Sturt vs Port game review thread

[stampy]

Weslo are a complete joke and so is anyone who contracts them

no shit

[pipers]

Yes, every club has some "supporters" like that, but Sturt seem to have a greater percentage than the other clubs, and there doesn't ever seem to be anything done by the club about it until it completely boils over, as it has a few times against the Eagles.

I'd disagree that Sturt has any more or less, it a stupid statement which can't be backed up.
Congratulations to Port. That was just about the worst I've seen Sturt play, ever. Disgraceful attempt atca game of football.

I will back that statement to the hilt - I have witnessed numerous incidents and near incidents over the past decade due to a very unsavoury element at the SFC. The club needs to address it. The people in charge would know who they are.

Oh, and I will back up your second statement too. Sturt were woeful, in the first half particularly.

[CUTTERMAN]

Cutterman...

What are your suggestions? I'd sincerely like to hear other Sturt fans thoughts on this one...

A valid suggestion needs to be based on credible information, I'm not inside the club and don't have that information so I try to be measured with my reactions.
Is Norman doing well as a coach at the moment? No.
Are the players performing. No.
Are we financial enough to end his contract early. Probably not.
Is there a better coach available that the club can afford? Don't know.
John Reid did a revision of the club at the end of last year. Senior players that had retired or left at the end of last season and present ones were interviewed and asked what they thought some of the issues were within the club. The club acted on some or all of those points from that review. So I have the opinion that the club have acted on the issues they can effect and tried to remedy the ones they can't enact an immediate outcome.
So no CS I don't have many suggestions to remedy this but I'm not about to demand knee jerk reactions without valid options or plausible outcomes.

[CUTTERMAN]

Yes, every club has some "supporters" like that, but Sturt seem to have a greater percentage than the other clubs, and there doesn't ever seem to be anything done by the club about it until it completely boils over, as it has a few times against the Eagles.

I'd disagree that Sturt has any more or less, it a stupid statement which can't be backed up.
Congratulations to Port. That was just about the worst I've seen Sturt play, ever. Disgraceful attempt atca game of football.

I will back that statement to the hilt - I have witnessed numerous incidents and near incidents over the past decade due to a very unsavoury element at the SFC. The club needs to address it. The people in charge would know who they are.

Oh, and I will back up your second statement too. Sturt were woeful, in the first half particularly.

Yeh and I've been threatened at Alberton by Port supporters and seen crap behavior towards others also. I've seen WWT supporters keep trying to start a fight at Unley infront of WESLO. Ive seen North supporters behave like total retrobates, as with Central supporters. Ive seen Sturt supporters act the same, we've all seen alot of bad behavior so to say one is worse than the other is simply unfounded as you havent been to every game played, so you wouldn't know but have only an opinion formed from your own perception, through your own eyes, clouded by your own judgement and bias at a certain place and point in time. Valid to you I'm certain but doesn't stack up in a wholistic assessment.

[pipers]

Yeh and I've been threatened at Alberton by Port supporters and seen crap behavior towards others also. I've seen WWT supporters keep trying to start a fight at Unley infront of WESLO. Ive seen North supporters behave like total retrobates, as with Central supporters. Ive seen Sturt supporters act the same, we've all seen alot of bad behavior so to say one is worse than the other is simply unfounded as you havent been to every game played, so you wouldn't know but have only an opinion formed from your own perception, through your own eyes, clouded by your own judgement and bias at a certain place and point in time. Valid to you I'm certain but doesn't stack up in a wholistic assessment.

And that's the attitude that allows these miscreants to continue doing what they do...

I have seen and heard about the other clubs you mentioned doing something about it.

From SFC all we hear is "we aren't the only ones"...

Sort yourselves out.

[csbowes]

So no CS I don't have many suggestions to remedy this but I'm not about to demand knee jerk reactions without valid options or plausible outcomes.

My job requires me to make informed decisions. I run an $80m project that had 160 engineers on it. I don't knee jerk, but I don't shy away from making tough calls.

When the club did this review it should have disclosed the results to members at the AGM. Too often comms would settle nerves, but for some reason secrecy is the norm.

What will the club tell me when I ask why we've gone from 2nd to 5th to 8th and yet kept the man who has taken us there? You essentially said you don't know what to do.

The board can't say that...

... I can't say that in my job, so fairs fair.

This is not a charity.

[csbowes]

And that's the attitude that allows these miscreants to continue doing what they do...

