Players back Wallace (Herald-Sun)

[WilliamPowell]

Sure this is shaking things up a bit, which is exactly what’s needed, and hasn’t happened in the past, because some were scared that if anyone so much as breathed it could disrupt everything.  But there’s a difference between a distraction caused by a disgruntled few wanting change for their own gratification and a review by those in charge.  And hopefully that’s what this is.......

So, basically, if this is handled properly and professionally, I don’t see how this whole thing could signify anything but positive and progressive change.

In principle I agree with what you are saying TS, however what I've underlined is what concerns me...

It has been well documented that there have benn people in the background that have been rumbling for the last 18 months. They would appear to be the "disgruntled". They got digruntled and then suddenly we seem to running around reviewing.

Until this point most things were being kept in house, then suddenly we have the events of the last few months that have been anything but professional. 

As I said on another post at the moment it looks like amatuer hour at the local under 12's

I have no problems with the idea it is the execution that's been the issue ....






I am all for reviews because yes that it is what the baord is there for but

[blaisee]

Sure this is shaking things up a bit, which is exactly what’s needed, and hasn’t happened in the past, because some were scared that if anyone so much as breathed it could disrupt everything.  But there’s a difference between a distraction caused by a disgruntled few wanting change for their own gratification and a review by those in charge.  And hopefully that’s what this is.......

So, basically, if this is handled properly and professionally, I don’t see how this whole thing could signify anything but positive and progressive change.

In principle I agree with what you are saying TS, however what I've underlined is what concerns me...

It has been well documented that there have benn people in the background that have been rumbling for the last 18 months. They would appear to be the "disgruntled". They got digruntled and then suddenly we seem to running around reviewing.

Until this point most things were being kept in house, then suddenly we have the events of the last few months that have been anything but professional. 

As I said on another post at the moment it looks like amatuer hour at the local under 12's

I have no problems with the idea it is the execution that's been the issue ....






I am all for reviews because yes that it is what the baord is there for but

i dont understand willie p

execution? there has been no execution of anything yet, other than miller getting sacked. And to be honest that was a huge storm in a tea cup. Miller should have gone 2 years ago, great bloke, finished as a football administrator, much like sheedy, minus the great bloke bit 

March managed miller off the board, and then sacked him, it took a while, but he got the job done.

March has also put wallet back in his box, and  got him to concentrate on what he is being paid to do...coach

Now march will shortly appoint an outstanding candidate to manange the five new departments of the football division, terrys boss.

These are all very important changes, people have been sacked, others have been moved sidewards, others have lost their powerbase and finally Craig Cameron and the new head hincho have been given new responsibilities. There is no way this could have been done without some egos being bruised, and without a bit of fallout. Ultimately the question has to be asked, is the RFC better off with the changes being made? The answer is YES.

Gary March has been superb under the circumstances. Very difficult job to do, full of minefields, and politically savvy football people trying to undermine him ( Wallace ) at every opportunity. Thankfully for us, he has had the balls to stay true to what had to be done, and there is no doubt we are all gunna be much better for it

[WilliamPowell]

i dont understand willie p

execution? there has been no execution of anything yet, other than miller getting sacked. And to be honest that was a huge storm in a tea cup. Miller should have gone 2 years ago, great bloke, finished as a football administrator, much like sheedy, minus the great bloke bit 

blaisee there was the "execution' of the sacking of Miller... you know the leaking of that. That was handled abysmally IMHO... that's what concerns me. This whole thing whould not be played out in the media

Again my view the 5/10 comment was poorly done as it encouraged the media pack to circle whent there was no need

Gary March has been superb under the circumstances. Very difficult job to do, full of minefields, and politically savvy football people trying to undermine him ( Wallace ) at every opportunity. Thankfully for us, he has had the balls to stay true to what had to be done, and there is no doubt we are all gunna be much better for it

You say Wallace is trying to undermine March, which I don't agree with - so we can agree to disagree on it 

However my view is that there has been some undermining throughout very parts of the club (including the coach) as well and for me some of that hasn't been handled well and that's the main reason I have very little confidence in what is going on now .....

