Because there’s more context to an application than a singular data point, especially in such a small industry.
Chris Scott had been an assistant for just three years when he got the job at Geelong, when Fremantle finished 14th, 14th and 6th. It was a far weaker resume than most candidates you’d expect to consider, but he had great references and then presented well.
Hird also has great references, is well known to our President, and has been a senior coach before with a respectable record before the saga derailed things.
It doesn’t mean he should get the job, but he’s clearly worthy of consideration.
He sold some chocolates? He ran a sports consultancy ? Dabbled in stockbroking? Two days a week for the last year and a bit at Port Melbourne (13th, VFL)? Civil engineering degree?
None of this says “yep, this guy should be an AFL coach”.
It all relies on him having been a fantastic player and captain 2 decades ago.
choosing Hirdy might be the simplest or easiest cop out approach for them to take.
because if they say thanks no thanks to Jim, it’s puts anyone else under huge scrutiny.
you put a poll out of 5 options and Hird will get the most votes everytime.
popularity contest and Hird wins it every time. We probably have to go through having him and having him fail unless Hird himself says look I’m not as good as some of the other options available.
Looks like you deliberately omitted the bit where Hirdy actually coached an AFL team for nearly 4 years, which says "yep, this guy can coach in the AFL”.
We’ve had supporters of other clubs on the board before, doubt it’s any different now. All 9 currently sitting were appointed, albeit some have subsequently moved to “elected” seats (some have even faced election).
Vacancies for AFL coaches don’t come around every day. If you are really keen and think you can do the job surely you apply for every position going, even if the club is a disaster zone.
