We havent really seen enough of Sampson to tell, we have Norwood at home in our next match in round 14 which is a game that the club should be a reasonable chance of winning.
I am a little concerned that under Jack Cahill the club beat Glenelg, Port and West and drew with Norwood, yet the same side has yet to record a win under the new coach. We lost first off to Central who have not hit their winning form yet of recent years and we played them at a time when it was felt that the club should be a chance of winning as a result of the motivation of the coaching situation that had occured the week prior. We then rolled on to lose against the Eagles at home and North at Prospect which were both games against sides placed in a similar position to us on the ladder and I dont feel that there is a sufficent excuse as to why the club did not pick up at least one of those three games as a win.
Since being on SAFooty I have seen that many supporters have the full expectation of their club that they are to win every week. This is something that has never really existed at South, losing is accepted and expected to the larger half. Many of our problems are cultural and that is specifically why Jack Cahill was there to try and deal with, hence the two occassions where he refused to hand out "best player" awards after shite performances and losses from the whole side in general which is something that had never happened before at South to my knowlege.
South need to toughen up and it appears that when Jack tried to do just that it was more than the club could take and they attempted to apply the handbrake so to speak.
The points made about Clay Sampson coaching in an modern AFL style were noted by me of course, yet what is it that people think that Ken Sheldon tried to do at South previously? That is hardly a new idea to the club and I dont think it will solve our problems in the intermediate term.
My thoughts were that South needed a coach that took no nonesense from the playing group and would toughen the group up as a whole and work towards creating a culture that would see South expected to win every week. My candidates for the job were Michael Nunan, Phil Carman or at an outside chance John Schneebichler for that reason. Yet its clearly pointless appointing any of these as that style of coaching will not be supported by the club.
I dont want to come across as continually railing on the club, yet I dont think Clay Sampson as coach will work. I think that Sturt are a good example where someone like a Phil Carman had to come into the club, lift it off the bottom of the ladder and make it competitive, then another coach was brought in with some different tactics who as fate had it finished off the job. Clays coaching style might work as a finisher, yet IMO not as a builder which Jack Cahill was there for. Until we go through that process as a club we are kidding ourselves is my opinion to the initial question.
