Kearney

[Kornstar]

Any coaching experience is irrelevant if your team doesn't perform at club level. But you don't that until after the guy is signed.

Geoff Toovey had plenty of experience as an assistant and lower grade coach but his team of premiership winners are playing like busteds at the moment.

Wayne Bennett has achieved everything in the game but his team suck at the moment too. Yet the Dragons had instant success when he took over.

It's not all down to the coach. Sometimes there are deep structural issues that need changing and sometimes coaches are just unlucky with injuries and poor form to key players.



You know that's never going to happen - Kearney will quit before being marginalised in his own club, unlike Anderson who threw his own plans out the window in a desperate bid to save his job. However your weird homoerotic dominance/submission fantasy is something else.

You've got quite the obsession with forcing other men to 'swallow their pride' and so on, haven't you? Be careful posting that shit around DeanPay98. He works with psychiatrists, don't you know?

I think one of them gives him his meds every night before lights out.

Manly? Busteds? Weren't they going for 5 in a row today? Wish we were going that busted!!!!

I have heard you bang on and on and on and on and on and on and on about first year coaches and then continually bring up Cleary, Bennett & now Toovey (who coincidently lost today, perfect timing) when defending Kearney, who is now in his second year, not first, like those guys........is it because you argue with EVERYTHING that you sometimes lose focus?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Because it's nonsense that in a performance industry that performance should not be judged by an employer in the first year.

But you're assuming coaching performance is all about wins and losses. The fact is that coaching performance is about development of the team, and wins and losses should eventually fall out of that, but not necessarily straight away.

Wayne Bennett's performance this year is yet more proof of that. The Dragons were minor premiers in his first year in charge, but the Knghts are going much worse in his first year with them.

Does that mean he's a worse coach in 2012 than he was in 2009?

Refute what? That you think Kearney should get the benefit of the first season's doubt?

No, that if coaches who won in their first year turned out to be ordinary, and coaches who finished near the bottom in their first year turned out to be guns, then it is strong evidence that a coach's first year in charge can't be judged on wins and losses.

That's your opinion only, and doesn't need "refuting".

No it's factual, and I just showed you why.

Your statement contains nothing factual

I just gave you the factual examples of Hagan, Stuart and Hasler's rookie seasons.

and is not related to how a professional club needs to be mindful of performance every year.

A team's performance is dependent on everybody in the club; not just the coach. Otherwise Wayne Bennett and Des Hasler's teams would finish 1st and 2nd every year.

Ah, so you haven't done Philosophy 101 to learn about the nature of logic then.

When it comes to logic I'm just a natural. Sounds like you should ask for your HECS fees back though.

 

[bartman]

Any coaching experience is irrelevant if your team doesn't perform at club level. But you don't that until after the guy is signed.

Or you could sign someone with some record of individual week to week coaching achievement - even as an NYC or NSW/Qld/NZ Cup coach, rather than a chancer assistant coach.

It's not all down to the coach. Sometimes there are deep structural issues that need changing and sometimes coaches are just unlucky with injuries and poor form to key players.

And sometime we talk bollocks like this to make the task sound more impressive, when really it just comes down to the same basic skill of getting the best out of the squad of players you've got at any point in time and under any conditions. A skill Kearney has shown over a season and a half that he doesn't have (unless it's a cream of the crop rep side for a maximum of four games).

You know that's never going to happen - Kearney will quit before being marginalised in his own club, unlike Anderson who threw his own plans out the window in a desperate bid to save his job.

Neither us us know anything. Here's hoping Kearney quits and soon! Anderson simply looked at what was going down and adjusted his plans and structure accordingly - a skill we dearly wish Kearney had right now!

However your weird homoerotic dominance/submission fantasy is something else.

You've got quite the obsession with forcing other men to 'swallow their pride' and so on, haven't you? Be careful posting that shit around DeanPay98. He works with psychiatrists, don't you know?

I think one of them gives him his meds every night before lights out.

Nice one, getting personal when the discussion leaves your points behind. DeanPay98 may not be the only one who works with psychs... and can tell through posts which people here might most need one! ;-)

 

[Eels Dude]

Any coaching experience is irrelevant if your team doesn't perform at club level. But you don't that until after the guy is signed.

