Why Knights Failed - by Robert Shaw

[BenDoolan]

Article by Robert Shaw in Inside Football. Easily the best article I've read about the topic, and I find it difficult to disagree with any of it.

Why Knights Failed

THE Essendon Board has been very proactive in initiating a swift and emphatic dismissal of coach Matthew Knights.

As a life member and reserved seat purchaser, I view all Essendon games I can possibly get to given my media commitments.

I have found the past three years exceptionally difficult, balancing the emotions of being privileged to be an Essendon person and attempting to provide objective analysis from the press box.

Essendon's past three years has seen the club spiral to equal 15th on the AFL ladder and with a game plan that lacks fibre.
The greatest consistency has been the inconsistency, not to mention the lack of physicality and poor defensive organisation.

Matthew Knights needed to acknowledge this and provide an alternative game plan that may not have won week by week but at least sent the members home knowing that their team was prepared to tough it out.
His game-day coaching was picked apart by all other coaches.
As Essendon under Knights has gone about its business, Melbourne and Richmond have flown by in terms of organisation, player development, fitness and tactical acumen.

As a coach myself, I feel for Knights the person, family man and father.
He joins a long list of senior coaches, including me, who have gone through the same thing. He is not Robinson Crusoe.
I cannot have the same sympathy for him as coach and leader of Essendon, though.
Criticism goes with the job, particularly when you’re at the helm of a great club and Knights should consider it the highlight of his football career that he was chosen to have his name on the same honour board as Reynolds, Hutchison, Clarke, Coleman and Sheedy.

Knights came from a coaching background of limited success. A very short stay at Port Adelaide, an unsuccessful tenure at Bendigo, and then landing the biggest job at an AFL superpower.
There is no doubt he did his best.

No doubt he acted with strength in front of the cameras, but what came through was his limited experience in what it takes to build a premiership and, in particular, lead as the senior coach.
The role of senior coach through Essendon’s long history has been filled by men who can lead and unify all sections of the club.
Essendon now is not unified.

To me the decision to sack Knights had very little to do with the dynamics of coaching and what took place on the field.
Knights had a certain system that he tried to implement. He was emphatic about the presentation of this game plan, but apart from fleeting glimpses of brilliance it lacked starch.

It was unsuccessful and unsustainable because it failed to take into account the premiership benchmarks of tough defence and tactical sophistication.
Essendon is one of the most famous institutions in Australian sport. This generation under Knights has lost the generational focus. They don’t know or understand what and who they are playing for.

Chairman David Evans made what to me was the most profound and interesting comment in his press conference.
“It was made as a totality of review across the whole club,” he said.
Totality is the key word here. To me, that implies direction and leadership and, importantly, the coach’s role in unification, stability and confidence.
People such as James Hird, Matthew Lloyd, Scott Lucas (and even insignificant me) have being heard to be critical.

I must support those three strongly. They have grown up with and been champions of Essendon, on and off the field.
They gave about 45 years combined service to the club and the performances of the past three years have ripped their hearts out.
As youngsters they were mentored by the likes of Harvey, Wallis, Long and Thompson. One thing they were constantly taught is what it means to be a Bomber.
We all took responsibility for seeing that the values and traditions of this great club were passed on.

When I arrived as a 17-year-old from Tasmania I was “lectured” by the likes of Don McKenzie, Alec Epis, Ted Fordham and Charlie Payne. Ken Fraser was my reserves coach.
All these men played in great sides and had a link to the likes of Coleman and Reynolds.
In my time as an assistant I never forgot those messages, which were in fact the Essendon story.
I think Essendon fears that it has eroded under the Knights regime.
Knights was a totally different package to Sheedy and there is logic in that approach.

Instinctively Knights wanted to be everything Sheedy wasn’t.
A need to assert himself saw what looked like a deliberate attempt to marginalise the traditional heartland and create a club in his own image.
But Knights made a strategic error in alienating many people who over many years not only shared success but also took enormous pride in playing their role in handing on the Essendon baton.
Knights should’ve embraced these honourable traditions by adding this critical component to his coaching kit bag.

