Ian could have been talking about BNSW in the above article.

From the outside, his insights seem to explain the decisions made.

Scott "one basketball" Derwin gets very little mention, but really deserves far more scrutiny, he's been there for almost 20 years.
There is no doubt that "If Patrick or Lorraine didn't like you then your chances of getting a National job were much harder " is an understatement of great magnitude.

Their control over that area was absolute, In the early 2000's , LL actually wanted BA to go through FIBA to ensure that no Juniors player could accept a USA college scholarship without BA approval, to stop the best from not attending the AIS. Not necessarily a bad idea for basketball, but one which illustrated the core values of "we in BA run the sport"

Gaze senior and P. Hunt had the best interests of Basketball and "their" players and coaches at heart, but if you weren't one of their players or coaches there was , and still is, no way around them.

Hopeful that Jan will be a great success in her role.


Have grown in respect for Stacker as a person since reading his blog articles, I can respect and agree with his own admission that his time (as a coach ?) has come and gone, but that does not meant that his opinions and experience are not relevant.

He certainly sounds bitter and twisted

Very Old.

His time being gone also does not mean what he says is accurate.

I read the post and despite admitting himself that he is "bitter" a lot of his assertions are just that - assertions, based on assumptions.

People can say what they want about Hunt, Derwin, Landon etc., they oversaw an excellent era of international success for Australia.

HO

No, but his time being gone means that he is no longer seeking self-promotion to achieve a coaching appointment for himself.

People who were contemporaries in the 1980-2010s can, and will, judge the accuracy of Stackers' descriptions of the actions he personally witnessed, by directly comparing his "asserted" experiences to their own personally witnessed experiences.

Just saying "Hunt, Derwin, Landon etc., they oversaw an excellent era of international success for Australia" is a even more general assertion, akin to saying Hamilton and Stopford were generals involved in overseeing a victorious WW1 campaign by the allies. Both are correct, but should not actually preclude any examination of less than optimal decisions. I would lay very good odds that no-one outside of a very select few thought that the 2000 boomers were well served by their coaching leadership in Sydney.

Not saying LL and P Hunt were not positive contributors to the outcomes, the fact is that the observations that Stacker makes are actually about all of their contributions, including contributions to the "We own the sport" culture within BA staff at the time.

The only observation he makes about Landon and Hunt is that it was difficult to get appointed if you were not on very good terms with them personally, not that they appointed incompetents.

Nepotism does not inexorably lead to total failure, just unfairness and less success than what could have been possible.

I read it as him saying coach section decisions should result from criteria that are open transparent and made by a well-experienced formal group.

the idea that Penny should have been asking Andrew Gaze "what happened" instead of him asking her is well founded. Choco will get sacked, but the selection committee and process will essentially continue as is, unless people like Stacker pull its failures out into the light.

a lot of truth in the previous post!!!!!!!!!!!!