Poupou Escobar
Post Whore
- Messages
- 91,116
You might expect quick improvements from a new coach if coaching was the problem under the last one.Quick improvements aren’t the coaches job.
You might expect quick improvements from a new coach if coaching was the problem under the last one.Quick improvements aren’t the coaches job.
Yeah the coaching at Parra wasn’t the problem. The stupid club got rid of poor Brad because of bad luck.You might expect quick improvements from a new coach if coaching was the problem under the last one.
Yeah the coaching at Parra wasn’t the problem. The stupid club got rid of poor Brad because of bad luck.
We can’t forget a lack of resources.And lack of resources.
He had little say in control of recruitment and retention, or so you have told us, so why would they need to replace him to do that? If the club still thought he had something to offer, they just would have moved on the senior players.I think they replaced him so they could get rid of some senior players. If he couldn't coach, he wouldn't have achieved the record he did.
We can’t forget a lack of resources.
It's just more evidence that coaches are largely interchangeable. As I've said in the past, if he gets sacked it'll be due to his relationships within the club, not because of his coaching knowledge or tactics. He had coached over 200 NRL games before his 50th birthday. He knows what he's doing.It's all very confusing.
. Everyone in the media, all his opposition coaches and many fans rate BA.
. The hierarchy of our club are definitely the right people who wouldn't be swayed by stupid fans.
Yet here we are with unlucky Brad sacked.
So where did it all go wrong?
No, you told us he had full access to the club's chequebook and just chose to be stingy. See, we can all bullshit and misrepresent each other.He had little say in control of recruitment and retention, or so you have told us
You can't "just move on" players because their payouts are included under the cap and limit the club's ability to sign replacements., so why would they need to replace him to do that? If the club still thought he had something to offer, they just would have moved on the senior players.
This is about relationships not coaching ability.They've replaced him because he was stale and we were going nowhere but down.
He was given more than enough chances. Probably the longest tenure of any unsuccessful coach ever, except maybe Ricky and that's Canberra's problem.
38 years smartarseAnd the fact we are a small club. Don't ever forget that.
No, you told us he had full access to the club's chequebook
But you just told us they got rid of Arthur so they could do exactly that.You can't "just move on" players because their payouts are included under the cap
I think they replaced him so they could get rid of some senior players.
Yeah you don't like when it happens to you do you? Don't f**king do it to me.I've never said that so don't lie and make up bullshit to support your pathetic theories and don't accuse me of things I have never said.
I agree, and I have said as much.I have however said that he would have had a huge say in who we did and didn't recruit.
Because they need to be encouraged to agree to f**k off, and having their mate as coach will make that harder.But you just told us they got rid of Arthur so they could do exactly that.
Yeah you don't like when it happens to you do you? Don't f**king do it to me.
Because they need to be encouraged to agree to f**k off, and having their mate as coach will make that harder.
Do f**k off for a break mate, your bullshit argumentative for the sake of it shtick is getting real stale - source: your post above. Maybe pay some more attention to the family or another hobby or something else for a while?Yeah you don't like when it happens to you do you? Don't f**king do it to me.
I agree, and I have said as much.
Because they need to be encouraged to agree to f**k off, and having their mate as coach will make that harder.
You absolutely made shit up. That’s why you couldn’t quote it. I tell you idiots he doesn’t have control of recruitment/retention and you twist my words. It’s called a strawman. I say we're not as big as the Storm or Panthers and suddenly we're a tiny club. I say we were lucky in 2022 and unlucky in 2023 and suddenly everything is about luck. I say the coach doesn't control the players on the field and suddenly nothing is the coach's responsibility. These are all strawmen, and you use them because you're unable to engage with my actual argument.f**k off. I call out your bullshit. Nothing else. I don't have to lie to do it.
Well I’m sure we’re going to try. But it’s not about whether we can just move them on. That’s easy when you're paying them to play elsewhere. But success will be measured by how much cap space is freed up, which means minimal payouts. How will we know the size of each payout? We won't, I'm sorry to tell you. Buzz Rothfield might know or he might not. If he doesn't he might just make up a number. You will lap that shit up.So which is it? Can we get rid of them or not, because you've said both within the last page.
That’s because most of you are too dopey to realise the things occurring off the field aren't simple. fFs PoUpOo CaN wE gEt RiD oF aLl ThE pLaYeRs Or NoT?!? oNlY oNe Of ThEsE tHiNgS iS pOsSiBlE yOu TrOlL!!!See? This is the shit you continually carry on with just to be argumentative which is why you are considered the biggest troll in the Eels forum.
Here we go, Hepatitis Suitman joins the attack! Thanks for your advice mate.Do f**k off for a break mate, your bullshit argumentative for the sake of it shtick is getting real stale - source: your post above. Maybe pay some more attention to the family or another hobby or something else for a while?
It's just more evidence that coaches are largely interchangeable. As I've said in the past, if he gets sacked it'll be due to his relationships within the club, not because of his coaching knowledge or tactics. He had coached over 200 NRL games before his 50th birthday. He knows what he's doing.