Charles Perkins academy going to fit temporarily at Fairfield Showgrounds?

It seems that the project is not going ahead at the moment.

I know, it's a piss take.

Bit harsh Frank. The A league was started to develop local talent. The NT have qualified for every Wcup since 2006. Won the ACup in 2015. Quality players such as Maty Ryan, Mooy, Rogic, Sainsbury, Milligan (despite criticism he played damn well at Wcup 2018!) , Rhyan Grant, Mabil, Risdon, Arzani, Leckie etc etc - they all developed via the A league. Most of NT success has involved Tim Cahill scoring amazing goals- freakish player- hard to replace obviously. Saying the ‘NT now resembles nothing’ is out of order. 

Agree with you. Farina phrased it badly. If he is just trying to say let’s have less methodology and  more diversity in coaching styles and tactics, then I agree with him. 

I agree with Farina 

The problem with coaches who didn't play at a high level is how do you know as people they understand excellence? In the cut throat world of high performance people need to be able to prove they are winners.

Understanding excellence has nothing to do with obtaining qualifications. It has everything to do with how to react to tough situations, how to react on game day and all those fuzzy things in between that make someone successful over a long period of time.

In that case the likes of Klopp, Mourinho, Sarri, Nagelsman would never get a chance then....

They worked there way up to where they got to now through an open system.

If they tried coming through here they would get nowhere due to that perception, here its a closed system and still has a 'jobs for mates' mentality which has shifted coaches coming through alot like players.

The likes of Cklamovski and Papas had to go overseas for opportunities, what does it say about the mentality in Australian football with regards to coaches if they are not former players for the Roos or overseas?

Not every great player is a great coach, coaching requries a different skill set alot like teaching and that has nothing to do with what reputation you have as a player but more as a person and as a communicator.

Poor take by Farina.

The ironic part of this is the young talent coming from the 2000s and up have all benefited from the programs implemented from the FFA and state feds that included the NC aka 'dutch 433' and SAP programs a decade ago are now some of the best young talent coming through in the aleague perhaps ever since its inception.

Technically they are more advanced in all the things they do and unlike of the current senior players struffing around who still struggle to the do the basics at times.

Agree.

Frank was criticised by his FFA coach educators,  because he was reluctant to take on board new ideas.  

There are exceptions to the rules. Plus I would say that many of those guys did show excellence early and rose to high levels. It subjective I know but Someone like Klopp maybe have had crap natural ability but his drive to succeed actually made him get to a higher level (playing) than would normally be the case (for someone with the same ability). SO this helped make him a great coach.

So what you cannot say is that the best players are the best coaches....it just doesn't work that way. And as you also say it doesn't mean all good players make good coaches or that some crap players won't make good coaches. 

What you can say though is that you need to be able to predict if someone will be successful and the best way is to look at someones history. Do they have a history of success? Again this doesn't necessarily need to be as a player. If they don't then you are shooting into thin air...

The big problem with former players is that there is  a massive differential in their ability to communicate with players and impart the knowledge they have.

There are also a massive number of former  players around, who  find contemporaneous coaching methodology too cerebral and complex to devise sophisticated and sequential training ground practices, based on comprehensive  analysis of previous games.

The  likes of Popovic, Arnold, Muscat, Ange, the Aloisis, Veart, Okon, Corica, Rudan, Talay, are  former pro players with good communication skills. Moreover, they have the cerebral qualities to devise quality training ground practices.

These guys are conversant with and have adapted to, the new European powerhouse style of coaching methodology in Aus. It is no coincidence Aus coaches are attaining overseas coaching roles, because they are now well educated.

Ideally in a head coach / assistant coach scenario, one needs to be a good communicator, whilst it is handy for the other to have played at a high level to have insights in reaching pro standards.

I'm not sure Arsene Wenger, Arriga Sacchi, Gerard Houllier, Andre Boas-Villa, Jose Mourinho, also Holger Osieck have been top level former players?

Wenger struggled at the top pro level on the pitch.

It hasn't impeded their ability to coach top level football teams.

