There is no substitute for skill at the Olympics, looks like Joyce picked a team on supposed chemistry when he should have went with skill/experience & managed it.
Lemanis on the other hand had 15 players with the skill sets/experience to play for the Boomers....from them he picked the best TEAM.

We've seen him do this at NBL level where he shoehorned his useless son into everything. The guy gets a minor crush on a player and he forces them into situations they aren't good enough for.

Sadly for him, he will have a hard time getting a decent gig after the Opals mess.

Jan Sterling died in 2004 and I don't think she ever played basketball.

Jan Stirling wasn't appointed General Manager High Performance until November last year, bit late to replace Choco then, even if she could, which she can't.

Gotta love anons. ;)

Onya, Boti. That's the one I've been waiting for.

Boti's opals "B" team

HC Tom Maher
Brondello
Lucas
Timms

seems a clear step up from
HC Joyce
Cotter
Chizik
Butler

Players

Natalie Hurst
Kelly Wilson
Tess Madgen
Jenna O'Hea
Rebecca Allen
Bec Cole
Abby Bishop
Kelsey Griffin
Alice Kunek
Louella Tomlinson
Elyse Penaluna
Suzy Batkovic


Reserves
Belinda Snell
Sara Blicavs

I'm not sure BA interfering with player selections is quite the solution, though. That just seems like it would create more potential problems.

There was the story of the English rower Ben Hunt-Davis who won Olympic Gold at the Sydney Olympics.

When the team lost in Atlanta they committed to going again. The GB Men's Rowing Eight decided to fundamentally change the way they worked and how they worked with each other. Their focus became purely about performance, and their ethos which drove their every decision was "Will It Make The Boat Go Faster" and every decision they made came back to that question.

I think Brendan Joyce had a similar ethos, and that was "Will This Make Me Look Good". It started with essentially cleaning out almost every player from the team in London. They weren't "his" players so he wasn't going to get as much credit for their performance. There was only downside if they didn't perform. He hand't "discovered" any of those players, so they weren't going to go off and do better things after the exposure he gave them.

There was the Burton infatuation which brought back memories of Daniel Joyce and the Gold Coast days. She tested well athletically... It could be compared to if Lemanis took Lucas Walker (also gifted athletically) to London and started him every game.

With some of the arrogance displayed above and in Boti's piece. It should come as no surprise that learning essentially stopped somewhere along the way. Nothing was learnt from the Euro tour where the results weren't great or from the pool games where even though the result was 5-0, it was clear that some improvements/changes were needed once the competition got tougher.

RIP BJ

"I'm not sure BA interfering with player selections is quite the solution, though. That just seems like it would create more potential problems."

Exactly. Hire the right person (e.g. Maher, Seebohm) and there shouldn't be a need to intervene.

Strungout, Lucas Walker at least puts up some stats! From what everyone has been saying, Burton is akin to picking Matt Hodgson for the Boomers.

The criteria of a full time coach living in Canberra is also a flawed requirement, Unless BA wants all the players to move also, there seems no clear benefit to the Opals program.

Everyone's focusing on the Burton selection and bringing up Batkovic's omission and treatment which is fair enough.

But clearly Joyce wanted 'mobility' and 'athleticism' at the 4. While Burton was totally outmatched at this level and lacked the credentials to be selected in the first place, it exposed the lack of depth Australia has at this position. Other PF options tended to be either much more offensively-skilled but a little slow, or undersized.

The Batkovic over Burton argument is a stale one.

The coach should be able to pick the team he feels will deliver the best result, and there is certainly more to that than any individual's talent.

However, Joyce got the team and he wanted, but they were clearly unprepared, and fell short of expectations.

Even the team he had - short of our best (potential) lineup - was capable of more than a QF exit.

Joyce is culpable for the result: he has no excuse. BA are culpable for his appointment.

When does BA review coaching positions?

"The coach should be able to pick the team he feels will deliver the best result, and there is certainly more to that than any individual's talent."

Disagree.

There should be a selection panel. You don't risk everything in an organisation based upon 1 person.

Do NBA coaches or AFL coaches have total say on who they recruit or who their assistant coaches are?

Boti's article just blames BA. But who exactly??

Who is responsible for letting this all happen?

Who signed off on the final team?
who signed off on the assistant coaching appointments?

Is it just possible that some of the problem here is that a golden era of Aussie women's basketball has come to an end?

I am no Joyce apologist, and criticism of his coaching is fair enough, but are our expectations based on previous teams unrealistic? We might be seeing a talent correction similar to the Boomers after 2000. There does not seem to have been much discussion or enough about that.

It was basically the same team that won silver in 2014, plus Liz Cambage.

Perhaps the golden age is over NOW, but the expectations that the #2 ranked team would medal seems reasonable.

Silver was certainly a realistic goal for this group (but a lot less of a certainty than previous games. Many of us could see for a long time that this team would really need to perform to get it).
Having said that, yes XY, you'd certainly call this the end of an era now that Penny is retiring.

(Also - correction for Mo - we won bronze in 2014, not silver. Although in reality the format of the tournament may have been the only thing that cost us a silver)

You also need to keep in mind which bits of Boti to take with a grain of salt, as he has his favourites just like anyone else. I agree that a Batkovic vs Burton argument is largely missing the point, as they're completely different players. Personally if I had been campaigning for Suzy, it would have been Cayla George's spot I would have targeted.

As Je mentioned, the 4 spot became a real issue for us once LJ was ruled out. That's a challenge we'll continue to face, even more so with Hodges at the tail end of her career as well.

I believe we (only) got bronze in 2014?

True that we were the #2 ranked side coming in, but the rankings are based over an 8 year cycle as was thrashed out in another thread so it is inflated by that 'golden generation'. Have we just fallen back towards the pack's level of competition?

I am not saying that we shouldn't have medalled at the Olympics. Watching the games though I was finding it hard to spot our supposed talent advantage over opposition teams. Some of that must be coaching and team selection, sure, but other than Cambage, it seems to me we do not have any stand-out generational talent anymore.

Forgetting completely about Americans for the purposes of this post:
* Taylor is still as good as anyone out there. In the WNBA this season she has been one of Phoenix's best players
* Cambage is a clear level above anyone else
* Phillips & Mitchell are still at the level of legit WNBA rotation players, which not too many other foreigners can say
So that is 4 starters that should instantly put us in the conversation for most talented non-US team.
Then we've got other players like Tolo & Jarry who are WNBA-worthy in the right situation, and ditto for the omitted O'Hea & Allen.

Rio should not have been such a struggle.

In terms of standout talent, gone are the days of having a trio like Harrower, Taylor & Jackson that could win games by themselves. So yes, that's why we're now in a fight with a bunch of other countries rather than trying to climb that final step to be competitive with the USA. (I still believe that Joyce's focus on beating the USA is partially to blame for what has happened with this team over the last 2 years)

Going forward - Taylor is gone. Erin & Leilani aren't getting any younger. (Erin in particular has had a nasty run of injuries over several years now). Things aren't looking great right now for future stars that will be ready for Tokyo.


P.S. We've now fallen from #2 to #4 in the FIBA rankings now thanks to our Rio finish replacing our Beijing silver in the calculations.

Good Review Luuuc

I think you have acurately pointed out that both popular reasons are in face contributing to the bad result.

1) Player selection

not all of the best players were selected that arguably should have been. Irrespective of the coaches "team philosophy" one or more of

Jenna O'Hea
Rebecca Allen
Abby Bishop
Suzy Batkovic

should have been selected, if only to replace one of George,Hodges or Burton.


2) Coaching

The players that were selected still formed a player group that were/are capable of knocking off the teams they won against in a far easier and more convincing a fashion than the struggle each game turned out to be. They should ahve been able to compete in a far closer fashion than they did against a team that had already lost more games than they had won in the other group.


To only say that a better selection of players was available is damning both the coach and the existing selected players, implying that the failure was one of selection only, and once selected the outcome was doomed irrespective of the coaching performance at the tournament.

It was both. We definetly need a better Opals coaching group.


On a separate point

I was uncertain of merits of the men taking essentially 4 potential point guards in delly, mills, martin and lisch ( with Bubbles on the bench) .

But with watching the mens games, and their very succesful defence in the groupo games, perhaps we needed another euro and WMBL Finals MVP point guard like Hurst sitting on the bench just in case.

"must be confident of recontracting"

Does BJ still hire himself out through his own coaching company 'B & J Management Group Pty Ltd'?

http://www.hoops.com.au/forum/9691-brendan-joyce/

Correct: bronze, not silver in 2014. Wishful thinking on my part!

"To only say that a better selection of players was available is damning both the coach and the existing selected players, implying that the failure was one of selection only, and once selected the outcome was doomed irrespective of the coaching performance at the tournament.

It was both. We definetly need a better Opals coaching group."

^This.

The Cotter position as assistant coach, who also has no experience with women's basketball (as far as I'm aware) and was also the last NBL coach to hand out a contract Daniel Joyce could also be looked at as part of the BA review.

If that coaching group is reappointed Australian women's basketball will continue to fall, they need to go

I don't really believe that there is a particular "international style" you ever need to play anyway. No two teams on the court are the same, so the essence of winning is to have more of the differences work in your favour than in the opponent's. The main thing that the international level brings is an increase in the quality of your opponents, so whatever weaknesses you have are potentially going to be exploited more.

If your opponent is huge, it doesn't mean you need to focus on fielding your biggest lineup as well. That might not play to your strengths. You might be better off finding a smaller lineup that can at least make life difficult for your opponent at one end even if it's not quite a fair fight, but be much harder for them to stop at the other end.
Look at what Japan did to us for 90% of that game. They didn't try to match up with us player-for-player, they played to their strengths.

When Paul Westhead - the "Guru of Go" - first took over from Carrie Graf as head coach of the Phoenix Mercury, they were about the slowest, whitest team in the WNBA and overnight he tried to turn them into 2016 Japan. It really did not go well at first. Over time he compromised, changed and refined his game plan, and eventually won the franchise their first title, but that process took 2 seasons and some significant personnel changes. He won that with Tangela Smith and Penny Taylor as his starting C & PF, by making more out of his team's strengths than his opponents could exploit out of its weaknesses.

Joyce seemed to be fixated on this idea of beating the USA with athleticism, which is inherently silly IMO when you consider some of the athletes running around for the USA. There's no way we can physically top that, so it's crazy to put all the eggs into that basket. (In reality the one single advantage we potentially had over the USA was Cambage, and that was due to the opposite of athleticism. It was because Cambage's size and touch could be a handful for the more athletic Griner & Fowles duo). More to the point, as I've been saying for a long time it's dumb to even focus on beating the USA as our goal in the first place. How about first making sure we even get that far. The infatuation with the USA (and by extension, our "speed") is the No.1 thing I would point to as our downfall, as it seems to be at the heart of most other things that transpired as well.

The "speed" philosophy was further brought undone by the idea that people's straight-line running speed would somehow translate into superior basketball. Those infamous metrics ... ughh... We're dealing with established basketballers here, not an AFL pre-draft camp for 17 year olds.
Where did we actually use our speed in the tournament anyway? Credit where it's due to Tessa Lavey. She's got the ball into the front court in the blink of an eye. Then what? Then nothing because she's not a finisher so she has to wait for everyone else to catch up, and then we fall into our usual offence. Defensively we can certainly harass the ball-handlers, but set one pick on us and everything turns to utter chaos. One-on-one D isn't everything, as even Martin & Lisch found out in Rio. The Boomers struggled with D at times, but the Opals struggled the entire tournament.
The other player that Joyce made a song and dance about discovering was Bec Allen, and she didn't even make the cut despite being our only young player in the last couple of years to impact the WNBA. A lot gets made of the Batkovic omission, but really I think Allen's had more impact. (I also think that the 12 we selected could still have won a silver, so the selection controversies are far from the whole problem)

Anon a couple of posts up reckons that in the absence of a suitable PF, we would have been better off playing small ball. And I think they have a fair point, too. Players like Allen & Blicavs aren't traditional international 4's, but they're both skilled and versatile players whose plusses could outweigh their minuses at that spot if used correctly. Even Jarry can play there in a pinch. Penny won a WNBA title playing there by exploiting her ability to penetrate at the other end. I'm surprised that Joyce of all people, with his focus on speed, didn't explore those avenues more.

All of that, only to discover that the whole "speed" thing was a bit of a fallacy anyway, as most of the game our offence consisted of finding ways to get Liz the ball in the paint, and was otherwise rather stagnant and lacking in purpose.

(Yes, I'm still angry about this campaign being wasted, a legend being denied a decent farewell, our ranking falling, our funding likely suffering ... these women work their arses off for very little money, so they at least deserve fair results to show for their efforts)

Really good post Luuuc. I think the other important point is the things Joyce emphasised - length and speed - that worked inTurkey weren't really a part of the way the Opals played in Rio. This was effectively a team without a defined plan or style and it showed.

