Nick Bendel
Meet the new Lion King
September 3rd 2008 12:30
With the Tri Nations delicately poised, and with the Bledisloe Cup on the line, the Australian Rugby Union decides to take a gamble, dumping Robbie Deans and replacing him with Tim Horan for the upcoming test match against New Zealand.
Absurd though this hypothetical scenario is, it is worth considering why it is so absurd. Yes, it would be illogical to rush in a new coach on the eve of such a crucial match. But the greater illogic would lie in awarding- at any time- such an important post to a rookie, whose only merits would be that he was once a star and that he currently works as a commentator. Everybody knows that experienced players generally perform better in big games than inexperienced players. Well, the same applies for coaches. When the Wallabies take to the field for their most important challenge since last year’s World Cup quarter final, their supporters can be content in the knowledge that they are being guided not by a famous novice, but by a wizened tactician, who has spent many years learning, honing and practicing his craft. That counts for something.
Brisbane Lions fans: imagine, if you will, the following scenario.
With your club missing out on the finals for the fourth consecutive year, and with your list featuring a number of impressive youngsters who seem to have the ability to lead you forward, management decides to take a gamble, replacing your vastly experienced coach with a television commentator.
It may seem harsh to describe Michael Voss as a commentator, but that is what he is. He is no longer a player. And, notwithstanding a brief stint as the boss of the AIS’s under-17 team, he has never been a coach. He is simply a commentator. When reduced to such terms, it seems extraordinary that the Lions should have been in such a rush to hire him. Was Bruce McAvaney unavailable?
Sport: The Australian Disease made similar comments several months ago, when it appeared likely that Voss would agree terms with the Gold Coast franchise. Yet despite criticising the “irrationality” of his mooted appointment, Gold Coast’s behaviour was far more rational than is Brisbane’s. The new organisation offered him a three year deal: for the first two, he would have been coaching his team in the state league, before drawing on that experience when taking charge of the Coast’s inaugural AFL season in 2011. Brisbane, however, sees no merit even in such a limited apprenticeship; instead, the board is bestowing its most important position on somebody without the qualifications and experience to fill it.
Unlikely though it sounds, chairman Tony Kelly insisted that the entire board was “fine” with the appointment of a “novice coach”. True, Kelly acknowledged, Voss “hasn’t coached at the AFL senior level,” but then again, “everyone has to start somewhere.” While the new man “may make mistakes,” he and the others were determined to “back him all the way.” And thus the board handed Voss the keys to its Ferrari, simply requesting that he learn how to drive whilst speeding down the highway.
Given such irresponsibility, it seems appropriate to subject the board to some scrutiny. One might assume that it was filled by diehard fans or oft-concussed ex-players, who were so keen on the idea of their beloved Vossy returning to the club that they naively allowed his aura to affect their judgement. A quick examination of the Brisbane website, however, shows otherwise. Tony Kelly, the chairman, is also deputy chairman of the Brisbane Markets and a director of the Gladstone Ports Corporation. Angus Johnson, his deputy, serves as a managing director for Citimark Properties. As for the directors, Linda Nash is a senior member of the Queensland Treasury Corporation’s Major Projects Team, David Liddy is chief executive of the Bank of Queensland, and Paul Williams is a consultant who recently served as the CEO of Eastern Corporation. The final director, Laurie Serafini, is the only one of them to have played the game at the top level- yet even he holds a senior corporate position, acting as the head of sport: sales and marketing for the Slade Group.
How could such clever people have made such a manifestly illogical decision? The only explanation is that they, too, must have fallen under a spell- of Vossy in particular, and footy in general. If Liddy was looking to fill an upper-level vacancy at BQ, it is inconceivable that he would consider candidates who lacked a relevant degree and banking experience. That, after all, would be illogical. Yet in sport, different rules are allowed to apply. Business, with its sales volumes and balance sheets, must be rooted in logic, otherwise jobs are lost and companies ruined. However, sport, with its heroic competitors and screaming fans, is driven by emotion.
