not have hurt Freo then I cannot help you further.

I'm struggling to work out the comparison between Fyfe and Viney.  Fyfe has been Freo's main man for a number of years, has had a significant amount more media duties than Viney.  It's no surprise that he sounded a lot more polished.  That said, I'm yet to hear from a Freo supporter that wasn't disappointed with the way he handled the whole contract situation.  If anything, he has put doubt in some of their minds.

There's no way Fyfe's performance on SEN and any other interview since he was named captain, would've appealed more to new Freo members/sponsors, than what Viney's minimal interviews did to Melbourne members/sponsors.

I much prefer our captain to do "captains" jobs, such as lead the team onfield, be a role model to players off it, and lift the cup at the end of the season.  Because we have 2 captains, I'm more than happy for Jones to take any other media duties until such time as Jack has had appropriate training.  The fact that Jack oozes the first two of the jobs I listed will ensure he will be a very good captain this year, and will only grow in the role over the coming seasons.

If I'm wanting to attract sponsors, I want whoever is the most marketable representing my company, which at the moment is Gawn.  If I'm wanting to sell memberships, I want players that the average Joe can relate to, such as Max, Bernie and Watts.

2 hours ago, billy2803 said:

I'm struggling to work out the comparison between Fyfe and Viney.  Fyfe has been Freo's main man for a number of years, has had a significant amount more media duties than Viney.  It's no surprise that he sounded a lot more polished.  That said, I'm yet to hear from a Freo supporter that wasn't disappointed with the way he handled the whole contract situation.  If anything, he has put doubt in some of their minds.

There's no way Fyfe's performance on SEN and any other interview since he was named captain, would've appealed more to new Freo members/sponsors, than what Viney's minimal interviews did to Melbourne members/sponsors.

I much prefer our captain to do "captains" jobs, such as lead the team onfield, be a role model to players off it, and lift the cup at the end of the season.  Because we have 2 captains, I'm more than happy for Jones to take any other media duties until such time as Jack has had appropriate training.  The fact that Jack oozes the first two of the jobs I listed will ensure he will be a very good captain this year, and will only grow in the role over the coming seasons.

If I'm wanting to attract sponsors, I want whoever is the most marketable representing my company, which at the moment is Gawn.  If I'm wanting to sell memberships, I want players that the average Joe can relate to, such as Max, Bernie and Watts.

I've never compared Fyfe and Viney.

4 hours ago, P-man said:

Ha. It's funny how eager people are to point out that they don't watch it.

They've had a pretty good run for a show that nobody watches

You have seen the people that turn up to watch the show live haven't you?

3 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

I've never compared Fyfe and Viney.

Why keep banging on about Fyfe then?  You are clearly in awe of his recent media performances, what has this go to do with Jack being a co-captain?

And I will repeat, most Freo supporters I know were far from impressed with Fyfe's interviews.  They have more questions than answers about his playing future from 2018.  But go ahead and think that they (supporters) will be very impressed if you wish, but it's far from being accurate.

I'm done on this one, Fifty-5.

Heard a Caro interview today and she was at a breakfast interview with Goodwin who mentioned that Nathan Jones did raise his eyebrow on the decision and questioned the need to another co captain.

19 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Heard a Caro interview today and she was at a breakfast interview with Goodwin who mentioned that Nathan Jones did raise his eyebrow on the decision and questioned the need to another co captain.

I don't mind that from Jones. He is well within his right to do it, but he also needs to back his coach and the decisions he makes. Obviously we aren't privy to what the reasons were and the discussion they had, but I don't think it was a decision that was made lightly and without good reason. 

4 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

I've never compared Fyfe and Viney.

The moment you used his interview as an example was the moment you compared Fyfe to Viney. 

