One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: mightytiges on February 12, 2005, 06:35:35 PM
-
What do you think of the Saints or any club for that matter changing their captain every year?
I hope we don't go down that path. IMO it totally devalues the position of captain when you think of all the great Tiger captains - Dyer, Hart, Weightman, etc... we've had in the past. Imagine taking the captaincy off these champions ???.
-
I agree that it devalues the position of captaincy but I have no problem wiht it when there isn't an outstanding candidate for the job at the club. For instance in our situation there really isn't a standout player and if anything placing one of them as a long term captain will have the same effect: devaluing the position of captaincy.
-
Depends really on the Culture of the Club and whether or not the team is winning. I think it's working ok for the Saints only because they are doing well. If they were on the bottom of the ladder i'm sure their rotation policy would be very heavily attacked as being un workable and a silly thing to be doing. Thomas is going down this path because he is trying to increase the level of leadership and responsibility individually into his players, it has some merit, but obviously there are other ways to do the same thing it just happens that this is the way Thomas has chosen to do it.
It's attacked by others mainly because it is a diferrent way to do it and we as a people are very loath to change traditions and customs. I don't ascribe to the notion that it demeans the status of a captain at all, rather it gives the opportunity for a player to experiance the responsibility of leadership and all that entails such responsibility. It will be a growth experiance for these players.
As far as our club is concerned this type of process would be inadequate, our players would not be up to it or ready for it at present. Maybe in a couple of years a concept such as the saint's might be a viable proposition at Richmond but at this stage there is still to much growth to be had by our list for it to be effective for us.
-
I agree that it devalues the position of captaincy but I have no problem wiht it when there isn't an outstanding candidate for the job at the club. For instance in our situation there really isn't a standout player and if anything placing one of them as a long term captain will have the same effect: devaluing the position of captaincy.
Yeaaah baby. :thumbsup
-
Granted (like Rodger said) it appears successful at St Kilda because they are winning and I have no doubt that if they were not winning it would be viewed differently. However, I will never understand or like the concept - I agree with MT it devalues the position and following a club that has had some legendary figures as captain perhaps I place a greater importance on the job.
But back to the only example we have in St Kilda. The Saints first captain under this policy was Hamill and quite frankly he was very good and I think he deserved to remain captain. I get the feeling that now Reiwoldt is captain that in 2006 the rotating captain policy at St Kilda will cease.
-
As far as our club is concerned this type of process would be inadequate, our players would not be up to it or ready for it at present. Maybe in a couple of years a concept such as the saint's might be a viable proposition at Richmond but at this stage there is still to much growth to be had by our list for it to be effective for us.
Agree Rodger, too early for us to go down that track.
I like the idea behind the rotation system though. It would be a great learning curve for anyone and would greatly benefit any player to have the Captaincy for any amount of time. They get a greater sense of responsibility and maybe learn something about themselves they didn’t know before.
Whether it would work just as well at others Clubs, as it does at the Saints, is debatable. But I think it works there because they have a Coach who knows how to work the system he’s put in place and, most importantly, he’s created the environment where it can work. Also, he’s got a good group of players and a number of them with leadership qualities. And by giving players even one year at the role, they learn and grow by being Captain. So it can only make them a better team in the long run.
It’s easy to see leadership qualities in someone, but it’s up to the player to tap into his natural ability to handle the role in his way. The advantage the Saints players have is that they know they are going to have great support from their teammates, as well as the coaching staff, which is probably vital with any Captain, but especially in a developing team with a young Captain. I don’t know too many Clubs who would have as many young players ready to put their hand up for the role as the Saints seem to have. Which probably says a lot about the work that Thomas has done there to create such an environment where young players can feel confident enough in their own ability to be Captain. Hats off to Thomas.
-
As far as our club is concerned this type of process would be inadequate, our players would not be up to it or ready for it at present. Maybe in a couple of years a concept such as the saint's might be a viable proposition at Richmond but at this stage there is still to much growth to be had by our list for it to be effective for us.
Agree Rodger, too early for us to go down that track.
I like the idea behind the rotation system though. It would be a great learning curve for anyone and would greatly benefit any player to have the Captaincy for any amount of time. They get a greater sense of responsibility and maybe learn something about themselves they didn’t know before.
Whether it would work just as well at others Clubs, as it does at the Saints, is debatable. But I think it works there because they have a Coach who knows how to work the system he’s put in place and, most importantly, he’s created the environment where it can work. Also, he’s got a good group of players and a number of them with leadership qualities. And by giving players even one year at the role, they learn and grow by being Captain. So it can only make them a better team in the long run.
It’s easy to see leadership qualities in someone, but it’s up to the player to tap into his natural ability to handle the role in his way. The advantage the Saints players have is that they know they are going to have great support from their teammates, as well as the coaching staff, which is probably vital with any Captain, but especially in a developing team with a young Captain. I don’t know too many Clubs who would have as many young players ready to put their hand up for the role as the Saints seem to have. Which probably says a lot about the work that Thomas has done there to create such an environment where young players can feel confident enough in their own ability to be Captain. Hats off to Thomas.
Exceptionally well put TS, you got it in one :thumbsup
-
I reckon Nick Riewolt will be a great captain for the Saints. So, next year, are they going to give him the flick and pass on to someone else? I reckon if you find a good one, as i expect he will be, be dumb to get rid of him and put someone else in who may not do a better job. I like the system especially when you see good results the Saints have had, however, I'd use it only until a really suitable candidate puts their hand up.
-
That's the way I see it too Moi. By all means evaluate the captain's performance each year and give someone else a go if warranted. We went through a similar patch in the late 70s/early 80s - Sheeds, KB, Monteath, Wood and Clokey all got a go. But if you find a good one then it just seems silly IMV to change just because of some rigid rule that's been put in place. Like WP I thought Hamill was a very good captain for the Saints and likewise I think Riewoldt will do well as well.