In the first of a series of posts, I looked at Premiership coaches since 1960 and identified that gritty players who'd worked hard to get the best from their limited talent were disproportionately represented in the ranks of Premiership coaches.

I think there's one major reason that this should be so, but there is a prerequisite assumption involved.

The prerequisite is to assume that the performance level of the bottom 20% of a list determines the success of the team. Let me expand on this a little. Few would disagree that the ‘stars’ in a team are those who can be relied upon to produce close to their best most weeks. These may be the top 5–10% of the list. Then you've got the nucleus of the team — up to 70% of the list — who’ll do their assigned jobs most weeks without threatening to take the game by the throat, except in unusual circumstances. Then there’s the 20% who are the journeymen, the guys fighting to cement a place in the team, the guys who aren’t going to win BOGs, B&Fs or Brownlows. I think it’s the performance levels of these guys that defines Premiership teams.

OK, with the prerequisite assumption bedded down, how does this factor into coaching prowess? It seems to me that the list of the most successful Premiership coaches of the past 48 years is a list of blokes who made their playing reputations, such as they were, on guts and determination rather than natural talent. Who better to help the bottom 20% of a list understand what they need to do to cement a place in the team and potentially write themselves into history as Premiership players?

Of course, expounding on coaching credentials in this way is pretty meaningless without applying the ideas. So, of the current crop of coaches, who best fits the bill? These are subjective analyses, necessarily, but opinions make the blogosphere go ’round! Remember, Premierships are the only measure of success in this discussion and these assessments are relative.

Adelaide: Neil Craig
No record at AFL level, which could be seen as both a plus and a minus. I don’t see a flag from this coach.

Brisbane: Michael Voss
Not hugely talented in the Hird/Buckley mould, but not a gritty journeyman either. Ferocious determination on the field, but with the physical goods to make it happen. Especially without experience, I don’t see a happy ending here.

Carlton: Brett Ratten
A fair possibility if he can get the cattle.

Collingwood: Mick Malthouse
Classic example of the theory early in his career. The burden of being at Collingwood and fading memories of playing days suggest no more flags for Mick.

Essendon: Matthew Knights
Classic example of who NOT to choose under this theory. Talented footballer who didn’t have to work hard to earn his spot. No flag here.

Fremantle: Mark Harvey
Undoubted courage as a player, but also a precocious talent. Flag unlikely.

Geelong: Mark Thompson
Certainly an example of this theory in action. Hard to see him not adding to the trophy cabinet.

Hawthorn: Alistair Clarkson
A bit part player at a few clubs, but kept bobbing up. 2008 flag was no accident. More to come.

Melbourne: Dean Bailey
Never a standout at Essendon as a player. Administrative issues, affecting playing stocks, could reduce his potential. Unlikely, but a possibility.

North Melbourne: Dean Laidley
Laidley’s nickname — Junkyard Dog — says it all. Administrative issues have wrought havoc. A Premiership coach in waiting.

Port Adelaide: Mark Williams
Certainly gritty as a player and no-one would accuse him of being gifted. Club culture and expectation are a millstone that reduce his potential to add to the trophies.

Richmond: Terry Wallace
Should be the essence of this theory. Disappointing thus far.

St Kilda: Ross Lyon
Highly-talented player. No flag, especially in the St Kilda culture.

Sydney: Paul Roos
Roos is the exception to prove the rule. Hugely talented as a player. His mentoring of Sydney into successive Grand Finals speaks volumes for his capabilities.

West Coast Eagles: John Worsfold
I’d rank him on the cusp of fitting the theory.

Western Bulldogs: Rodney Eade
Ticks all the boxes, but there seems to be a timeframe before his message wears thin.

Why is it that the British Bulldog crowd (Rugby League) and the mobile wrestlers (Rugby Union), with, arguably, more in common than Gaelic and Australian Rules football, don't play against each other? We've seen an increasing number of high-profile bulldogs (not just Canterbury/Bankstown!) cross to wrestling recently, mostly successfully it seems, so there's not an insurmountable gap between the codes skills wise.