I have seen and heard about the other clubs you mentioned doing something about it.

From SFC all we hear is "we aren't the only ones"...

Sort yourselves out.

To be fair the cheer squad leader resigned last year because he was sick of the bad behaviour after much talk with the club and when he left, about 10 others did in support and now the squad is maybe 10 strong compared to 30+ last year.

[csbowes]

I agree with Cutterman on supporter behaviour...

... as in my exp I've never come across a badly behaved Port fan in my 25 years!

Amazing I know, but it's true.

Might be why I like the club and relish our clashes the most.

[pipers]

And that's the attitude that allows these miscreants to continue doing what they do...

I have seen and heard about the other clubs you mentioned doing something about it.

From SFC all we hear is "we aren't the only ones"...

Sort yourselves out.

To be fair the cheer squad leader resigned last year and when he left, about 10 others did and now the squad is maybe 10 strong compared to 30+ last year.

Yes, the cheersquad (or certain elements of it) were an absolute disgrace so good to see it cleaned out. I have seen one really bad incident at a port game in a decade (against North at Prospect in about 2006), but pretty much every game against Sturt sees some big-mouth double-blues fan voicing the usual stereo-typical abuse that is like water off a duck's back to a Port fan. Then when they get something in return they turn filthy/homophobic/racist/incoherent...

I'm no shrinking violet either, but seriously, there is a line...

[dedja]

I can understand the frustration CSB, but I can't see how sacking the coach will achieve anything.

- Sturt may not be in a financial state to afford a 18 month payout.
- There doesn't appear to be a ready made caretaker ... or am I wrong?
- The season is shot regardless ... no possible performance improvement will achieve a final berth

Glenelg didn't have these issues ... hence why their decision (hopefully) makes more sense.

Better to review at the end of the year when calmer decisions can be made I would have thought.

[smithy]

[pipers]

Exactly! I'm no shrinking violet...

(and seriously, has everyone saved that photo to their HD or something?)

[smithy]

Exactly! I'm no shrinking violet...

(and seriously, has everyone saved that photo to their HD or something?)

No, just a quick search on "port supporter" and "crowd disturbance" will do the trick.
Seriously you need to get over today.
Happens at all grounds.
Shall I bring up old stuff from sturt forums on crowd trouble at ALberton that you never saw or read ?
Maybe you witness an idiot everytime you are at a sturt game because you hang around them.

[Sojourner]

John Reid, Ken Sheldon, Robert Pyman. All quality Coaching Staff that got sacked from the club because they had "lost the support of the players". South Adelaide's constant sucking up to the playing group has cost the club several times over. No doubt its easy to look back in retrospect, yet its clear to see that sacking these coaches did nothing at all for the club.

One of the reasons why I have always admired Malcolm Blight is for what he did to the playing group at the AFC when he took over. He could have walked in there, told the playing group its an open page and started over. Instead several players who thought they were pillars of the club found themselves sacked. One more was pretty lucky to get to stay so I am told. Blight goes on with a group that he sees fit to play and wins back to back premierships.

Sturt gave Norman the job and extended the contract because they believed in him and what he was doing at the club. If its actually factual that there is some type of animosity occurring, perhaps another answer to the question is for the board of the club to back Norman in and go cut those players that the club feels that he has lost and replace them with players that will play for him and the Double Blue. Consider it this way, if players don't want to play for the Coach, then they clearly don't want to play for the Guernsey of the club either and think its negotiable, a new Coach may not necessarily change that attitude within a playing group once it becomes entrenched.

[The Sleeping Giant]

I think you should bring up some old stuff.

[southee]

John Reid, Ken Sheldon, Robert Pyman. All quality Coaching Staff that got sacked from the club because they had "lost the support of the players". South Adelaide's constant sucking up to the playing group has cost the club several times over. No doubt its easy to look back in retrospect, yet its clear to see that sacking these coaches did nothing at all for the club.

One of the reasons why I have always admired Malcolm Blight is for what he did to the playing group at the AFC when he took over. He could have walked in there, told the playing group its an open page and started over. Instead several players who thought they were pillars of the club found themselves sacked. One more was pretty lucky to get to stay so I am told. Blight goes on with a group that he sees fit to play and wins back to back premierships.