There is one thing that could be done to ease my mind but sadly I doubt it will happen (an I aint talking contract extensions) 

[Moi]

The whole thing should have been brought up in Wallace's next contract.
All the roles that were being taken away from him should be in the next contract.
YOu can't tell someone these are you roles, you do them and then call them control freaks for doing the roles you asked them.
There should be no demarcation disputes if it's all set in stone when people are contracted.
If Wallace doesn't like what's proposed in his "next" contract that's when he can walk
But to tell someone midway through a contract I don't think is the way to go
Next year should be about learning to work with these new people, and if he wants to stay and abide by the club's new contract, and who he is accountable to, so be it.

[blaisee]

The whole thing should have been brought up in Wallace's next contract.
All the roles that were being taken away from him should be in the next contract.
YOu can't tell someone these are you roles, you do them and then call them control freaks for doing the roles you asked them.
There should be no demarcation disputes if it's all set in stone when people are contracted.
If Wallace doesn't like what's proposed in his "next" contract that's when he can walk
But to tell someone midway through a contract I don't think is the way to go
Next year should be about learning to work with these new people, and if he wants to stay and abide by the club's new contract, and who he is accountable to, so be it.

sorry not that simple

alot of damage can be done

EG

we trade riewalt and cotchin   and our first pick for kerr, and lock him ( kerr )into a 5 yr deal worth 3 million

we are then stuffed for another decade

[tigersalive]

The whole thing should have been brought up in Wallace's next contract.
All the roles that were being taken away from him should be in the next contract.
YOu can't tell someone these are you roles, you do them and then call them control freaks for doing the roles you asked them.
There should be no demarcation disputes if it's all set in stone when people are contracted.
If Wallace doesn't like what's proposed in his "next" contract that's when he can walk
But to tell someone midway through a contract I don't think is the way to go
Next year should be about learning to work with these new people, and if he wants to stay and abide by the club's new contract, and who he is accountable to, so be it.

sorry not that simple

alot of damage can be done

EG

we trade riewalt and cotchin   and our first pick for kerr, and lock him ( kerr )into a 5 yr deal worth 3 million

we are then stuffed for another decade

Amen to that.

The youth policy should hold strong. 

[Moi]

we trade riewalt and cotchin   and our first pick for kerr, and lock him ( kerr )into a 5 yr deal worth 3 million
we are then stuffed for another decade

That's scaremongering and do you honestly believe that scenario?

[blaisee]

we trade riewalt and cotchin   and our first pick for kerr, and lock him ( kerr )into a 5 yr deal worth 3 million
we are then stuffed for another decade

That's scaremongering and do you honestly believe that scenario?

dunno mate, do you?

this is why all good organisations are system based as opposed personnel based.

[the_boy_jake]

we trade riewalt and cotchin   and our first pick for kerr, and lock him ( kerr )into a 5 yr deal worth 3 million

we are then stuffed for another decade

I agree with that in principle, list control should have been moved out of Wallace's hands as soon as it was clear we weren't gonna have a competitive lilst by the end of his contract.

But I still think March's PR skills leave a lot to be desired.

[Tiger Spirit]

In principle I agree with what you are saying TS, however what I've underlined is what concerns me...

It has been well documented that there have benn people in the background that have been rumbling for the last 18 months. They would appear to be the "disgruntled". They got digruntled and then suddenly we seem to running around reviewing.

Until this point most things were being kept in house, then suddenly we have the events of the last few months that have been anything but professional. 

As I said on another post at the moment it looks like amatuer hour at the local under 12's

I have no problems with the idea it is the execution that's been the issue ....

I am all for reviews because yes that it is what the baord is there for but

Maybe how things have happened isn’t ideal, but ultimately, this has to be a good thing.  We have to remember that we’re coming from so far behind other clubs and have to start somewhere, even if it looks somewhat amateurish at this stage.  If this is an attempt to change things for the better then how it has happened is acceptable on this occasion, but not if it becomes a constant.

That aside, I don’t understand why people seem to have so much faith in TW’s direction, and knock March for his efforts.  For all intents and purposes, neither of them has achieved anything yet.  But if the club’s management and board appear incompetent through this then what does it matter who the coach is if management has no idea and various departments within the club are working to their own agendas?

