Kearney

[lingard]

And many haven't, so that's probably why.

Suity

No, not many, I`d say. Most people on here know their football and are entitled to have their opinions respected.

 

[Suitman]

No, not many, I`d say. Most people on here know their football and are entitled to have their opinions respected.

Mate, I'd say that most of the opinions here are emotional and unconsidered.

The minority are learned and considered. Don't take offence. You're in the latter.

Suity

 

[Eels Dude]

No, not many, I`d say. Most people on here know their football and are entitled to have their opinions respected.

Thing is the board members wouldn't see that much either... what do they do, meet for a meeting once a month or so? Most of what they rely on for judging their decision making on is hearsay also.

 

[Suitman]

Thing is the board members wouldn't see that much either... what do they do, meet for a meeting once a month or so? Most of what they rely on for judging their decision making on is hearsay also.

lol.
Their only source of information is at monthly Board meetings. Yeh, right. :lol:

Suity

 

[yy_cheng]

poops u r the most naive person on this forum. people dont always tell the truth.

youre just a yes man and have no vision.

you think your gut is wrong because people who u think knows more are making the right decision. everyone is human and everyone makes mistakes or have their own agendas not necessarily for the good of the club

u probably havent heard of people power.

i believe this board supported ando and then booted him

 

[Poupou Escobar]

So, it`s probably not the coach - but it`s also probably not the players.
Make up your mind, son.

I think it's definitely the players. I see every week how bad they are.

How often do you see the coach if you're so convinced he's the problem? You must spend a lot of time at training.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yeah, that'd be it for sure.... support is nothing to do with self-interest or saving face.

If you critically analyse 1 from 10 and 7 from 34 without any emotion (or saving face), then imo there's not too many other conclusions one can reach other than to call on the Board to get in a new coach asap.

You don't think we need new players? Or at least give our young and inexperienced ones time to develop?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

OMFG you're kidding me?!!! ... and here I was thinking we are the Parramatta Board ... OMG how stupid of me!!!

thanks for enlightening me numbnuts ... although maybe we are just DISCUSSING what we think of it dimwitt!

I'm not surprised you missed the point. Not surprised at all.

The reason I say it's not our call to make is to illustrate how little visibility we have of the coaching situation.

The people who do have the authority and responsibility to make that call also have good visibility of what is wrong with the team, and whether changing the coach is likely to fix it.

Here's an example from politics...

At the next election I will vote against the current PM. I'll vote against her just because I don't like her - I don't like how she comes across in interviews and I don't like what her or her party stand for. That's why I'll vote against her. Not because I think she's done a bad job - how could anyone know if she's done a bad job? What do we compare it to? Previous PMs? They were in charge under different circumstances, and you just can't compare them.

I'm pretty certain it's a f**king difficult job, running a country, especially a democracy. And I'm 100% certain the PM knows far more about politics and running a country than I do. The fact is I just don't like her and if I wanted I could be like most people that don't like her and justify why I'm going to vote against her. I would talk about how much better the previous PM was and quote statistics about the economy and say smug things like "ANY other PM would be better!" and "She has the worst record of any PM ever!"

But the fact is I just don't like her. I didn't like her as a player, I don't like the fact that she's a foreigner and I hate that she was previously employed by the club that cheated us out of a premiership.

But because I don't want to admit that I'm so petty, I'll make up shit about her performance and ignore all the various factors that have contributed to the country's poor form while she's been in charge. I'll just blame it all on her, which suits me since I just don't like her.

Who appoints a rookie PM head of party anyway?

 

[strider]

I'm not surprised you missed the point. Not surprised at all.

The reason I say it's not our call to make is to illustrate how little visibility we have of the coaching situation.

The people who do have the authority and responsibility to make that call also have good visibility of what is wrong with the team, and whether changing the coach is likely to fix it.

Here's an example from politics...

At the next election I will vote against the current PM. I'll vote against her just because I don't like her - I don't like how she comes across in interviews and I don't like what her or her party stand for. That's why I'll vote against her. Not because I think she's done a bad job - how could anyone know if she's done a bad job? What do we compare it to? Previous PMs? They were in charge under different circumstances, and you just can't compare them.

I'm pretty certain it's a f**king difficult job, running a country, especially a democracy. And I'm 100% certain the PM knows far more about politics and running a country than I do. The fact is I just don't like her and if I wanted I could be like most people that don't like her and justify why I'm going to vote against her. I would talk about how much better the previous PM was and quote statistics about the economy and say smug things like "ANY other PM would be better!" and "She has the worst record of any PM ever!"

But the fact is I just don't like her. I didn't like her as a player, I don't like the fact that she's a foreigner and I hate that she was previously employed by the club that cheated us out of a premiership.

But because I don't want to admit that I'm so petty, I'll make up shit about her performance and ignore all the various factors that have contributed to the country's poor form while she's been in charge. I'll just blame it all on her, which suits me since I just don't like her.

Who appoints a rookie PM head of party anyway?

well clearly I am as thick as two short planks so yeah figures


PS: I didn't bother reading past the first sentence - it was just too much for me

 

[Poupou Escobar]

He needs a drill seargent telling him how to act & think. Independent thinking is not allowed. We must jump when told to

Yeah I'd be much better off thinking the same thing as all you merkins. :lol:

 

[Poupou Escobar]

well clearly I am as thick as two short planks so yeah figures


PS: I didn't bother reading past the first sentence - it was just too much for me

Sure you didn't.