Sturt gave Norman the job and extended the contract because they believed in him and what he was doing at the club. If its actually factual that there is some type of animosity occurring, perhaps another answer to the question is for the board of the club to back Norman in and go cut those players that the club feels that he has lost and replace them with players that will play for him and the Double Blue. Consider it this way, if players don't want to play for the Coach, then they clearly don't want to play for the Guernsey of the club either and think its negotiable, a new Coach may not necessarily change that attitude within a playing group once it becomes entrenched.

Great post Sojouner......

[csbowes]

Sturt gave Norman the job and extended the contract because they believed in him and what he was doing at the club. If its actually factual that there is some type of animosity occurring, perhaps another answer to the question is for the board of the club to back Norman in and go cut those players that the club feels that he has lost and replace them with players that will play for him and the Double Blue. Consider it this way, if players don't want to play for the Coach, then they clearly don't want to play for the Guernsey of the club either and think its negotiable, a new Coach may not necessarily change that attitude within a playing group once it becomes entrenched.

I tip my hat to you... you've made an incredibly good point there.

I don't know what to say in response to that, I think you've trumped me!

[smithy]

John Reid, Ken Sheldon, Robert Pyman. All quality Coaching Staff that got sacked from the club because they had "lost the support of the players". South Adelaide's constant sucking up to the playing group has cost the club several times over. No doubt its easy to look back in retrospect, yet its clear to see that sacking these coaches did nothing at all for the club.

One of the reasons why I have always admired Malcolm Blight is for what he did to the playing group at the AFC when he took over. He could have walked in there, told the playing group its an open page and started over. Instead several players who thought they were pillars of the club found themselves sacked. One more was pretty lucky to get to stay so I am told. Blight goes on with a group that he sees fit to play and wins back to back premierships.

Sturt gave Norman the job and extended the contract because they believed in him and what he was doing at the club. If its actually factual that there is some type of animosity occurring, perhaps another answer to the question is for the board of the club to back Norman in and go cut those players that the club feels that he has lost and replace them with players that will play for him and the Double Blue. Consider it this way, if players don't want to play for the Coach, then they clearly don't want to play for the Guernsey of the club either and think its negotiable, a new Coach may not necessarily change that attitude within a playing group once it becomes entrenched.

Pretty sure he ( blight ) sacked 31 players when taking over from Woodville too, and the results happened.
YOu bring up good points. Have you been to your clubs AGM and voiced them over the years ?

[Sojourner]

YOu bring up good points. Have you been to your clubs AGM and voiced them over the years ?

I have to confess that I seldom bother with the AGM anymore, its gotten better in recent times, but along with the sackings of players, various board members blow in, blow up and blow out of the club on a frequent basis promising everything so what is the point - when you have a drawer full of "next season" letters it becomes pretty tedious, hence I prefer to approach the management directly, on the last time to try and convince them not to have the current reverse Guernsey, the current group are at least approachable and will listen to what people have to say which isn't the worst thing.

[CUTTERMAN]

Sturt gave Norman the job and extended the contract because they believed in him and what he was doing at the club. If its actually factual that there is some type of animosity occurring, perhaps another answer to the question is for the board of the club to back Norman in and go cut those players that the club feels that he has lost and replace them with players that will play for him and the Double Blue. Consider it this way, if players don't want to play for the Coach, then they clearly don't want to play for the Guernsey of the club either and think its negotiable, a new Coach may not necessarily change that attitude within a playing group once it becomes entrenched.

I tip my hat to you... you've made an incredibly good point there.

I don't know what to say in response to that, I think you've trumped me!

Good points Sojourner. I've been thinking for some time about what makes for a successful club in the modern (post AFL) SANFL era. When it comes to on field performance I think there are two main factors that are constantly affected by instabiliy largely due to the AFL. One is a constantly changing playing list due to developing young players that go to the AFL, players changing SANFL clubs to get a better chance of becoming AFL players and then the players that struggle with the demands of family, training and full time work and decide that it's not worth it.
The other is senior coaches, SANFL clubs seem to nurture and develop senior coaches pretty well, many go on to the AFL but the SANFL club is then left to do it all over again and again and again. This creates a lot of instability. Look at Norwood, they've done really well with Bassett but it's likely that he'll be gone to the AFL soon so then where does that leave Norwood? Centrals have got a great system in place and a coach that has no desire to move to the AFL, thus great stability.
So I guess my point is that there's a lot of unsettling influences that SANFL clubs have little influence over and thus create a certain amount of instability, so when a club is in a situation as Sturt is at the moment maybe it is better to make cautious well thought decisions and lessen the chance of any more instability.
Does that make any sense or is it another onion?