People BAGGING out Daniel Joyce - haters/ idiots. He has played for multiple clubs DOMINATED at some levels, what have you ever done ??? nothing smh. Probably can't even dunk. Daniel is a hit on and off the court, can drain the trey, trash talk with the best of them and throw up the goggles. Daniel Joyce is the man should still be with the kings. So he is a bit old now who cares, he is better than any of you.

^ Brendon's home lol

Great post Luuc, and absolutely right, this thing Joyce has about " international potential" I'd ridiculous, it was his inability to coach and understand what he had that was his down fall,

Speed and quickness.

http://www.fiba.com/news/joyce-we-want-to-beat-the-best

He really did sound like a racehorse trainer quite often when he spoke about players.

The "international player" thing was a way to pick the players he liked and cut the players he didn't like.

One other thing that may have cost us is not chasing (or looking to overturn) the ruling on Leilani Mitchell being a naturalised player. I think this ruling suited Joyce as he didn't have to deal with Griffin who would have taken minutes or competed for a spot with Burton. Classifying Leilani (an indigenous athlete) as naturalised never felt right to me.

The real winner out of all of this was Batkovic and Abby Bishop's 'Hangover-style' Bender in Vegas during the Olympics Campaign


....not at the table Carlos....

Gorris with seebottom as assistant or good female former Aussie player as coach, someone like Jackson , Taylor , Brodello, definitely not any of the former coaches like Maher or Molloy, ( can't even believe some suggested him)
Some new younger blood that can take the program forward and understands women's basketball ( it's a very different game to mens)

Boti's final (?) word on the opals

"And if we were fair dinkum about challenging the USA for a Gold Medal, the Opals would have been

Erin Phillips
Rachel Jarry
Penny Taylor
Suzy Batkovic
Liz Cambage

Leilani Mitchell
Rebecca Allen
Jenna O'Hea
Abby Bishop
Marianna Tolo
Tess Madgen
Cayla George

But they weren’t."

http://www.botinagy.com/blog/a-dream-existed---farewell-to-rio/

that's out with

Katie-Rae Ebzery
Stephanie Talbot
Natalie Burton
Laura Hodges
Tessa Lavey

changed his tune from Mar, 2016 http://botinagy.com/blog/polishing-opals-for-rio/

apparently Lavey, Hodges and Talbot are all off his "have" list from back then

"In my team, I'd have Madge, Bec Allen and Steph Talbot battling it out for two spots, and may the best players win."

"My Opals team for Rio, in no particular order:

Erin Phillips
Rachel Jarry
Penny Taylor
Suzy Batkovic
Elizabeth Cambage
Leilani Mitchell
Stephanie Talbot
Rebecca Allen
Cayla George
*Marianna Tolo
Tessa Lavey
Laura Hodges
(*If passed fully fit)"

Another Opals post-mortem, this time from the FIBA website:

http://www.fiba.com/en/news/opals-rio-roller-coaster

I find it quite interesting that in terms of the starting 5 it takes aim at Mitchell & Phillips for being undersized as defenders, Taylor for being a player that is supposedly "targeted defensively", and Cambage for having poor lateral quickness. It seems to miss one of the starters. Oh wait, no it doesn't. It claims that Burton was "mobile" but "unable to cover the inadequacies of others at this level"

L.M.F.A.O.

Joyce was incredibly proud of the way his team performed and the success of his style, and rightfully so, starting at the defensive end.

Except in Rio, they didn't play defence.... Joyce and his "international style players" theory

"Joyce will now almost certainly lose his job. The sad part for him is he will fall because he departed from what he believed in, the style that had worked, the combinations that had worked and the reason for his controversial selections in the first place."

He didn't depart from anything, he still had the same players, except for adding Cambage, and running Burton in the starters, BA should be glad to see the back of this fool

Luuuc, it doesn't take aim at any players, it takes aim at Brendan Joyce for using a starting five that was at complete odds with the philosophy he had constantly spruiked. With the style they played in Rio, which was inexplicably very different to Turkey, Marianna Tolo should have been the starting power forward and Abby Bishop should have been coming off the bench.

