Discard Campbell still missing the Shire

[blacktip-reefy]

I thought one of the major reasons T left was a dispute.

But even if it wasn' who were some of the other first graders we lost in this high turnover time? Green left because he was after ridiculous money and hardlk showed it was a mistake letting him go. I really can't think of many others. Bell was held for longer than he should have been.

He was great depth.
Barnett.
Green.(very important with his form at the time & major disruption to the club)
If you ar a fan of Reicks style, then Whippet.
Greenhill.
T.
Kearns. ( I was not a big fan of his early years)
Raper. ( I was not a huge fan but most were)
I'd have to go back over the team lineups for more.

 

[Aries]

If you cut out the bias they're fair points griefman .....

But i hardly see how the cronulla conection is accountable for penriths massive depth ........

I reckon the reason were unable to buy depth and re-sign players like T was because we were paying well over market value for alot of players that werent much more than average 1st graders .........For example: Colin best signed an initial contract worth about 230k(this is 5years ago mind you...thats heaps) ........you cant tell me he is/was worth that...

If we ever want to get our club heading toward a common goal, we need to clean out the dead wood that is the cronulla board! imo they've offered nothing fresh, and seem to be struggling to keep with the times .......fug them all off and hire a bunch of astute business proffessionals who will actually make a real go of it....instead of just settling for mediocrity

btr said that the players and admin and coach we let go are performing well. He never said that was the reason for the Panthers success I'm sure even btr would agree that this is only a very small part of the Panthers success this year and the majority of the success belongs to their junior depth and work done by others before JL and the rest got there.

I origional said here that there were other things that caused us not to win a Premiership yet. Alot of them have already been stated here and player recruitment and retention was just part of it. The contract you refer to was in the time of ridiculous contracts. That would have been a base rate for a first grader back then. Thankfully santity has now prevailed with the Salary cap restrictions, although some clubs even ignored that (Dogs)

Frenzy, my comment was to CA's losing culture comment at the club. I stated that there is no such thing and other reasons were behind the fact we had never won a comp. Plenty of other reasons are being given by others here and there are plenty of others to go with them. So, no I can't see how it ties into a losing culture that I say is a myth of CA ;-)

 

[Frenzy]

I thought one of the major reasons T left was a dispute.

But even if it wasn' who were some of the other first graders we lost in this high turnover time? Green left because he was after ridiculous money and hardlk showed it was a mistake letting him go. I really can't think of many others. Bell was held for longer than he should have been.

He was great depth.
Barnett.
Green.(very important with his form at the time & major disruption to the club)
If you ar a fan of Reicks style, then Whippet.
Greenhill.
T.
Kearns. ( I was not a big fan of his early years)
Raper. ( I was not a huge fan but most were)
I'd have to go back over the team lineups for more.

Well and good reefy, but, you said it yourself, we had no money. Especially after 1997 when we had to go about getting some very ridiculous Super League contracts in check.

And there were other circumstances why players left. Aaron Raper left because of the guarantee of a test jersey if he stayed loyal to the ARL. So did a young lad called Ritson. Kearns was all but dragged by the scruff of the neck to the Reds because SL needed/wanted him there. Greenhill was no certainty of even playng again after his neck scare.

Then theres retirees and/or UK jaunters, Davidson, Lee, Healey, Donaghy for example. There has to be some natural attrition, you can't keep them all and you can't replace them all with no moola either.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

Of course.
But Moolah or lack of it caused some to leave prematurely.
1 Players retention could have been the difference. i.e Green

Could the 150k the Sharks could not find have been the difference to a trophy or no trphy?

Could the 150 k been the difference.
Could the 300k for the both been the difference?

 

[Frenzy]

Of course.
But Moolah or lack of it caused some to leave prematurely.
1 Players retention could have been the difference. i.e Green

Could the 150k the Sharks could not find have been the difference to a trophy or no trphy?

Could the 150 k been the difference.
Could the 300k for the both been the difference?

Without a shadow of a doubt, especially Green, but as I believe and will say again, we didn't have them. We can't go back and get 'em either. WHat we had is what we had and what we had didn't/couln't do it. OK, maybe they could of if things were different but not me nor you nor any other protagonist in the debate can change what's gone by.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

that is not what I am saying.
What I am saying is that clearly was the problem. Identified, Stamped, agreed, no question.
The issue is now, why are we doing the same things? Falling in the same pot holes? Putting the roof up before the foundations?
Look at your past to define & shape your future. We don't do that.

 

[Frenzy]

that is not what I am saying.
What I am saying is that clearly was the problem. Identified, Stamped, agreed, no question.
The issue is now, why are we doing the same things? Falling in the same pot holes? Putting the roof up before the foundations?
Look at your past to define & shape your future. We don't do that.

And have we ever? I think the answer is no. So at the risk of causing an argument, which is not intended, it's merely a question - why blame Ando for it all when it's clearly ingrained into the club.

Surely the boards past and present have to shoulder more of the blame than any one coach. They have the pursestrings.