Mate, the ignore button is in bart's sig.

 

[strider]

i have signatures turned off - it just overloads my poor little brain

 

[born an eel]

I think it's definitely the players. I see every week how bad they are.

How often do you see the coach if you're so convinced he's the problem? You must spend a lot of time at training.

you see the players once a week on TV and feel this is enough to judge them on?

Do you not think that the people who see/train them every day know more if they are suited or the problem? How many players have been sacked?

Why do the same core group of players keep getting selected?

This is the point you f**ken nitwits don't get - IT IS NOT OUR CALL TO MAKE.

We're not privy to what goes on behind the scenes so it's stupid to think we can judge. We can only see the players - whether they're doing their job or not - we can't see coaches at work well enough to judge them.

how do we know if the players are doing their job when we don't even know his instructions to them.

 

[bartman]

You don't think we need new players? Or at least give our young and inexperienced ones time to develop?

No, we were all satisfied the squad assembled for this season should have been enough to have a crack at the 8. I recall you writing that 1 win from 5 would be unacceptable, so no I don't think we "need new players".

And young players always take time to develop, the skill in head coaching is managing your squad so that they are ready when the opportunity comes, or get ready quickly on the back of their experience. The really good young ones would grow into first grade very quickly anyway, and Kearney can't take the credit for that simply by just waiting for it happen.

Thanks for asking, but all emotions aside Kearney's lack of results last year and this year speaks for itself. He's a work experience coach at best that is sending the club backwards imo.

 

[Eels Dude]

And young players always take time to develop, the skill in head coaching is managing your squad so that they are ready when the opportunity comes, or get ready quickly on the back of their experience. The really good young ones would grow into first grade very quickly anyway, and Kearney can't take the credit for that simply by just waiting for it happen.

Well said Bart. I get the impression next year if we're still in as bad a position as we are now, all of the Kearney defenders will be using the excuse of the reason we're going so poorly is because we've offloaded a bunch of experienced players (Hindy, Burt, Poore, Shacks, Fui?) and relying on inexperienced youngsters to replace them... so lack of experience will be our 2013 downfall. I guess we'll just wait and see.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

you see the players once a week on TV and feel this is enough to judge them on?

It's as much as anyone on here sees of them, and more than any of us see of the coach.

Do you not think that the people who see/train them every day know more if they are suited or the problem?

Yes I do.

How many players have been sacked?

A couple.

But sacking is only half the job; those players need to be replaced in the first grade lineup, and if there is nobody better then there's little point sacking them unless it is assessed that spending time in the lower grades will improve their game.

Why do the same core group of players keep getting selected?

Probably because they're the best we've got.

how do we know if the players are doing their job when we don't even know his instructions to them.

I'm certain their implied tasks include making their tackles and holding onto the ball.

Or do you think they're told otherwise?

 

[Parraren]

You don't think we need new players? Or at least give our young and inexperienced ones time to develop?

I'm sure you agree that at some point the coach becomes ultimately responsible for our results.

A lot of us feel that time has arrived. I certainly do but I respect those who think we need to give SK more time.

So where do you draw the line? End of this year? First 10 rounds of next year?

We can't just keep on losing and blame the players/culture/ego's...

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I'm sure you agree that at some point the coach becomes ultimately responsible for our results.

I definitely do. The question is at what point.

A lot of us feel that time has arrived. I certainly do but I respect those who think we need to give SK more time.

So where do you draw the line? End of this year? First 10 rounds of next year?

We can't just keep on losing and blame the players/culture/ego's...

I honestly don't know. It's obviously different on a case-by-case basis, but some people here think it should happen immediately. I'd say that depends on the health of the club when the coach takes charge.

People point to the grand final appearance in '09 as a sign of how strong we were, but that fails to account for the fact that we had only made the finals once in the three years before Kearney took over, scraping into eighth place.

The fact we were on a roll and went deep into the finals that year doesn't change the fact we only won just over half our games, and won less than half in '08 and '10. We had some very talented players in that time but there were obviously some weak attitudes in there as well.

The board decided that had to change and so they brought in a coach who said he would conduct a near-total cleanout.

Obviously that entire concept is a very emotive issue, and now most of the talented players from '05-'10 are gone, and a few others are well on the decline. We are performing very poorly during this cleanout and people are pining for an imaginary golden age. But when I remember it, it was all fool's gold. There was repeated false hope and constant failure to live up to expectations.

I believe our playing roster contained too much talent and not enough attitude during that period, and I'm glad something is being done to change it, even if it's painful as f**k right now.

How long will it take? f**ked if I know. It was never going to happen immediately, but I'll be pissed off if it looks like taking longer than three years.

 

[Eels Dude]

People point to the grand final appearance in '09 as a sign of how strong we were, but that fails to account for the fact that we had only made the finals once in the three years before Kearney took over, scraping into eighth place.

The club and board used that as an excuse to get rid of our previous coach. Because we made the grand final and did so on the back of a run of form in the second half we were installed as premiership favourites by the bookies, and because we were labelled as premiership favourites by the bookies yet missed the finals that seemed a justified reason to punt him.

That's the same board you trust so much and has appointed a coach who has got us into our current predicament.

 

[strider]

I don't think we want a "golden age" tomorrow - we just don't wanna have 40 pts put on us on a near weekly basis and only win 3 or less games all f'n season .... that's unacceptable for even the most shit teams in NRL history!