Coaching preference for 2024

[SAP58]

Assuming the vote has to be unanimous:

If Doust is in a battle with other board members, I’d be interested to learn of his reasoning behind his anti-flanno veto.

Just a simple statement listing his reasons so everyone can consider the merits of it and make an assessment.

Nobody has really told us why he is against Flanno.

That he was embroiled in peptides and broke NRL rules is a given. That he was a cheat is understood. That he did nothing good helping Mary is also true.

Are there other reasons for Dousts strong feelings on this matter which we don’t know about?

Doust is taking on some powerful adversaries in the media to stymie Flanno. It’s a big call. He’s risking a lot. Why?

I was thinking the same thing this morning. He must have done something or said something to or about Doust which is why I want him as the next coach, not a yes man. I doubt we will here anything from Doust as he has never had to substantiate anything he has done or said in the past this won’t be any different

 

[Como Connection]

CC, I am a little vague about the year now but I think the following conversation occurred in 2004. I was just leaving Jubilee Oval after a game when I bumped into an old mate. He said straight out that the Dragons were in trouble now with Doust as CEO. His reasoning: how could they appoint him when he was such a poor CEO of St.George Hospital? I had no idea just how prophetic his words were to prove to be!

I have spoken to a few ex players and they all nominated Doust as the major problem over many years, why is he so powerful and seemingly untouchable. Very unprofessional situation, crazy!
CC

 

[56to66]

Thats some great data there. What are the stats on Des?

Des- 2 premierships with Manly
2 Grandfinalist Bulldogs

2004–11	Manly Sea Eagles	206	122	0	84	59
2012–17	Canterbury Bulldogs	155	88	0	67	57
2019–22	Manly Sea Eagles	97	48	0	49	49
	Total	458	258	0	200	56

Des, Shane, are my 2 most important choices.
Followed By John Morris and Nathan Brown.
My Rookie Choice would be Ben Hornby under Des or Shane. 2026-27, depending the success of Shane or Des.
Dean Young next 2050.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

I’m a Des man as I think he’s best available.

But If its a board rumble, I am not sure why the board has to be unanimous in its selection of a coach.

Danny says that, but he doesn’t tell us why. Is it in a rule or constitution? Is the board bound by that prescript? I’d be very surprised if it was.

I have to take Danny’s assertion with a grain of salt -unless it’s written in stone. It is otherwise convention and not mandatory or …he’s made it up.

8 people isn’t it?

Good question, the Board unanimous thing has come up a few times. Not been on a Board of any significance to know. You would think that if the vote is 7 to one that would be the end of it.

If Doust is the problem, can't the Chairman just take him out the back and karate-chop him, or use the Spock grip on him? Has to be some way of breaking the dead lock.

 

[baggygreen man]

Hunt is expected to meet with his agent this week as he grows increasingly concerned about the plight of the club and whether he made the correct decision to re commit to the club. There is no doubt the Bulldogs are waiting in the wings and ready to pounce having had chats with Hunt when he was a free to sign with rival clubs last year.

Sooking again, when will he accept that he has been and still is responsible for part of the malaise sweeping this once famous club. Paid overs, delivered unders. Gould you are welcome to him.

 

[Dragonsteve2]

Assuming the vote has to be unanimous:

If Doust is in a battle with other board members, I’d be interested to learn of his reasoning behind his anti-flanno veto.

Just a simple statement listing his reasons so everyone can consider the merits of it and make an assessment.

Nobody has really told us why he is against Flanno.

That he was embroiled in peptides and broke NRL rules is a given. That he was a cheat is understood.

Are there other reasons for Dousts strong feelings on this matter which we don’t know about?

Doust is taking on some powerful adversaries in the media to stymie Flanno. It’s a big call. He’s risking a lot. Why?

Silverdale, in every thing I do, ethical standards are important to me. But when it comes to the NRL I believe that there are no genuine ethical standards. Basically almost anything goes or at least is forgiven. Contracts are regularly broken, drug takers and wife cheaters can become commentators, sin binning is applied with zero consistency, sexual scandals and domestic violence abound. Players ditched from one club because of breaking the law are quickly signed up by another. It's accepted that players are given more leeway in the SoO than in the NRL to break the rules. Even the top officials can intervene to break with precedent at finals time. The St. George side of our JV places limits on the degree of democracy in its electoral processes. What have I missed?

