Once again mainstream media have demonstrated their willingness to pursue a story until it fits their needs. The hounding of James Hird with questions designed to force him into making a controversial statement, and therefore breathing new life into speculation over the future of Matthew Knights, has been scandalous.
Aussierulesblog has generally refrained from commenting on issues uniquely affecting the Bombers. We prefer to think of ourselves as football fans first and foremost, with a strong affection for the Bombers. However we find the controversy emerging over the last few days requires a note of sanity.
When Matthew Knights was appointed, we were mightily unimpressed. Our assessment of his attributes as a player did not suggest he could be an outstanding coach. His limited coaching resume did nothing to soothe our fears. Time, however, has forced us to re-evaluate that assessment.
The last three or four years of the Sheedy ascendancy were pretty dismal times for Bombers fans who had become used to success and regular final series appearances.
Under Knights, the Bombers played a new and exciting brand of run and carry football. When this gameplan worked, it was breathtakingly successful. When it didn't, the team looked second rate. Some famous successes, including consecutive victories against the hated Blues, seduced some supporters into believing that the team’s glory days had returned.
Toward the end of Sheedy’s time, the club had taken a fairly short term view in its recruiting decisions. This policy doomed Knights to suffer the loss of much of the team’s experience and forced him, whether he wanted or not, into a rebuilding phase.
Statistics show that Knights’ record over his three years is superior to Sheedy’s over his last three years.
Nevertheless, the Sheedy supporters would not be swayed from the view that their icon had been unfairly removed and held Knights responsible. There also emerged a rump of supporters attached to the myth that Essendon did not accept mediocre performances. For this group, anything less than a resounding victory was unacceptable. These two groups, both with unrealistic expectations, provided a veil of legitimacy for media speculation over Knights’ future.
Aussierulesblog wishes to go on record as a Knights supporter. Without the benefit of hindsight, we considered that the Essendon board had got the timing and the decision on Sheedy right. With hindsight, perhaps he was given a couple more years than were deserved.
The argument can easily be mounted that Knights has not been done any favours by circumstances over the past three years. To mention just one, the loss of Gumbleton to debilitating injury for more than two years severely limited the development of a new forward line.
Convincing victories over acknowledged premiership contenders in both of the last two years suggest that Essendon and Knights have got it pretty right.
The assumption, implicit in the media's pursuit of Hird, that a gifted player will automatically be a successful coach at the elite level is not supported by history. Of premiership coaches over the last 50 years, only Coleman, Blight, Jesaulenko and Roos would have been considered gifted as players. So, a mere six of the last 49 premierships have been presided over by coaches who were gifted players.
Sentimentally, the notion that Hird could return and lead the club to a premiership is attractive. Whether it is realistic and whether it justifies removing an incumbent whose record is not all that poor is quite another question.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment