Big Dan calls it a day

[lynchbhoy]

I won't take this thread off topic for any longer but if that is what managers do then I think they are doing their job poorly. A manager never explained to me why I wasn't on a team or taken off and in truth, I rarely asked. Now that my playing days are coming to an end I regret not talking managers more about my position on the team. And now that I'm coaching and managing myself I make sure to try and tell lads what i'm thinking and encourage them to contact me if they want to. I think Davey was right to leave Dan on the bench, in fairness I think his reputation is based around one or two years and he wasn't a top IC player outside of those 'freak' years but I think you can let a player know why he isn't starting without annoying him.

Zulu - dont agree. no big deal.

Indy, I'd agree that Dan was a superb player, but imo he didnt fit into the style of hurling waterford were trying to play.

[Croí na hÉireann]

I won't take this thread off topic for any longer but if that is what managers do then I think they are doing their job poorly. A manager never explained to me why I wasn't on a team or taken off and in truth, I rarely asked. Now that my playing days are coming to an end I regret not talking managers more about my position on the team. And now that I'm coaching and managing myself I make sure to try and tell lads what i'm thinking and encourage them to contact me if they want to. I think Davey was right to leave Dan on the bench, in fairness I think his reputation is based around one or two years and he wasn't a top IC player outside of those 'freak' years but I think you can let a player know why he isn't starting without annoying him.

Don't agree. Dan was a very good player and in a waterford context - one of their best. Fitzgerald man management just isn't at the races. For me- an average coach with great man management will always be more successful then a top class coach with suspect man-management. Mick O Dwyer is a shining example of this.

Colm Parkinson wouldn't agree with that... 

[dowling]

that kind of statement drives me up the wall.
paddy bradley said something similar as his reason for leaving the Derry football panel.

Managers do not have to give players reasons.

I disagree with that LB. I think they should give players a reason, especially those that were recently on the team or who are regularly used as subs. A manager should explain to a player why he isn't making the team and what he needs to do to give himself a better chance of making it. The manager should also use the opportunity to get feedback from the player as to his own thoughts. Maybe you aren't playing him in his prefered position or that he doesn't quite understand the role you expect from him in the role he is being played. Everyone on an IC team is an adult and communication should be a cornerstone of the manager/player relationship, that's not to say players shouldn't ask a manager what the story is, it is a two way street.

Zulu you can only take things so far and some things don't need communicated. On top of that there's some players who don't accept reasons for not playing, whether they're past it, not able to play in the way a team needs or were on the piss the night before, even if you took them home and made them tea while explaining. Some boys think they have a god given right to start on a team irrespective of what anyone else thinks. While it would be unfair to expect Dan to win every ball that came his way and threaten a goal every time I think we all know he didn't carry the threat from previous years so why didn't Dan know that. Did he really need Davy to tell him that? Adults shouldn't need to be told everything.

[Zulu]

Players always think they should be on the team, if they didn't I wouldn't want them on the panel (at IC level anyway). And it doesn't matter if they accept the reasons given or not, at least they know what you're thinking and what they need to do to make the team. That's not to say you have to tell every player everything but you should communicate with your players and try to work with them to become better players. For example, if I wasn't picking a certain player because he didn't work hard enough or he didn't bring enough of a scoring threat I explained that to him he might go away and work on that aspect of his game. If I didn't explain the reason he wasn't making the team he might know why himself and therefore never even attempt to correct his weakness. On the other hand he might be thinking to himself that I don't know what I'm talking about but at least I did him the courtesy of letting him know my thoughts. What he does afterwards is his business.

By the way, I agree that Dan's position was as an impact sub (if even that) but he deserved an explanation at least.

[dowling]

Zulu I had a debate with Reillers on another thread about whether or not all players know when they're past their best. Some do some don't. Communication is obviously a problem for some players and a little advice on what to work on doesn't go amiss for many. At IC level though? Other than explaining what is needed 'teamwise' it shouldn't be an issue.
I don't for one minute believe - especially in view of the history with Justin - that Dan didn't know that Davy didn't think he was good enough to be on the starting fifteen. He's not really in a position now to influence a change of manager but there's no doubt he's having a go for the sake of a bit of mischief.