In Australia, Arthur Papas, who must be on the cusp of an A League gig, was also coaching at a young age when most players were still playing. He has a sports medicine tertiary qualification.

I think reaching that level is a success...

And Papas showed (possibly) by studying sports medicine that he is successful in other areas

None of them played provisional league for Monbulk

I Agree with this....it needs to be a combination

Agree. I’m totally amazed that anyone other than a jockey or a horse could train a Melbourne Cup winner!!

I'd want an experienced jockey to train my apprentice jockeys

I agree with this. Some brilliant footballers make brilliant coaches. Some brilliant footballers make lousy coaches. Some terrible (or non-) footballers make lousy coaches. Some terrible (or non-) footballers make brilliant coaches.

The system, the football authorities and the football community should be open-minded and meritocratic. They should be mindful not to make assumptions. Assumptions hold back Australian football as much, if not more, than than anything.

While this criticism of Frank Farina may be valid, I do get the distinct impression that the same criticism could easily be made of many coaches within the FFA.

I don’t think playing at the highest level is a necessity to be a great manager. There are just as many examples of those who were great players that have failed, than average players that have thrived in coaching.

Ultimately, some players seem to have a very one dimensional view of what made them successful and only want to focus on that. Things evolve, with tactics and training regimes all going through many changes over time, so anyone that thinks that what they did in the 90’s to be successful works today may be very surprised when that doesn’t translate.

Frank is entitled to his opinion though. Whether most agree or disagree makes for interesting reading :)

The hope is that they do have the combination of attributes necessary to succeed at the top level (talent, technique, temperament and, for certain roles, speed/agility).

The issue, which you've highlighted, is that many senior Australian footballers today have been far worse in all those departments (talent, technique, temperament, speedy/agility) than the Golden Generation. As a result, our footballers have struggled massively in Europe in the long-term and our NT has been utterly without competent strikers and wingers.

Many of these footballers are products of the NC. However, they they haven't learnt their craft entirely from the NC (the NC was adopted by the FFA when they were a bit older, as I understand it).

The problem you have is that trying to work out of a coach is any good is way more subjective than working out if a player is any good. 

If you look at results - maybe its because the coach had good players, maybe the leadership group on the pitch is great...

So how then do you work out of. coach is any good? Very very difficult....and very risky

If you have a an excellent player (so an obvious history of being good at something) then combine that with being a good thinker and communicator then you have a far less risky proposition

And who are we kidding - if were were to look at the statistics - lets say there are 1,000 professional full time football coaches in the world - you would make an educated guess that 80-90 percent of them played at a very high level...

And then there are the outliers....

And no doubt an experienced horse to train his horse?

You came up with the lame comparison (lame - get it...)

No,  you get the farrier to train the horse.  It would be a shoe-in to win then.

“You don't have to have been a horse to be a jockey.”
-- Arrigo Sacchi

Sacchi is regarded as one of the greatest managers of all-time^[1] and his Milan side (1987–1991) is widely regarded to be one of the greatest club sides to ever play the game, and by some to be the greatest of all-time.^[2][3][4]Sacchi was never a professional football player and for many years worked as a shoe salesman

Wonder if Al Bundy would’ve made a great coach too

To follow on with the point you are making, for those who think playing isnt important, who would the following side go in the A League?
GK: Kalac (Goalkeeping Coach)
DF: Popovic
DF: Rudan
DF: Postecoglou
DF: Muscat
MF Kewell
MF Milicic
MF Farina
MF Arnold
CF Fowler
CF Corica
Res
Moon - A league Player
Stajci - Youth International
Aloisi 
I am pretty sure that such a side would go okay in the A League.  This tends to suggest that playing ability is pretty important still.  Maybe someone should tell those in charge to start picking the shoe salesmen?
Its interestig that the defenders seem to be the Most successful of the positions.

Thanks for that 

I can see why defenders might make better coaches. Its about temperament. Creative types in the front third are necessarily temperamental. They need to be dynamic and aggressive.

Those in the back third are probably more consistent types who are calmer.

Good on him. I really think there are exceptions - and sometimes the exceptions are exceptional because of the barriers they needed to jump over.