My Vote for the dumbest post of the week!

Totally unpractical.

What if the coaches are unable to commit?
What if the coaches do not want to do it? Do we not have a coach at all becasue nobody in the top 4 wants to do it?
What if the coaches disagree on philosophy?
How do you decide who the head coach is? The team that wins the totally unimportant summer competition?

PS Did your kid get cut last week?

I didnt mean literally all share the team. What I meant was that the role is shared each year from the top four or 5 clubs so that each club has the opportunity to have one coach do it.

#125662, 10 State positions, Eastern 2, Forestville 2, Norwood 2, Sturt 2, North 1, Unassociated with a district club 1. I'm not sure there is any factual basis for your claim based on these numbers.

I believe the state selection process is too long by far.
I believe the coaching roles are too static.
I believe some of the selection processes are political.
Saying the above does not mean it is so as I am often wrong.
However, If no one is supposed to say anything critical of the process because they are perceived as having an axe to grind then looking at the situation more closely will never occur.

anon #125679,

What benefit would this have on results? It would destroy continuity, and not allow the best coach to coach the team each year.

Surely the coaches deemed best suited to performance should be chosen regarless of their club.

Again, what if none of the coaches from that age group are willing to give up their time? If they were, they would probably apply and if deemed acceptable get the job.

688 -

"I believe the state selection process is too long by far."

- I beleive it is too short. I think The teams need more time together before heading away to nationals.

"I believe the coaching roles are too static."

- Is there a reason for this? No one else willing to make the significant committment required of coaching a state side. or simply no other candidate putting their hand up that has proven they deserve a chance (success at district level, committment to personal growth, a desire to acheive the next level ie SASI).

I believe some of the selection processes are political.

- What processes do you think are political? Please be specific.


*oh gee - i'm starting to sound like darth*

When the coach chooses the team according to their performance at trainings and in games, how is that political?

If it is the coaches dream to coach at state level, then let them; only don not let them coach with in a 2 year age group of the state team they are currently coaching.E.G. U16's state coach (metro or country) cant coach between U14's, 16's or 18's.

There are a couple of coaches at a well known club that, while not directly coaching the age group they coach at state level, they are only 1 year behind.

It could be said that some kids at the club in question have an unfair advantage over the other kids in the same 2 age groups as it is pretty obvious that they "help" each other with local district selections.

Time to clean up the whole metro/ country state coaching act and try a bit harder to make it seem as though no bias is shown.

wow what a load of crap

mm

All processes should be open to criticism surely.
If these state gigs are so tough , how come the same guys do it year in year out?
#402 You are stating facts and everyone else is whinging-not sure most would agree.
I follow why the boys put up with it, but what I don't understand is why girls put themselves thru it when they have no career paths available to them.

Ask Lauren Jackson how her career path is going. Or Laura Sommertons. Or Maybe Penny Taylors.
I am sure all of them are making more cash than you!

No 448, most of us do agree - you're just a whinger.