For those interested, the article looks at quotes from Joyce post WCs about what made the team so successful in 2014 and then points out how his actions in Rio were completely different, including the limited use of players and combinations that were keys in Turkey, and even keys against France at the Olympics, which was the Opals only complete performance.

Personally I think it misses the mark on some things. Our defence was a shambles all tournament but IMO that had nothing to do with length and everything to do with instruction, cohesion and plain ol' effort/intensity - which was sadly lacking compared to Opals teams of the past.

"Marianna Tolo should have been the starting power forward"

:O
I believe that's the first concession I've ever seen about FIBA.com's favourite long mobile defensive stopping rebound machine!

"Abby Bishop should have been coming off the bench"

I wouldn't have had her in my 12 personally. That's one selection/omission I have been fine with from the start.
Anyway, the 12 we brought should still have been a far more effective team than they were, and at the very least reached the semi finals. All the talent needed was there regardless of people's preferences/hindsight/backtracking about Bishop, Batkovic, Allen, O'Hea, etc.

I think it's also dangerous to focus too much on the France game. That's a normally solid team who lost their best player and floor leader right on the eve of the Olympics, and they had a poor tournament as a result. That's akin to the '96 Opals losing Michele Timms. Penny played a blinder and we had one killer (25-10) quarter against them. The other 3 quarters we won 64-61 which is nothing to brag about IMO.
Despite Cambage's foul trouble and resulting limited (15) minutes she was still +9 and was our top rebounder for the game. Penny playing SF was second in that category. We gave up 14 O-boards to France and lost the rebounding battle to them by 5, despite 2 of their starting front court players being crippled by foul trouble, so I don't know that I'd use that game as too much of a blueprint for our front court setup.
We also coughed up 17 turnovers. So while it probably was our most complete game of the tournament as the article says, it's clearing a very low bar to achieve that honour. When someone does what Penny did that game, it can be easy to gloss over a lot of other issues.


Looking forward to Jan getting back, and I'm hoping that the fallout results in some changes to the Opals head coach requirements to open up the field to more candidates.


Throwback Thunday to when our current coach was appointed:
http://www.hoops.com.au/forum/31680-joyce-to-be-announced-as-opals-coach/
:/

When the current Opals coach was with the Hawks I remember a conversation we had about the various ways to defend sceens.

I was interested in his advice because a friend of mine missed out on a rep job (BJ was director of coaching for the junior program)and my friends feedback was that part of the reason for missing out was that he failed to answer the question "tell me about the options for defending screens" to the required standard.

I was only a scrub coach but I loved to learn about the game so when I bumped into BJ at the Snakepit I asked him about the options. He was always generous with his time to talk basketball. (maybe with the emphasis on talking about himself)

After outlining about 4- or so of his preferred ways to defend I decided to ask more about which of the options the Hawks would use against certain NBL players. I did so because I have always had a great interest in individual players strengths and weaknesses. As a young player many years ago I was taught be my junior coach to scout opponents and have a memory bank of their tendencies.

We started on the poorer shooting PG's of the time and while I cant recall the player I suggested other than he was the type who was a reluctant shooter who liked to get to the rim (think C Jackson type)I said that you would send his defender behind the screen and then started talking options on the great shooters such as Shane Heal etc. When talking about the non shooting types I said " you would go behind the screens like some teams do with Damon Lowery". Watching most Hawks NBL games at the time Lowery was a poorish shooter and many teams did go behind the screens on Damon. BJ said "no they don't because he is such a good shooter"

BJ's answer to how the Hawks defended screens was they defended all screens in the same manner that they were using at that time,rather than using some/all options based on who the player was. Of course they used different methods at various stages of the game or in different games. His reasoning for the one method per possession decision was "because players were not smart enough to execute different methods based on who the individual player using the screen was at the time". WTF

Bit hard to explain fully but I clearly remember walking away shaking my head in amazement.

"because players were not smart enough to execute different methods based on who the individual player using the screen was at the time"

While a little condescending, this is a fairly accurate statement.

BJ does have reasonable basketball knowledge - that isn't what has prevented him from achieving sustained success at the highest levels.

So Playmaker you are saying if I was coaching a team against United I couldn't after a week of training and watching tape drill them to go under on balls on CJ, switch on Goulding and Majok on balls and double Thomlinson using an on ball for example. (not saying the examples are the correct tactics but surely a pro player could execute that type of stuff).