Flanagan broke the rules twice and was punished twice. But Doust has broken the hearts of Dragons' supporters time and time again and never been punished. It's Doust who should be banned from holding a position at the Club not Flanagan. Additionally, what logic is there in banning a candidate from becoming coach when you have seen fit to appoint him as an assistant coach?

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Good question, the Board unanimous thing has come up a few times. Not been on a Board of any significance to know. You would think that if the vote is 7 to one that would be the end of it.

If Doust is the problem, can't the Chairman just take him out the back and karate-chop him, or use the Spock grip on him? Has to be some way of breaking the dead lock.

I’ve been on a couple of boards, essentially the numbers ruled, a tied vote goes to the chairperson to bust a decision. It’s called democracy.

But if one persons opinion can dominate 7 others, I’m surprised anything can be determined.

Under a proper system, Dousty can note his objection to Flanno and therefore absolve himself of any adverse impacts that may eventuate.

So he’s in the clear and the club moves on.

 

[Mojo]

I don't know why we bother really, since our opinions, especially mine, really don't matter and won't make any difference. However, I have been a zealous Saints supporter all my life.

I don't know anything much about the personalities on the Board, in the management, or the current candidates for Head Coach.

I've previously adopted the high moral ground regarding Flanno. I really dislike his history. However, listening to his commentary it is very evident that he is a scholar of the game and, at this juncture, his non-compliant characteristics might be what we need. Everyone seems to have agreed, for ages now, that Doust is a bit of a mongrel and a domineering type of guy, and the gossip is that he is deeply resistant to Flanno. Joining dots, this suggests to me that Flanno doesn't / hasn't yielded to Doust in the past or, at least, that they dislike each other. So, that's probably a tick for Flanno.

Watching South's attack last night it struck me how reminiscent it is of Saints in 2010. There's some brilliant players there, that's for sure, but the structures and the team 'smarts', tell me that Hornby is an excellent attack coach, who obviously really studied and understood everything Bennett taught him. I also have the distinct impression that Hornby is a really straight-up kind of guy. Looking at the detailed stats for this year, South's attack is probably the best in the comp. Compared to Deano and Ryles, as defence coaches admittedly (ie; comparing apples and oranges), Hornby is streets ahead.

I don't know why 'club legends' take on coaching gigs with their old club. Failure as a coach destroys the legacy. Sure, success does the opposite (eg; Cleary). But, coaching failure at another club by a club legend leaves the playing legacy intact (eg; Barrett).

It's a fact that we need to pull some players too, which needs a coach with a good past 1st grade record.

All things considered I reckon a combination of Flanno and Hornby could be very strong.

On the Board and JV structure issues: (I have a professional background in corporate governance and company directorship). A 50/50 structure, both of the JV itself and also of the Board, especially made up of two private entities, simply cannot work. There are well-established governance principles almost all of which are based around independence of directors. There are also well known problems with dominant Chairpersons. Boards should not be directly involved in management. Also for JV's to be functional, especially where there is no 'managing party' (ie; one with more than a 50% interest), a management committee should be established to advise the boards of the two parties - not the board itself - that is a recipe for disaster - especially for indecision. Simply forming a 50/50 board to directly manage the JV is doomed to failure because it will only serve to institutionalise a division between the parties.

The core structure of StGI is completely wrong in all of these areas. The first thing needed is a revised constitution that provides for an independent Chair. This is the appointment that should be unanimous (not the Head Coach). The Chair should have a casting vote when a majority can't be arrived at for any particular decision. Directorships, including the Chair, should have limited terms (not set for life), and a management committee for the JV should be established to report to the Board. The Board should be focused on strategic and policy matters, not 'product', management and recruitment decisions (for example).

(Pigs might fly. I am developing a product called 'pig lipstick', which is needed by most boards).

