:lol:
No, that's not why he was sacked.
Why was he sacked then?
:lol::lol::lol::lol:
Could you suck his d*ck any harder?
He was given a squad better then finishing as low as he did. The fact that we were in games to choke in proves that!
We finished third last. Can you name more than two teams who had worse rosters than us?
He had enough talent to win more games (maybe not make the 8 though), they were mentally piss weak and ultimately that cost us.......
We were unable to close games out because we lacked in two key areas for hanging onto leads - kicking game and edge defence.
We were a weaker squad than 2010 but 2010 underachieved and should have been at least top 8 maybe top four.
Um no. The 2010 side should have finished in the bottom half of the top 8 just like they did the year before.
So we should by all rights have expected to be in the mix for the final spot in the eight at the back end. We would have been if we could have closed out games and SK was supposed to be a genius in winning the close ones, so what happened?
Why was he supposed to be a genius at that?
Kearney was signed because he was going to bring discipline to the club and change the Parramattitude in the place.
"Winning the close ones" is about the players on the field. Hopefully Kearney can sign or develop a few players who can win the close ones.
Lucky for us that Anderson had the vision to release Mateo and Inu and free up the money to fix up our halves. The man sure does know his stuff.
A lot of people deny Anderson had anything to do with letting those two go (they're usually the same people who think letting Mateo and Inu go was a mistake). Whoever released them made the right decision, imo. If it was Anderson then good on him.
we have had a weak halves & hooker for the last 2 years. I dont buy that excuse cause it wasnt allowed for the years before
We were able to work around the weak halves in the back half of '09 because we didn't rely on them. Instead we relied on heaps of offloads and hoped that they stuck.
At the start of 2010 Anderson went back to trying to play with less risk but that kind of footy relies on good halves, which we didn't have.
It became clear that the team needed a rebuild, which is what we're going through now.
Hence why he chased every half off contract for this coming season. He new what we lacked
He did indeed. Unluckily for him he didn't manage to lure any good halves to the club in his 2 years in charge.
Must be someone else's fault.
Perhaps if the board hadn't meddled since Day 1 Ando would have been able to do his job.
Then again, that was their purpose so he was never going to get any support there.
At the end of the day, Ando had to go - not because he couldn't do the job but because he couldn't do it with a board that was trying to destabilise him.
At least Kearney has their support. The foundation is there now for the club to move forward.
Why do you reckon the board didn't trust Anderson?