On the other hand, we have only Jim Stynes, Tadhg Kennelly and Colm Begley who’ve succeeded at the highest level in aussie rules, the younger Stynes and two O’hAilpins who’ve stumbled and struggled, and a few more around the fringes. Have any Aussies gone to Dublin to tackle (;-)) Gaelic Football?

I’m sorry — I’m about to utter another heresy. The Internation Rules series is a crock that advances neither sport and only enriches, ever so slightly based on ratings, television channels. The chance that a team, in either code, could lose a crucial player for a season as a result of an injury sustained in a meaningless confection of a sport is too great. Let's just knock this unfortunate 'bastard' on the head and get on with our respective codes.

A report in The Age on possible rule changes is most disquieting.

While there is considerable argument on the necessity for a change in relation to intentionally rushing behinds, some of the solutions being touted are definitely worse than the disease.

Other proposals include:

• the provision of two substitutes on the bench in pre-season games
  do we really want to make Aussie Rules more like gridiron?
• Awarding a free kick and 50-metre penalty for players who put down, tackle or unreasonably retard an opponent who has disposed of the ball, which prevents them from reaching the next act of play or next contest
  I can already see the umpires getting stooged on this one
• Introducing a fourth field umpire to provide greater scrutiny at stoppages
  and yet another interpretation of rules on the ground — JUST what we need
• Increasing the legal kicking distance from 15 metres to 20 metres and possibly as much as 30 metres
  Huh? Where on earth does this come from?
• Making the goal line level with the back of padding around the goal posts
  clearly one of the most important issues in the game! This is a nonsense run up the flagpole to take scrutiny away from things that are important.

I'm with Glen Archer! Dean Laidley's floating of Hamish Macintosh as trade bait was tawdry in the extreme. I wonder what reaction there'll be, sometime next season, when Laidley implores Macintosh to find an extra ten percent? What about “F**k off”? What damage has Laidley, perhaps unwittingly, done to the invisible fabric of his team? Will the famous Shinboner Spirit be as weak as Pimms in ’09?

I remain convinced that the Bombers’ slide after 2001 was hastened by the way that Hardwicke, Caracella, Blumfield and Heffernan were seemingly disposed of. I don't think that team ever recovered their trust in the coach, match committee and club.

Back on Laidley's turf, the matter of Daniel Harris, if media reports are accurate, is a totally different scenario. Cameraderie and group cohesion is a fragile commodity, but Premierships are NOT won without it.

From the Great Southern Stand, the sight of the Carlton Draft hot air balloon drifting across the ground had bets being hurriedly laid on its chances of taking out a light tower, or perhaps a couple of beamers in the car park. One of the better moments from the pre-game 'entertainment'.

It is a sad fact of modern, corporatised, socialised sport that clubs can demand that players bleed for the jumper, but, come Trade Week, all bets are off and anything goes. If only loyalty were a two-way street...

I confess I am mildly astonished that no-one voting for the Norm Smith Medal saw fit to award even one vote to Chance Bateman, while his opponent for a good part of the day was largely ineffectual but gained a sizable tally.

And so, finally, to the football, which reached no great heights.

After an even first quarter (I know it was even, because Rob Waters told me at quarter time!), the Cats could have sealed the game in the second with straight kicking and looked to have the Hawks covered.

The turning point, in my view, was Rioli's wonderful defensive efforts on the Members' wing in the third quarter. Neither side had been able to break the other's will to this point, but the Hawks seemed galvanised by Rioli and slammed on a match-winning six goals for the quarter.

One has to feel for the Cats. Were the game to be played ten times, I'm confident they'd win the other nine. Still, it's the best on the day and the Hawks did what counted on the scoreboard better than the Cats.

Oh, one last note to the sound guys: perhaps we could have done with only ONE hundred renditions of the Hawks' song?