If Kelly et al owe their positions on Brisbane’s board to their corporate experience, then surely it is incumbent on them to apply the lessons they have learned in the corporate world when managing the club’s affairs? They could never have risen so high unless they possessed considerable intelligence and strong analytical skills. These intellectual gifts should have been exercised when it came time to selecting Leigh Matthews’s successor. For any old fool can make decisions based on passion- few, though, are as well placed as them to make decisions based on reason.
And that is the crux of the matter. Voss has become the new Lions coach not because he is qualified or experienced or the most accomplished, but simply because it warms the hearts of a few influential people. He is nothing more than a commentator with an aura. Granted, Michael Voss was a champion player. But as for Michael Voss the coach, it doesn’t take a Bruce McAvaney to realise that he’s nothing special.
| 70 |
| Vote |
Comment by Buckman
I have to say I disagree. There are plenty of examples of former players being rushed into coaching positions before they've gathered sufficient experience, and they've often done well. Sometimes they've even made players coaches before they've stopped playing.
The only fair judge of Michael Voss' appointment will be time.
Buckman
Comment by Nick Bendel
Sport: The Australian Disease
I must also disagree with you, or at least part of your comment.
Yes, there are examples of inexperienced ex-players succeeding, but that is not the point. The point is that somebody with qualifications and experience is more likely to succeed than somebody without. Nothing is certain in life- just as an experienced coach is not guaranteed to succeed, an inexperienced coach is not guaranteed to fail- but some things are more likely to occur than others. And one of those things is that an experienced coach is more likely to succeed than an inexperienced one.
To draw an analogy: if you went to hospital for an operation, would you prefer to be operated on by an unqualified and inexperienced surgeon, or a qualified and experienced surgeon? If you flew overseas, would you prefer the plane to be flown by an unqualified and inexperienced pilot, or a qualified and experienced pilot?
While I agree that the only fair judge of Voss's appointment will be time, the odds suggest that he is more likely to fail than succeed.
Nick
Comment by Buck
Most people do not learn their jobs from what they study, they learn it by seeing it being done by others. And there is no better way to see coaches at work than to be involved in a football team, especially as a player. Let us not forget that Leigh Matthews himself, the man Voss replaces, was a successful player. And he would have learnt more about coaching as a player than by studying it or reading books.
Yes, this is a riskier proposition than putting in a coach who has years of experience. But sport is often about taking risks. And a resume that reads ten years of work with one of the most successful coaches of the modern age, plus an out and out passion for the club he is to lead, is not one light on merit.
Comment by Nick Bendel
Sport: The Australian Disease
It is true that football does not involve life and death, unlike the analogies I raised (surgery and a plane flight). However, those analogies are still valid, because they get to the heart of the matter- namely, that those who are experienced generally do better than those who are inexperienced. Even though failure in sport carries different consequences from failure in those analogies I raised, what is identical in both instances is that those who are experienced generally do better than those who are inexperienced.
Although you acknowledge that appointing Voss is a “riskier proposition” than appointing an experienced coach, you then seem to contradict your admission by talking up Voss’s alleged qualifications. Yes, Voss spent many years observing Leigh Matthews- but there is no shortage of ex-players who have spent time around successful coaches and gained coaching experience (such as John Longmire).
I would also dispute your assertion that Voss’s “passion” is significant. Firstly, passion is the antithesis of reason, and we should be encouraging our coaches (just like our surgeons and pilots) to be as educated and rational as possible. Secondly, do you think that the coaches he will be up against- and all those prospective coaches who might have taken on the Brisbane job- are devoid of passion? If Voss turns out to be a success, it won’t be because he screams at his players and shows them reruns of Braveheart (like Tommy Raudonikis), but because he knows how to read a game, devise strategies, plan training, manage men, and innumerable other things involving the brain. Coaches succeed because they are smart, not because they are passionate. And the best way to boost one’s intellect is to acquire qualifications and experience.
Thus, I must return to my original point. Voss may very well succeed, but he is more likely to fail, and he is more likely than many of his peers to fail. And thus he should never have been appointed.