bing181

Perhaps because there's a perception that there has been a disconnect between the admin side (CEO/Admin + Board) and the FD?

Revisiting this, might shed some light: "Competition sources have confirmed the Demons, who are on the lookout for a new senior coach after the sudden sacking of Simon Goodwin, are also making inroads into creating a new senior role – to be in charge of strategy. The West Coast Eagles did a similar thing at the end of last season, hiring their premiership coach John Worsfold to oversee the football department in a role that the club said would include coaching structure, development, performance and culture. If the club were to make the appointment in the off-season, it would mean that current football boss Alan Richardson, who is contracted for 2026 is part of the club’s subcommittee to choose the next coach, would answer to the new appointment. The role would essentially sit between the football department and Guerra."

The latter. Reading between the lines, to make sure the Board, Admin and FD are all singing from the same hymn sheet.

This x 1000.

Once again, for me it's not so much about the team, it's about onfield direction and leadership. Players like Hodge and Pendlebury can control and shape play off their own boot. In contrast, Max, Viney, Lever ... ?? Great lead-from-the-front generals, but not a lot of smarts, especially with ball in hand.

Reluctant as I am to agree with you, I agree with you. But it's not so much a criticism of the team as a criticism of the on-field leaders. It's no accident that in those final tragic minutes against Carlton, arguably the two key players were Lever and Viney. McVee also with his failure to intercept or kill the ball when it reached Docherty, but as a first-year player we can cut him some slack. The ball should never have been out there in the first place, Viney should have had the know-how to make sure we maintained possession, or at least force an OOB/contest.

A season or two too early. Also, I don't know that she wouldn't be looking eventually to step in to the men's game?

As has been discussed here ad nauseam, list management decisions are the prerogative of the List Management Committee. Neither King nor Goodwin get to decide who comes or goes, not in isolation in any case. The knee bone's connected to the thigh bone etc etc. All of these decisions are linked, but reading between the lines based on the little actual info that's out there, it would seem that a gang of 4 of Richardson, Green, Smith and Guerra were fairly active in righting the ship and implementing a No DH policy. Goodwin was the first domino to fall, but Clarrie and Trac were probably already in the crosshairs by the time that decision was reached. Sacking a leader always creates a spill of other positions and makes change easier, even necessary.

Yep, because the only reason the club makes multi-million dollar investments in players, or re-signs players or even signs players in the first place is for PR.

It's Goodwin's job to back his players, especially publicly. King will do the same, as does every coach, especially when players are struggling. BTW, in how many other games did Clarry get sent out to play as a tagger?

Geelong's reported offer was a future first, i.e. this year. Which was pick 24.

Hindsight much? Not what you were saying back in October 24: "fine him into submission, play at Casey till you earn it coupled with appropriate medical / clinical care "

Centre bounces is but one part of being a mid. Kozzie has been a (great) centre bounce specialist but has not had substantial on-ball/midfield time, he's been primarily a forward.

Losing ANB and Gus is one of the factors in why we had to move on Oliver and Trac. You can cope with all sorts when you have strong leaders, but asking for trouble otherwise.

Of course you do. Only a matter of time before Goodwin is blamed for Norm Smith's sacking.