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Silverdale, in every thing I do, ethical standards are important to me. But when it comes to the NRL I believe that there are no genuine ethical standards. Basically almost anything goes or at least is forgiven. Contracts are regularly broken, drug takers and wife cheaters can become commentators, sin binning is applied with zero consistency, sexual scandals and domestic violence abound. Players ditched from one club because of breaking the law are quickly signed up by another. It's accepted that players are given more leeway in the SoO than in the NRL to break the rules. Even the top officials can intervene to break with precedent at finals time. The St. George side of our JV places limits on the degree of democracy in its electoral processes. What have I missed?

Flanagan broke the rules twice and was punished twice. But Doust has broken the hearts of Dragons' supporters time and time again and never been punished. It's Doust who should be banned from holding a position at the Club not Flanagan. Additionally, what logic is there in banning a candidate from becoming coach when you have seen fit to appoint him as an assistant coach?

Awesome post but I don’t quite follow “The St George side of the JV places limits on the degree of democracy…”

How do you make this out?

Plus I’m straying out of my lane to criticise Doust. I don’t have the requisite understanding or am familiar with all of his shortcomings. I don’t support him either. I remember the Oust Doust signs which were great.

I also remember BJ and co banning the Fail Mary signage from matches.

That was a disgrace, I will never forgive BJ for that.

That was a simple silence of dissent ..form of bullying fascism.

That Mary junta was terrible.

 

[baggygreen man]

Is obvious the BOD has had its hand forced over the Ryles debacle so are desperate to tie up a worthy head coach pronto, reason it now has Flanno back on the radar.. better an experienced coach than a chancy assistant. Apparently Flanno is on record that he holds no bad feelings over his heave ho and is willing to return.

 

[Dragon David]

The whole bloody board needs to go to spec savers cant they see the club is been destroyed. Some where in the mix there has to be a proven name person so we can attract quality players the way, Gould has at the dogs, Bennett at the Dolphins etc. All we get is players looking to pad out their retirement funds. When Sharon Woods leaves you know you are in deep

OK folks, we are now down to the next person on the pecking order list of which we have really no idea who have been on it anyway. Was Hasler one of them? Is John Morris included or Josh Hannay? Was Flanagan on it? Who have they now discarded?

No matter who they now have in mind, that who needs to be able to get the best Support staff to work with him and a deal attractive enough to make the job worthwhile because it is one hell of a big one that is for sure. There will be so many critics giving their comments on his performances which will add so much pressure. The guy has to be someone who can handle a lot of this stuff. But, to alleviate this, he needs a strong General Manager of Football to take all of these away from the coaching he is employed to do, like Gus Gould does for Ciraldo. Just let the coach coach and not worry about the press/media etc.

The other main thing is obviously getting the right players to build the future on. We just cannot afford to go in the same direction as for the past umpteen years. We need players with passion and know how to play tough football. We need tons of speed - all plays must be executed speedily it adds to the excitement and creates so many more chances of scoring and also, cutting down oppositions moves quickly - speed and strength and fitness.

I am leaning towards Flanagan and I do hope that the Doust won't deny this and will go with the decision which I think is what the majority of the Board want. Going for another rookie with such a big responsibility will be a killer. Let someone with plenty of experience and knows how to win premierships get the club heading towards top 4 finishes and then that would give the rookie coach's job in a few years a better chance to continue the success but not like the Bennett to Price changeover, no way.

 

[BLM01]

Rumour (unsubstantiated by the media of course) has it Flanagan would get the nod but Doust was the only stumbling block. And our collective unit BOD that work so well together are the only group that need a unaminous vote thinking they are the high court.
All roads keep pointing back to Des as our new coach all this time flying under the radar as he likes it.
It wont be Dean Young, there were good reasons he did not get the nod 2.5 years ago.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

Rumour (unsubstantiated by the media of course) has it Flanagan would get the nod but Doust was the only stumbling block. And our collective unit BOD that work so well together are the only group that need a unaminous vote thinking they are the high court.
All roads keep pointing back to Des as our new coach all this time flying under the radar as he likes it.
It wont be Dean Young, there were good reasons he did not get the nod 2.5 years ago.

I'd be happy with Des. If the decision is flying under the radar (possibly influenced by recent events) then so be it.