I’m pretty sure that Matthew Knights failed not because of his work rate nor a dodgy game plan, nor poor selection policies, but because he just didn’t get it.
He just never understood Essendon. He never led the club.
I think that’s what David Evans may have meant.
Ironically the man who has created such a topic of discussion in comparison with Knights, Damien Hardwick, has brought much needed direction and leadership to Richmond.

Essendon is about people, families and generations of support. It has 16 premierships.
It has enormous pride and a great culture, because it has ALWAYS shown great respect for its origins.
In a museum at Manchester United’s ground at Old Trafford is a special place commemorating the 1958 air disaster.
The theme is “Manchester United will rise again.” It has, because of its people.
Essendon will rise again too.

But the next person privileged to coach this great club had better clearly understand and embrace its people, heritage and its pride.
Anyone can teach a zone or a clearance. But not just anyone should coach Essendon.

– ROBERT SHAW

[auditor]

It's good article Ben. Choco comes from a very simular background. If we base the criteria of electing a new coach on Shaw’s writings then Williams does fit the culture mentioned by Shaw in his article.

[Windy_Hill]

Standing f****** Ovation

Robert Shaw - Thank you for articulating what I am sure most of us have been thinking.

Knights - he just didnt get it

[Jazz_84]

fantastic article and by god i hope many at Essendon have read it!!!!

[BenDoolan]

fantastic article and by god i hope many at Essendon have read it!!!!

I personally think Robert Shaw titled it "Dear Mr Evans". He is either looking to get a job back at the club or he is taking this situation to heart and wants the club to get the Essendon "values" and "traditions" back in the bloodstream.

Whatever Shaw's intent, he certainly hits a few nails on the head!

And taking all the things mentioned in the article into consideration, it makes the decision to not appoint Damien Hardwick 3 years ago all the more bizarre. Peter Jackson has a lot to answer for.

[Sismis]

[billyduckworth]

Excellent aricle. Although he failed at two attempts as a senior coach, Shaw is an astute student of the game and made a very good assistant to Sheedy. Maybe we should try to get him back in some capacity or another?

[pevfan]

Excellent analysis by Shaw who I have always rated very highly for ... just that; his analysis of the game and well just his overall presentation. I always looked forward to his regular post game comments on Bomber radio back in the days when he was assistant coach under Sheeds.

Personally I don't blame Knights, I blame the people that appointed him.... Really, when you look objectively at his credentials, he had very little to recommend him in the first place. He must have come across very well at the interview stage. Maybe they thought that the Richmond background may have counted for something as it had with Sheeds but of course the big difference was that Sheeds came from an entirely different Richmond culture that did Knights. Sheeds played under a winning culture. Richmond won flags while he was there. Whereas Knights came from a culture of ...well we all know what's happened to Richmond over the years and those were the years that Knights was there.

As for who should take over IMO Williams would be ok but the bloke I have always hankered for and still do is Lethal. I still reckon he's got what it takes. He was always able to outcoach Sheeds even during Sheeds and the club's halcyon years both at Collingwood as well as Brisbane. I've always admired his pragmaticism and excellent analytical approach and listening to his commentary each week it's clear that he's not lost anything....Anyway that's my two bobs worth...cant really see it happening but Gees we could do a lot worse.

[ace076]

Brings a tear to my eye!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you Robert Shaw!

[Rover 7]

Yes excellent article and all too true but Robert was obviously restricted by the editor as he could have written at least double that.
Pity he wasn't on the original interview panel.

[lozza89]

He just never understood Essendon. He never led the club.

This is the thing that stood out most in this article!

[Windy_Hill]

Any word from Knights yet??? Or is he saving it for his tell all book? Surely its time to emerge from hiding and just put on a brave face

Dont blame the guy for being pissed but gee, he got his money. He cant complain when he looks at the damage he wreaked upon the club.