New Signing wrote:New Signing wrote:Decentric wrote:New Signing wrote:While ive enjoyed your opinions on this matter dencentric and your knowledge of some of these blokes is quite impressive i still find myself wondering what happened with you.
Its not that long ago that you wouldnt hear a word against the FFA and NC now im seeing you a times questioning the direction of the FFA etc.
Care to elaborate? I am very supportive of most of the coaching methodology of the FFA NC. I find it bizarre about the 'heading' issue though. There are however, many paradoxes and contradictions within the FFA organisation operationally. I think I'm going to send a number of these concerns that I have to Han Berger. I'm assuming he won't respond. If he doesn't after a reasonable period of time, I'll post the concerns on here, which will answer your question. It is only fair for FFA to be given a chance to respond. I think a few people who should be more diligent and responsible, are given far too much autonomy within the FFA organisation. They are not accountable enough to anyone for their actions. I'd like to think they would be formally rebuked, demoted or sacked in the profession I've worked in for most of my life. I'm also trying to impartially compare it to the departments in my profession, to evaluate whether FFA's issues/problems are applicable to any bureaucracy. FFA needs to be an effective operational organisation to induce support from its constituents. I look forward to hearing your concerns @Decentric Off forum there are two excellent concepts being put into practice by FFA at state level. 1. A more proactive role in migrant football. 2. A proactive role in schools by FFA. Some younger up and coming coaches are doing some good work. They are circumventing the older, anachronistic, recalcitrants' unwillingness to accept change for the betterment of football. No organisation is perfect. I'm reluctant to voice a few 'issues' in a public sphere. Most things are being addressed by FFA. Football is on the up.=d>
|