Fair enough, Guy, but my take on things is that Bond has a far too conservative and defensive attitude to the way the club approaches all aspects of the game. We take tribunal decisions without saying anything, we accept umpiring displays like we copped in the derby (and we get far more of that treatment than any other club in the comp, despite what some here think), the footy manager could take some heat off by questioning these things. And I am sure Bond has influence on game day tactics.
As for recruiting, I do think that in the last couple or 3 years we have gone back to recruiting footy players, from about 2008 or so on we went for athletes, basketballers and the like without considering their footy intelligence, and it hurt us for the last 3 or 4 seasons. That is why the young players drafted in the last 2 drafts have come straight into the side. They have the instinctive ability to play footy, no matter what age or number of pre-seasons . Now if Bond is in charge of recruiting he is culpable for that period which was not successful.
As for Neesham, the club at the moment does not seem to have the wise footy heart that could have redirected some of our attempts to go down the wrong road. Can you suggest anyone else with the acumen that we could put in as the "wise old man" of the club?