Obviously, they all want the same thing but, realistically, how can the current set up possibly work, to anyone’s way of thinking?  How could any coach be expected to deliver anything like success under such disjointed circumstances?

Surely someone has to provide a clear direction and have ultimate control over the whole thing.  Scattering the responsibility just brings a lack of cohesion and direction.  We all want unity, which is what is needed most.  But treading carefully, to avoid confrontation, just keeps us where we are.  So if a bun fight is the only thing that will bring that unity then bring it on.

That way, people can either sort out their differences or part company.  Whatever the outcome, it should create greater understanding, and people can then move on to the next step, in the same direction.

[Tiger Spirit]

The whole thing should have been brought up in Wallace's next contract.
All the roles that were being taken away from him should be in the next contract.
YOu can't tell someone these are you roles, you do them and then call them control freaks for doing the roles you asked them.
There should be no demarcation disputes if it's all set in stone when people are contracted.
If Wallace doesn't like what's proposed in his "next" contract that's when he can walk
But to tell someone midway through a contract I don't think is the way to go
Next year should be about learning to work with these new people, and if he wants to stay and abide by the club's new contract, and who he is accountable to, so be it.

How do you know these things were written in his contract?  I doubt such a thing would've been written in his contract.  If the club held hopes of improving their finances in the future, why would they tie up various roles within TW’s contract, thereby stopping them from employing others in these roles, for 5 years?

And if these roles were written in the contract how could they change things midstream anyway, without mutual agreement?  TW would be in his rights to make a fuss and RFC wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

If there's nothing in his contract, and the way things have been run in the past are not in the Club's best interests, going forward, then management is well within their rights to make whatever changes they deem necessary.  That’s their role and their job.

[Moi]

The whole thing should have been brought up in Wallace's next contract.
All the roles that were being taken away from him should be in the next contract.
YOu can't tell someone these are you roles, you do them and then call them control freaks for doing the roles you asked them.
There should be no demarcation disputes if it's all set in stone when people are contracted.
If Wallace doesn't like what's proposed in his "next" contract that's when he can walk
But to tell someone midway through a contract I don't think is the way to go
Next year should be about learning to work with these new people, and if he wants to stay and abide by the club's new contract, and who he is accountable to, so be it.

How do you know these things were written in his contract?  I doubt such a thing would've been written in his contract.  If the club held hopes of improving their finances in the future, why would they tie up various roles within TW’s contract, thereby stopping them from employing others in these roles, for 5 years?

And if these roles were written in the contract how could they change things midstream anyway, without mutual agreement?  TW would be in his rights to make a fuss and RFC wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

If there's nothing in his contract, and the way things have been run in the past are not in the Club's best interests, going forward, then management is well within their rights to make whatever changes they deem necessary.  That’s their role and their job.

They expected him to be all things to everyone when we had no money for staff, it's a bit rough to say he's too big for his boots now which is what most of you lot are saying. 
Past caring anyway.  Wouldn't matter if you had Leigh Matthews in there or the greatest coach of all time, you and most other supporters would find fault in everything they did.

[WilliamPowell]

Surely someone has to provide a clear direction and have ultimate control over the whole thing.  Scattering the responsibility just brings a lack of cohesion and direction.  We all want unity, which is what is needed most.  But treading carefully, to avoid confrontation, just keeps us where we are.  So if a bun fight is the only thing that will bring that unity then bring it on.

Agree but I have a problem with it being played out in the media.... the bun fight should be behoind closed doors.

And the last 3 months have been played out in the media.... and that is what annoys and disappoints me. It's the leaks

Get rid of the leaks and for me that would be a start

[Infamy]

Wouldn't matter if you had Leigh Matthews in there or the greatest coach of all time, you and most other supporters would find fault in everything they did.

Isn't that the truth

[Ox]

sorry not that simple

alot of damage can be done

EG

we trade riewalt and cotchin   and our first pick for kerr, and lock him ( kerr )into a 5 yr deal worth 3 million

we are then stuffed for another decade

As If...