Incidentally, the High Court does not have to be unanimous. Plenty of examples of dissenting votes, but the majority rules. In the Mabo case for example, only 6 of the 7 judges upheld the claim. Why our Board has to be unanimous (if that is the case), well that's anyone's guess but could be the reason why the decision making process has led to such mediocre results.

 

[Phantom V]

Thanks @Coffs dragon, as you suggested, Webby had to be diplomatic, but I thought he was grovelling too much.

He didn’t give too much away. By his intonation and language, I suggest he’s not overly Flanno orientated. He said the club would go back to pre-Ryles candidates. Flanno is one of a few.

He’s said previously “it’s a big job”

He contradicted himself when he said the board had a good range of experiences ( ie the oldsters were ok) but also alluded to freshness needed in supporting staff for the new coach and indeed that he was a fresh himself.

He made the point that he sought leadership from the 8 members, which is right and of course they disagree and somehow wrangle out a decision.

I was dissatisfied that he kind of played this “ We are victim too” to the Ryles double cross, because that doesn’t provide any answers and it’s kind of hollow.

It’s probably true, but he should have gone on the attack about Ryles and rightfully blamed him for wasting everyone’s time and money. Stood up a bit for the club while he could. Saying that everyone should support the boys, that’s kind of victim speak and an appeal for people to feel sorry for the club etc.

This was a good chance for a bit of the DNA and Webby to be a man about it and show some pride.

I was Webb I would have said “ Ryles has lost the best coaching opportunity in the NRL”

We’ve discussed all those reasons why SGI is ideal for any coach. It’s win/win with a beautiful honeymoon period, cash and not full power, but a lot anyway. Which we agreed is not a bad thing for a coach because it can be used as an excuse by the new coach if the new coach screws up. But the whole SGI coaching show would be exhilarating for anyone who wants a go. That’s how Carr feels. He’s loving every second of it.

Pride in the jersey Webby, at all costs mate.

That’s what I’ve learned from engaging with you guys

I don't know why we bother really, since our opinions, especially mine, really don't matter and won't make any difference. However, I have been a zealous Saints supporter all my life.

I don't know anything much about the personalities on the Board, in the management, or the current candidates for Head Coach.

I've previously adopted the high moral ground regarding Flanno. I really dislike his history. However, listening to his commentary it is very evident that he is a scholar of the game and, at this juncture, his non-compliant characteristics might be what we need. Everyone seems to have agreed, for ages now, that Doust is a bit of a mongrel and a domineering type of guy, and the gossip is that he is deeply resistant to Flanno. Joining dots, this suggests to me that Flanno doesn't / hasn't yielded to Doust in the past or, at least, that they dislike each other. So, that's probably a tick for Flanno.

Watching South's attack last night it struck me how reminiscent it is to Saints in 2010. There's some brilliant players there, that's for sure, but the structures and the team 'smarts', tell me that Hornby is an excellent attack coach, who obviously really studied and understood everything Bennett taught him. I also have the distinct impression that Hornby is a really straight-up kind of guy. Looking at the detailed stats for this year, South's attack is probably the best in the comp. Compared to Deano and Ryles, as defence coaches admittedly (ie; not comparing apples and oranges), Hornby is streets ahead.

I don't know why 'club legends' take on coaching gigs with their old club. Failure as a coach destroys the legacy. Sure, success does the opposite (eg; Cleary). But, coaching failure at another club by a club legend leaves the playing legacy intact (eg; Barrett).

It's a fact that we need to pull some players too, which needs a coach with a good past 1st grade record.

All things considered I reckon a combination of Flanno and Hornby could be very strong.

On the Board and JV structure issues: (I have a professional background in corporate governance and company directorship). A 50/50 structure, both of the JV itself and also of the Board, especially made up of two private entities, simply cannot work. There are well-established governance principles almost all of which are based around independence of directors. There are also well known problems with dominant Chairpersons. Boards should not be directly involved in management. Also for JV's to be functional, especially where there is no 'managing party' (ie; one with more than a 50% interest), a management committee should be established to advise the boards of the two parties - not the board itself - that is a recipe for disaster - especially for indecision. Simply forming a 50/50 board to directly manage the JV is doomed to failure because it will only serve to institutionalise a division between the parties.