I'm saying that everyone has a limited cognitive capacity ("smart" is too simplistic - much like BJ). There are plenty of examples of players that could execute that scouting report, and much more. There are also many, many players that struggle with remembering a basic scouting report, let alone executing it.

Contemporary pick and roll defenses don't just concern the two primarily involved: it's a 5-man job. As such, if one breaks down because they couldn't execute their role in the scheme in a time-sensitive environment, the entire defense breaks down. Coaches need to account for that.

Sure. They have to remember their role in whatever defensive system they use. I am sure most good teams have quite a few ways to deal with on balls. They might change that up a few times a game or from game to game.

To switch it up depending on players the only thing they need to remember on top of that is which system they will adopt for the individual player/s. Surely that is much easier than remembering and executing the system itself.

Of course as you say some players will never get it and even if you keep things simple they will struggle. To understand that all you need to do is watch DJ on D for the 6ers.

Cheers for that detailed response Luuuc, I do appreciate it. I think there are some points I was trying to make in the article which perhaps you took differently.

France game - The article wasn't about looking at that game in isolation, it was about seeing why the 2016 team played so differently to the 2014 team when it had most of the same players.

The biggest reason I could find was the combinations of players used. The first half of the French game and part of the third quarter of the Serbian game was where combos from 2014 were used in notable stretches and they again performed very well.

It is inexcusable they weren't used more often. As the article says, the Tolo-Hodges-Taylor-Phillips combo that was so good in 2014 and so good against France was only used for 30 seconds in the game against Serbia. WTF?

Defensive length - The point wasn't that a lack of length caused our defensive issues (you nailed a number of reasons) it was that the 2014 team was picked so they could defend a certain way, and they did it very well.

That ability to generate offence from defence covered up the fact we didn't have a lot of players who could create their own shot.

With most of the same team picked, we needed to again use combos that could defend that way. If we weren't going to use those line-ups we needed to pick players who could defend differently. More experienced, high IQ players.

If we weren't going to generate offence from our defence, we needed players who could generate defence from our offence, that is put the ball in the hole.

Selection - The article wasn't saying certain selections were flat out right or wrong, but that players picked had to fit the way we played.

The Boomers could have taken the same squad to Rio, but had they run horn sets with wings just standing in the corner like Brett Brown did in 2010 they certainly wouldn't have been the impressive offensive unit they were under Lemanis' system.

Slovenia on the other hand, with less overall talent, can run horn sets and be very effective, because it suits the talents of their players (most notably the Dragics).

I guess the overall point is Joyce didn't find a way to mesh having Cambage into the squad and utilise her strengths while using the strengths of the 2014 team. He certainly stuffed up a potentially very good thing.

fstos, fascinating story. The common belief around the NBL was Joyce and Goorjian were great at preparing teams but not very good at making adjustments. We saw that in Rio and that story certainly backs it up.

Not Happy (With) Jan

One solitary analyst sang the side's praises, endorsing Joyce’s "game-plan" requiring certain types of players. As it turned out, those “certain types of players” weren’t such especially good ones.

If Stirling gives the OK for Joyce to keep his job, then frankly she needs to loose hers.
Neither actually should stay in their respective positions, she may well have been a decent coach, but she sucks big time in her ability to select others

Boti's rant against Stirling re Clarke is both hypocritical and wrong. Clarke came to the job being lauded by all ( including Boti) as an almost certain masterstroke.

The error was in allowing Clarke to have "poison pill" clauses in his contract without a balancing performance goal, which essentially signed him up until the end of the contract. That's on management being too optimistic

He's also railing against reality, Stirling will chair the review, but she is exceptionally unlikely to be the only voice heard.

I thought Very Old was Boti for some reason.

Guessing from above that is incorrect.

One of the difficulty with Boti, is that while he (mostly) has fair grips about BA and "authority", he is too often no more that a populist rabble-rouser ideologue - best suited to tabloid journalism than reasoned commentary.

His own house re providing quality and impartial sports administration and coaching is on quite shaky foundations as well, although that does not in any way automatically disqualify his opinions. I doubt Bart Cummings ever rode a horse well in a race either

_Strungout_

No I'm not him, I'm probably just as old, but I was a considerably better player and a far more successful coach :) LOL

But I'll always read his columns

No I'm not him

I am very old https://t.co/tlkUtslNgN

— Boti Nagy (@boti_nagy) September 13, 2016

^ haha