La Dee-vina Comedia

I can just see how the process might pan out if AI was used to make the decision. It would analyse all the contenders, whether they were applicants or not, and determine that Simon Goodwin is the best choice.

Somewhat ironically, the continuing media assessment that the job is Buckley's to lose somewhat weakens his position. The people appointed by the club to make the decision might feel some subconscious pressure to appoint someone else just to prove the "process" was real.

This reminds me of a comment comparing Mick Malthouse's coaching style with Paul Roos. I can't remember who said it, but it was said that Malthouse demanded players change to meet his requirements and if they couldn't do that, they should move on. Conversely, it was claimed that Roos identified what a player's strengths were, and worked with the player to get the best out of them.

Firstly, do we know they didn't ask Jimmy Bartel, Jason Dunstall or any others of that type (whatever that means)? I think Watson appears to be an astute choice. He's not that long out of the game that it has moved on too far. I have found his TV commentary to be measured and shows an understanding of the strategic elements of the game. At the same time, he doesn't appear to over-react, which in TV commentary might make him seem dull to some, but measured to others. Importantly, having had one of the worst experiences in AFL that is possible, he knows the importance of having a coach who knows right from wrong.

We also need a GET STUFFED emoji.

We need a question mark emoji.

Sigmund Freud would be so proud.

Not that any of this is relevant, of course.

I could see why Howes was the sub. It provided backup in case Adams completely failed (which he didn't) and allowed the option of moving one of the running defenders (ie, Rivers, Salem, McVee or Bowey) to midfield when he (Howes) came on.

Is Gawn a literary scholar? These words read like the football equivalent of "No Man is an Island" by John Donne. Read on, and think of it being about Goodwin (and ignore the hyperlinks): No man is an island, Entire of itself. Each is a piece of the continent, A part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less. As well as if a promontory were. As well as if a manor of thine own Or of thine friend's were. Each man's death diminishes me, For I am involved in mankind. Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls, It tolls for thee.

Adams playing should be no surprise. Otherwise we'd be playing with only two tall defenders against a team with a tall forward line. Assuming we play 7 defenders as usual, the likely "out" would seem to be either McVee, because he's on the bench and hasn't really been playing particularly well, or Howes, who would be unlucky. Of course, if Jefferson plays, then Petty could be the third tall defender and I have no idea what's going on.

I like to imagine that the Carlton Board is so deluded that they've reaffirmed their support for Voss because they were frightened by the prospect that we might poach him!

Meet this Harvard scholar: Lawrence D. Bobo | Lawrence D. Bobo

If I'm making a decision as to the next coach I couldn't go past the statistics that more Premierships have been won by first-time coaches than re-cycled coaches. That's evidence enough for me to go with a first-time coach. I don't have anyone specific in mind, but the assistant coach who impresses me most through the selection process would be my choice.

If it makes everyone feel better, Carlton has won more wooden spoons in the AFL era (ie, 1991 onwards) than any other club. They have five in the Wooden Spoon drawer. We've only got three. (I found that nugget here - a brief summation of various leadership matters in the AFL)

It may not have been his intention, but smart timing from Steven Smith! Makes Brad Green take any criticism while he keeps his hands clean publicly.

In my mind, Tom Morris is about the only journo who can hold his head high this week. At least he's reporting facts (whether we like them or not) while the conjecturing and opinion-making of others is extraordinarily shallow and unimpressive.

One thing Longmire and Goodwin have in common is that they both give absolutely nothing away in their press conferences. (Which is the polite way of saying they are truly boring.) However, that shouldn't be a pre-requisite for getting, or not getting, the job. If we take Brad Green's comments at face value (and that's risky, I know), the media commentary that Longmire is on the top of our wish list is just bunkum. It might end up that way, but I suspect we have moved on Goodwin now to give us time to work out what we want. Putting it another way, if we were settled on someone already (whether it's Longmire or not) we would have waited until the end of the season to farewell Goodwin.

If he plays this week (as he should), he'll join a relatively small group who will have played three consecutive senior AFL games under three different coaches.

With a name like that, more likely something spicy from the Dutch East Indies.

Has Goodwin already been made a life member of our club? If not, that needs to happen. (Perhaps not immediately, but at a time when he's ready to accept it.)

So, do I take it from this that Brad Green has been guided in this decision by some people who live in the Victorian town of Cohuna? And did they tell him to act in a way that shows he has the cojones? 😁

I suspect we used an outside PR/crisis management firm to draft it.

My apologies KozzyCan if you thought I was in any way being critical of your post. It was not my intention. I'm just aware of how these decisions can be looked upon differently as circumstances change.

Sacking a coach after a win might be a better strategy than doing so after a loss, particularly if it's a bad loss. It potentially allows for a more respectful announcement, a less-stressed playing group when they are told, and it makes it look like a more strategic rather than knee-[censored] decision of the Board.