2019 coach

[herbert henry1908]

See my above comment mate. You are starting to sound like Rothfield a little bit. Goulds done a lot of great things besides the squad. Our country connection to areas like Bathurst and dubbo, our community involvement in schools around the area, the world class facilities that opened two years ago. You are selling him way short, be fair.

And you talk about building the squad like its easy, that's the most important part of his job and he is nailing it.

All the big decisions have been stuffed up in recent times

- he sacks Cleary without a proper review, comes up with some BS about him being tired

- he then appoints Griffin without doing any proper search for a coach. The fact he shared a manager with Griffin made it look even worse.

- He appoints Corey Payne as CEO, someone with ZERO sports administration experience.

- Payne is fired after problems within the office, he’s replaced with someone who knows nothing about footy.

- He gives Griffin an extension when it was clear there were problems within the team.

- he’s then forced into sacking Griffin because the seemingly the board has gone against him. Costing the club over $1 million in a payout



I think he should be held accountable, any well run organisation would after so many f*ck ups.



He’s good at building a squad, so make that his only job and get someone else in to make the big executive decisions.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Better Gus than Craig Gower.

It was one name thrown up quickly, I mentioned 2 other people too.

The point is the idea, which you said you liked btw.

 

[herbert henry1908]

.

 

[herbert henry1908]

I don't mind your idea about a panel of qualified people.

I'm also still confident with Gus.

You can’t be too confident in him if you think a coaching appointment panel is an interesting idea.

 

[OldPanther]

You can’t be too confident in him if you think a coaching appointment panel is an interesting idea.

I think he has strengths and weaknesses. He also can't do this forever. We need some kind of system in place.

 

[betcats]

It was one name thrown up quickly, I mentioned 2 other people too.

The point is the idea, which you said you liked btw.

The idea of a panel selecting a coach after interviewing a bunch of candidates is a good idea but its not realistic IMO.
The board isn't going to give up that power and nor should they, if they cant even select a new coach why are they are on the board?

 

[betcats]

All the big decisions have been stuffed up in recent times

- he sacks Cleary without a proper review, comes up with some BS about him being tired

- he then appoints Griffin without doing any proper search for a coach. The fact he shared a manager with Griffin made it look even worse.

- He appoints Corey Payne as CEO, someone with ZERO sports administration experience.

- Payne is fired after problems within the office, he’s replaced with someone who knows nothing about footy.

- He gives Griffin an extension when it was clear there were problems within the team.

- he’s then forced into sacking Griffin because the seemingly the board has gone against him. Costing the club over $1 million in a payout



I think he should be held accountable, any well run organisation would after so many f*ck ups.



He’s good at building a squad, so make that his only job and get someone else in to make the big executive decisions.

All these f**k ups and look at the clubs position, top to bottom we are the most talented club in the game right now, the NRL team is the least successful team at the club and they are in the top four, what a piss poor job he is doing all these mistakes are killing us.

 

[herbert henry1908]

The idea of a panel selecting a coach after interviewing a bunch of candidates is a good idea but its not realistic IMO.
The board isn't going to give up that power and nor should they, if they cant even select a new coach why are they are on the board?

The panel wouldn’t appoint the coach, I already said that. They’d conduct the search and make a recommendation. The final decision would be the boards.

 

[OldPanther]

The panel wouldn’t appoint the coach, I already said that. They’d conduct the search and make a recommendation. The final decision would be the boards.

So would the panel give a short list?

 

[betcats]

So would the panel give a short list?

Who appoints the panel? The Board? Gus?

 

[herbert henry1908]

All these f**k ups and look at the clubs position, top to bottom we are the most talented club in the game right now, the NRL team is the least successful team at the club and they are in the top four, what a piss poor job he is doing all these mistakes are killing us.

We should be doing better.

You’re making the same excuses you were railing against with Griffin. People kept saying Griffin shouldn’t be fired because of our position on the table.

Maybe we should’ve just ignored Griffins failings because of our position on the table?

Why is everyone accountable except for Gould?

 

[OldPanther]

Who appoints the panel? The Board? Gus?

A lot of questions around it. If Gus and the board appoint them aren't they tainted so to speak?

If they give a recommendation for a single coach aren't they just appointing the coach or would the board also interview coaches?

 

[herbert henry1908]

So would the panel give a short list?

I don’t know. The board would set the terms of reference, a short list makes some sense though. Makes the board feel like they retain the power.

 

[betcats]

We should be doing better.

You’re making the same excuses you were railing against with Griffin. People kept saying Griffin shouldn’t be fired because of our position on the table.

Maybe we should’ve just ignored Griffins failings because of our position on the table?

Why is everyone accountable except for Gould?