Edited February 16, 20178 yr by Wiseblood

worlds biggest [censored]

On 14 February 2017 at 9:36 AM, pineapple dee said:

I think the coach is entitled to make the decision and I wouldn't be alone in thinking / hoping this is the correct one. Jack has got the qualities we've all been screaming out for for years at this club. Yes it's a bit of a shock now but i am certain the time is right..... and , though young, the man is right too. Someone here,hopefully correctly, said, Jack Viney will raise our next two premiership cups.

Exactly. Goodwin's been around professional football clubs forever and he's knows what leadership qualities a successful team requires.

He also knows this list and what it requires. If he reckons Jack should be a Co-Captain, I'm happy to unreservedly back his judgement on this.

 

15 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Heard a Caro interview today and she was at a breakfast interview with Goodwin who mentioned that Nathan Jones did raise his eyebrow on the decision and questioned the need to another co captain.

I don't think chunk has made any secret of his surprise, and I think a lot of the footy world felt the same but I doubt he would be to worried about it, never seemed to be the type to sook about things 

*Bump

Here's a reason not to have co-captains. Either (1) there's a second photo with Jack Viney replacing Nathan Jones, (2) there's only the one photo and Jones won the toss and represents the club, or (3) Jones is considered the "senior" of the club's captains. And if it's (3), then Viney should have been VC.

Mind you, perhaps the other advantages of having a co-captain outweighs this example of how it doesn't work...but only if Jack Viney doesn't feel slighted by his omission from the photo.

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

*Bump

Here's a reason not to have co-captains. Either (1) there's a second photo with Jack Viney replacing Nathan Jones, (2) there's only the one photo and Jones won the toss and represents the club, or (3) Jones is considered the "senior" of the club's captains. And if it's (3), then Viney should have been VC.

Mind you, perhaps the other advantages of having a co-captain outweighs this example of how it doesn't work...but only if Jack Viney doesn't feel slighted by his omission from the photo.

Jones was on SEN this afternoon and explained that he "lost the toss" to Viney and attended.

I'm sure most of the captains would rather not be there if they didn't have to.

I remain unenthused by the co-captain decision.

"But it worked for Sydney!!11"

No, having a good team, gameplan and coach worked for Sydney.

If Viney takes a backward step this season, I'll be annoyed. It wasn't necessary.

 

Viney is the apprentice Captain in waiting... like Goody was Apprentice Captain last year. Its a good way to develop Jack without throwing him in the deep end/setting him up to fail.

Can't see what the resistance is to it.

55 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Jones was on SEN this afternoon and explained that he "lost the toss" to Viney and attended.

I'm sure most of the captains would rather not be there if they didn't have to.

Neil Balme was brutally honest about captains day on SEN this morning. Said wasted of time and they would be better off at training.

That just could be because Richmond don't have a captain though. They might have if their medical staff weren't so prudent.

On 2/16/2017 at 11:09 AM, Fifty-5 said:

If you genuinely think that if Fyfe handled that SEN interview poorly that it would not have hurt Freo then I cannot help you further.

A leader's ability not to put their foot in their mouth during media interviews is about all that's required in the media. Tick that and your sponsors are fine. Why?

Sponsors care about eyeballs on their brand and how their brand is represented. If the club is winning - that's a tick. If the club has greater success - that's a tick. If their brand is visually present in the media without a negative foot in mouth experience - that's a tick.

This has got nothing to do with Fyfe. You said media performance is a key factor of a captain's role. And I call [censored] on that front.

As has been pointed out, Hodge is an ordinary media performer, as is Jones IMO. If the MFC leaders become known as winners, that's far more important to sponsors than whether a captain can string a sentence together.

Further, as Billy says, we have blokes like Gawn on The Footy Show every week, Lewis on AFL360 and Bernie I'm sure will also appear. This is brand exposure and has little to nothing to do with leadership on or off the field. We're playing football after all and although the business side of things is vital to a club's sustained success and ultimate survival, a captain's media performance is not anywhere near the top of the list of priorities.

Edited March 16, 20178 yr by A F