Lance McGovern

[flyboy77]

Yet we have Andrew Russell as head of fitness and conditioning.

it's an odd one, isn't it?

[LP]

Interesting.

PaulP, as people who have both stood up for Bolton, don't you see that this is a little bit of an indictment on the MC led by Brendan Bolton?

Thry, I think PaulP highlights that the problem is probably bigger than the coach, while your words suggest an idea that the coach is the major or primary contributing cause. It seems obvious to me that PaulP probably thinks the root cause is a much bigger umbrella issue that the coach works under.

What was the mandate and has it changed, it seems so!

Are we really judging apples for apples?

[PaulP]

Interesting.

PaulP, as people who have both stood up for Bolton, don't you see that this is a little bit of an idictment on the MC led by Brendan Bolton?

In round 1, it was an eyebrow raiser to have played both of Alex Fasolo, and Mitch McGovern ahead of Jack Silvagni.

It sent the wrong message to the group.  A bloke who had employed his own running coach in the off season, had a really solid pre season and gotten himself in the best nick of his career (JSOS) was dropped for round 1 so we could play Alex (broke my arm in a drunken incident) Fasolo, and Mitch (Brackets/stress fracture/out of condition) McGovern?

Teague's led MC has dropped him after giving him a period to prove his worth as well as dealing with the injuries to McKay and Charlie Curnow.

We had plenty of opportunities to drop Mitch this year and havent done it.  That means there were intangibles he was bringing to the table that wasnt to do with his own performance.

Yes, I agree all that is plausible, but it doesn't (at least for me) clarify the issue. There are many possible reasons as to why he was played then and dropped now.

[PaulP]

Thry, I think PaulP highlights that the problem is probably bigger than the coach, while your words suggest an idea that the coach is the major or primary contributing cause. It seems obvious to me that PaulP probably thinks the root cause is a much bigger umbrella issue that the coach works under.

What was the mandate and has it changed, it seems so!

...............

Yes, that's right. Maybe Teague isn't operating under the same type of pressure, and doesn't need to worry about playing the better players to deliver wins. Maybe he wants to make a point that he won't play favourites. Maybe he wants to protect his mate by getting him out of the team to ensure his reputation isn't sullied any further. I could go on all day, but at the end of it all, I have no idea. 

[JonHenry]

it's an odd one, isn't it?

It must be a conspiracy.

[Thryleon]

Its always easier to set these sorts of standards once the season has run away from you a bit.

McGovern did roll his ankle against the Bulldogs too.



I am going to float another idea.  The club had probably stated privately that they wanted the team to start winning games.  Bolton lives and dies by his decisions, and the ones he made were reasoned, but ultimately not quite right to win games of football and due to not winning more than 1 game in 10 (forget the last year, its not worth bringing into the equation) in a "do or die" sort of year for our club, where we have swapped first rounders is ultimately what finished him.

Coaches cant afford to be setting standards for proffesionalism in year 4 of their tenure.  Its just not good enough.

[LP]

Yes, I agree Thry. The only thing I must question is the idea of autonomy that is inherent in your post and our clubs actions.

I seriously doubt Bolton is the solo cause of the situation, but at this stage he's apparently wearing the solo blame!

It doesn't sit well with many of us that have lived through events like this many times before, our club seems to have a persistent and rotten culture in this regard.

[Tragic]

every club plays their better players when they aren't quite right.  Mitch does a few nice things every game that make a difference, but he wasn't fit enough to do enough of them imo, and eventually realised they were better off taking him out and getting him fit.  good idea.  was it done too late?  probably. 

good post earlier about jack being overlooked for Fas & Mitch in round 1.

i like the fact that a line has been drawn pretty much at the bye, and the club is trying to squeeze every last drop out of this season.  if it means Mitch has to have a conditioning block late in the season and he gets to play 3 or 4 games with more fitness, and that helps us win even one of those games, then it's a win.  I dunno if it's to do with a coaching change, but we seem as a club to now be trying to win EVERY game.  This i like.  Bugger the future.  Our team needs to win now.  That will breed wins in the future.

[townsendcalling]

every club plays their better players when they aren't quite right.  Mitch does a few nice things every game that make a difference, but he wasn't fit enough to do enough of them imo, and eventually realised they were better off taking him out and getting him fit.  good idea.  was it done too late?  probably. 

good post earlier about jack being overlooked for Fas & Mitch in round 1.

i like the fact that a line has been drawn pretty much at the bye, and the club is trying to squeeze every last drop out of this season.  if it means Mitch has to have a conditioning block late in the season and he gets to play 3 or 4 games with more fitness, and that helps us win even one of those games, then it's a win.  I dunno if it's to do with a coaching change, but we seem as a club to now be trying to win EVERY game.  This i like.  Bugger the future.  Our team needs to win now.  That will breed wins in the future.

I think you could guarantee that he'll be busting his ass to get back in 2 weeks time....vs Crows!!

[Micky0]

I dunno if it's to do with a coaching change, but we seem as a club to now be trying to win EVERY game.  This i like.  Bugger the future.  Our team needs to win now.  That will breed wins in the future.

Agree!!!