Im not making excuses. I acknowledged his mistakes long before most of us did. I called hiring hook without an interview a huge mistake back in 2016.

You keep saying we've been poorly run the last few years, I think you said four years in one comment. I just find that ridiculous and I am giving my reasons why. Yes there have been mistakes but even considering them we are doing very well.

You want to see what a poorly run club looks like? Try Parramatta, Wests, Manly, the dogs, the warriors, I mean you just aren't being realistic of you think we have been poorly run for 4 years. That's a joke IMO, you are changing the narrative to suit your opinion, we started last season as premiership favourites with the youngest squad in the NRL.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Im not making excuses. I acknowledged his mistakes long before most of us did. I called hiring hook without an interview a huge mistake back in 2016.

You keep saying we've been poorly run the last few years, I think you said four years in one comment. I just find that ridiculous and I am giving my reasons why. Yes there have been mistakes but even considering them we are doing very well.

You want to see what a poorly run club looks like? Try Parramatta, Wests, Manly, the dogs, the warriors, I mean you just aren't being realistic of you think we have been poorly run for 4 years. That's a joke IMO, you are changing the narrative to suit your opinion, we started last season as premiership favourites with the youngest squad in the NRL.

You’re making the exact same argument people were when defending Griffin.

“Things are good on the footy field so what’s the problem?”

It was a bad argument then and it’s a bad argument now.



I never said the *club* was poorly run the last few years, I said *Phil Gould* has made several bad decisions the last few years. He should be held accountable for that.

 

[betcats]

You’re making the exact same argument people were when defending Griffin.

“Things are good on the footy field so what’s the problem?”

It was a bad argument then and it’s a bad argument now.



I never said the *club* was poorly run the last few years, I said *Phil Gould* has made several bad decisions the last few years. He should be held accountable for that.

Oh bullshit it is not the same at all. I have literally pointed a number of the good things he has done(which you ignored) as well as acknowledging his f**k ups. We were a poorly run club before Gould got here, we are not a poorly run club now for the reasons I have listed. We aren't perfect but we are a f**kload closer to being perfect with Gould than without him.

Yep, that’s why I’ve said repeatedly he did good stuff in his early years here. The last 3-4 have been filled with poor management.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Oh bullshit it is not the same at all. I have literally pointed a number of the good things he has done(which you ignored) as well as acknowledging his f**k ups. We were a poorly run club before Gould got here, we are not a poorly run club now for the reasons I have listed. We aren't perfect but we are a f**kload closer to being perfect with Gould than without him.

Griffin did good things too. It’s very much a similar argument that you railed against with Griffin.

Of course we’re a better club for having had Gould here, but most of that comes from his earlier time with the club. I never ignored the good things Gould has done, in fact I’ve acknowledged them myself several times on these boards.



Let’s be clear here.

1. I’m glad Gould came to the club, he was instrumental in turning us around.

2. His recent decision making has been below par, I think this is either a symptom of the length of time at the club or his ego. Either way it’s time for fresh eyes.

The former doesn’t negate the latter.

 

[betcats]

Griffin did good things too. It’s very much a similar argument that you railed against with Griffin.

Of course we’re a better club for having had Gould here, but most of that comes from his earlier time with the club. I never ignored the good things Gould has done, in fact I’ve acknowledged them myself several times on these boards.



Let’s be clear here.

1. I’m glad Gould came to the club, he was instrumental in turning us around.

2. His recent decision making has been below par, I think this is either a symptom of the length of time at the club or his ego. Either way it’s time for fresh eyes.

The former doesn’t negate the latter.

I don't know what you mean anymore, ive been very clear on my stance here.

Griffin literally had talented people walking out of the club. Gould has and still is bringing talented people into the club. Yes he got it wrong a couple of times but IMO that doesn't mean he should go or is doing a bad job. I think we are much stronger with Gould at the club and much stronger with Griffin not at the club. The two are not the same.

 

[franklin2323]

I don't know what you mean anymore, ive been very clear on my stance here.

Griffin literally had talented people walking out of the club. Gould has and still is bringing talented people into the club. Yes he got it wrong a couple of times but IMO that doesn't mean he should go or is doing a bad job. I think we are much stronger with Gould at the club and much stronger with Griffin not at the club. The two are not the same.

Who brought Griffin here. Who re-signed Griffin? Everything Griffin did is on Gus. Seems like we are repeating the same mistakes

 

[MrBlack]

Gould has made 100 correct calls and 5 or 6 bad ones (granted Hook is a real bad one).

People like to focus only on the negative.

Our club (for the most part) is the envy of the NRL.

Financially stable, envious training facilities, improved fan base, higher profile, and a steady stream of talent coming through from the ground up.

Even Wayne Bennet was quoted as saying we had the most talented roster in the NRL.