The core structure of StGI is completely wrong in all of these areas. The first thing needed is a revised constitution that provides for an independent Chair. This is the appointment that should be unanimous (not the Head Coach). The Chair should have a casting vote when a majority can't be arrived at for any particular decision. Directorships, including the Chair, should have limited terms (not set for life), and a management committee for the JV should be established to report to the Board. The Board should be focused on strategic and policy matters, not 'product', management and recruitment decisions (for example).

(Pigs might fly. I am developing a product called 'pig lipstick', which is needed by most boards).

Great post Mojo. I agree with a Flannigan, Hornby alliance, as Flannigan is big on defence and Hornby was in our system when we won the comp.

 

[Dragonsteve2]

Awesome post but I don’t quite follow “The St George side of the JV places limits on the degree of democracy…”

How do you make this out?

Plus I’m straying out of my lane to criticise Doust. I don’t have the requisite understanding or am familiar with all of his shortcomings. I don’t support him either. I remember the Oust Doust signs which were great.

I also remember BJ and co banning the Fail Mary signage from matches.

That was a disgrace, I will never forgive BJ for that.

That was a simple silence of dissent ..form of bullying fascism.

That Mary junta was terrible.

Silverdale P, it's the 3 year membership before you can vote. Plus here's an example of St. George democracy at work, or not. A friend of mine heard of a vacancy and a call for candidates to nominate. He put up his hand and fulfilled the requirements. He was then contacted prior to the election and told he was only one of 2 candidates - the other was Craig Young who would be the unbackable favourite to win. He was asked to withdraw his candidacy on the basis of electing Craig Young unopposed would save the club the costs entailed in the electoral process. My friend withdrew his candidacy!

 

[Illusion]

Its a circus.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/dragons-boss-ryan-webb-confirms-st-george-illawarra-is-eyeing-shane-flanagan-for-vacant-coaching-role/news-story/3a25e3cc2973d8b8a27f4c748e5bb8bc&ved=2ahUKEwiNsMeS1Kj_AhW8plYBHTDvCHIQ0PADKAB6BAgNEAE&usg=AOvVaw3BLobP5k4LWgJHpx5KNBvZ

 

[Desperate Dragon]

If the club really want to alleviate the heat on us at present, for me it comes down to either Flanagan or Hasler.
The club is in desperate need of an experienced Nrl coach who can help rebuild the joint from the bottom up.
Then we put a Head of Football and Recruitment Manager straight into place to support him.
I still have some hope that Nathan Brown is included in the conversation to return in one of the senior roles, either in the Pathways or Recruitment space.

 

[Mojo]

Rumour (unsubstantiated by the media of course) has it Flanagan would get the nod but Doust was the only stumbling block. And our collective unit BOD that work so well together are the only group that need a unaminous vote thinking they are the high court.
All roads keep pointing back to Des as our new coach all this time flying under the radar as he likes it.
It wont be Dean Young, there were good reasons he did not get the nod 2.5 years ago.

Even the High Court doesn’t require unanimity.

 

[Mojo]

Silverdale P, it's the 3 year membership before you can vote. Plus here's an example of St. George democracy at work, or not. A friend of mine heard of a vacancy and a call for candidates to nominate. He put up his hand and fulfilled the requirements. He was then contacted prior to the election and told he was only one of 2 candidates - the other was Craig Young who would be the unbackable favourite to win. He was asked to withdraw his candidacy on the basis of electing Craig Young unopposed would save the club the costs entailed in the electoral process. My friend withdrew his candidacy!

Fair dinkum! Well, that’s seriously unethical. Who made contact with your friend? Was it a director?

 

[Ghostrider22]

Thanks Hewi & just hope they have some luck softening the view of the immovable Doust.
The club is in a self inflicted hole and the “sharks” are circling.
It’s got to be Flanagan, Hannay or John Morris in that order, having all come from the Sharks with experience in the frenzy of the NRL.
It’s no place now for a Rookie ex club favourite to be spat out.
Get it done BOD!

Coffs why not all 3, Shane, John and Josh are good coaches in their own right, they would a great choice to lead the Dragons out of this shit show. By the way it’s about time the weak arse board stood up to Doust.