 

[PJ]

They also set the strategy and direction. In this case to hire Anderson.

It is weak and wishy washy way that they carry on after the plans are in place that stamp them as inefective.

As Jack Gibson said you need a strong front office to be succesful, and that is something we desperatley need.

A strong board would not have allowed all the BS we had to put up with this year. A strong board would not, after having a meeting to thrash out the issues and coming out publicly and moving forward, would not be going back to old habits and leaking stories of sackings to the media.

You want a successful Sharks, then get a decent management.

 

[Aries]

They also set the strategy and direction. In this case to hire Anderson.

It is weak and wishy washy way that they carry on after the plans are in place that stamp them as inefective.

As Jack Gibson said you need a strong front office to be succesful, and that is something we desperatley need.

A strong board would not have allowed all the BS we had to put up with this year. A strong board would not, after having a meeting to thrash out the issues and coming out publicly and moving forward, would not be going back to old habits and leaking stories of sackings to the media.

You want a successful Sharks, then get a decent management.

The facts are that due to money available at times, we could not always do the things best suited to win a premiership. Is that the boards fault?...

In ways I guess it is, but they also have to balance the cost of a premiership in the past, with what we could afford and still survive. The board does try to do the best for the club at all times and as you state, a strong board would not accept the BS that has gone on in the club this year. Looks like they haven't now, and for once made a rational descision that they knew would cause further sh!t. JA was not a first grader, and I am now thinking that they were scared that CA would keep hjim in first grade next year, so they did what they HAD to do and didn't re-sign him.

But in doing so, this time they are sending a message to the coach that he cant have everything his way.

Look at it this way PJ... CA has been here for 2 years now. This club has NEVER known termoil and embarresment like it. They could not sack CA due to financial reasons when asked to "sack or back" him, so they backed him. That was the sensible thing to do. What they are doing now is just reminding CA who's actually running this club. It is up to CA to knuckle down, pull his head in, STFU in the press and get on with the job of coaching the Club to a GF win in 2004 or Fug off!! It is now CA's choice.

The baord have covered all possibilities no matter what happens atm!

One thing is for sure, for the first time they have shown some "strength" since CA came here.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

Agreement then?

Hiring a high profile coach was not the solution?

Success starts at the front office(money & power)?

Retention & development have been woeful(now we have juniors but no experience)?

It's not all Ando's fault (ggrrrr...)?

We are going backwards at the moment & immediate change is required on all levels?

 

[Frenzy]

Agreement then?

Would seem so for the most part.

Hiring a high profile coach was not the solution?

Apparently not. May of been part of a solution but not without the rest of the cogs in the wheel turning the same way. Or turning at all! :lol:

Success starts at the front office(money & power)?

Yes. Something we have always lacked except maybe the Gow years. But he had no money to work with either.

Retention & development have been woeful(now we have juniors but no experience)?

Particularly in certain positions. Seems we never fill the spot that needs filling most urgently. It's happened again this year in 2 obvious areas 5/8 and g/k.

It's not all Ando's fault (ggrrrr...)?

No, there's much more history to it than just blaming him. There's also no real point, especally financially in getting rid of him now unless they can find him a different job and not be out of pocket........

We are going backwards at the moment & immediate change is required on all levels?

Immediate or ASAP I'd say. There's no apparent front runners to give the board a shake that I know of. There's a coach in the wings but can he get the gig without it hurting the club's fiscalbone too much? There's more recruitment to be done and more culling as well. There are no laurels to rest on anymore.

And now...

I have to have some Maxalon

 

[cheese]

I'd opt for stemetil, frenzy ....the sedative could come in handy

........i think its fair to say that at the moment we are fugged.............Somethings gotta give ....i wonder what will give 1st though

Personally im in favour of a total restructure ......but that could only occur in fairyland, because for now we dont have the funds or the balls

 

[Generalzod]

Maybe the SHARKS need to look at Roosters and see how they do things.
It can't hurt.

 

[Feej]

Just to throw something a little different in, how do you guys think this whole Anderson thing would have unfolded had Gow been in charge?

 

[wittyfan]

........i think its fair to say that at the moment we are fugged.............Somethings gotta give ....i wonder what will give 1st though

My money is on the coach to go first.

 

[imasharkie]

If Ando goes where does it leave us with BK,Bails,Nuts etc who have publicly supported ando and do they have get out clauses in their contracts if he goes?

 

[wittyfan]

If Ando goes where does it leave us with BK,Bails,Nuts etc who have publicly supported ando and do they have get out clauses in their contracts if he goes?

If they go as well, which clubs would have room in their salary cap for them?

 

[Aries]

If Ando goes where does it leave us with BK,Bails,Nuts etc who have publicly supported ando and do they have get out clauses in their contracts if he goes?

This question already came up this year. I can tell you that the only person with a "get out" clause if CA goes, is Bails. Not even BK has that in his contract. This is NOT my opinion, but FACT that has already been stated.

 

[cheese]

Im almost positive that sludge got the clause taken out mid-season anyway!