Geoff Toovey had plenty of experience as an assistant and lower grade coach but his team of premiership winners are playing like busteds at the moment.

Wayne Bennett has achieved everything in the game but his team suck at the moment too. Yet the Dragons had instant success when he took over.

.

If Manly and Newcastle are playing like busteds what does that say about us. Manly have won 7 times as many games as we have this season. If both teams suck then that makes us the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked.

 

[yy_cheng]

When are we mathematically out of finals contention?

 

[spartan2153]

But you're assuming coaching performance is all about wins and losses. The fact is that coaching performance is about development of the team, and wins and losses should eventually fall out of that, but not necessarily straight away.

Wayne Bennett's performance this year is yet more proof of that. The Dragons were minor premiers in his first year in charge, but the Knghts are going much worse in his first year with them.

Does that mean he's a worse coach in 2012 than he was in 2009?



No, that if coaches who won in their first year turned out to be ordinary, and coaches who finished near the bottom in their first year turned out to be guns, then it is strong evidence that a coach's first year in charge can't be judged on wins and losses.



No it's factual, and I just showed you why.



I just gave you the factual examples of Hagan, Stuart and Hasler's rookie seasons.



A team's performance is dependent on everybody in the club; not just the coach. Otherwise Wayne Bennett and Des Hasler's teams would finish 1st and 2nd every year.



When it comes to logic I'm just a natural. Sounds like you should ask for your HECS fees back though.

Just in case you keep forgetting. Bennet has a proven track record. Cleary is doing amazing things considering the talent he has as well as the injury toll panthers have recieved this year, Toovey has also been smashed with injury with stewart, trex, foran & matuia missing plenty of game time this year.

YOu hero KONY is in his second year & has lead us to 1 win. What cant you comprehend. Penrith were a bigger basket case than what we are when he took over but has them playing a good brand of footy. They were tipped to come last with that roster.

Whats KONY's excuse

 

[Poupou Escobar]

My posts were not having a go at you, although I understand that you may feel it that way, with the amount of arguments you are having with others... but you have your own reasons.

I used to think that Brian Smith copped unfairly from this forum but that pales in comparison to what SK is copping. If it hails tomorrow, we can blame SK! Some posts are beyond critism but downright attack on SK.

Having said that, I'm not a SK defender. I don't agree with Anderson sacking and I'm not sure whether SK's structured game plan has evolved over the last 1.5 years.

But in spite of this, I can't see benefit of sacking SK now. Therefore, I support the coach, not because I think he is special, but for the lack of benefit in criticising/attacking him.

Now, others would disagree. And that's fine by me.

I agree totally. I only seem to defend Kearney as a result of attacking the ignorance I see around here. As I said, my pet hate is people criticising things they know nothing about. I also know nothing about our coaching situation, so I refrain from criticising.

To be honest I have no idea how good or bad a coach Kearney is, and neither does anyone who posts here. But they're happy to attack him so I'm happy to attack their ignorance. Hence it looks like I'm defending him.

If you can just accept that your perspective is fallible, just like everyone else, people would understand your views better.

But my perspective isn't fallible, other than I'll sit on the fence until I've got all (or most) of the facts. There's nothing forcing me to make a hasty judgement, and in my opinion there's plenty stopping me from doing so - because I don't want to come across as just another ignorant league fan.

If that's a fallible perspective then so be it. But I'm comfortable waiting for Kearney to prove his ability or lack thereof. Especially after Hagan turned out shit and made a goose of me. I was convinced he would lead us to a premiership because he'd won one before.

Turns out history isn't always a good gauge of the future. Neither is a coach's early results with a club.

 

[Eels Dude]

When are we mathematically out of finals contention?

Who knows... we need to get at least another 3 wins to draw level with 15th.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Manly? Busteds? Weren't they going for 5 in a row today? Wish we were going that busted!!!!

I have heard you bang on and on and on and on and on and on and on about first year coaches and then continually bring up Cleary, Bennett & now Toovey (who coincidently lost today, perfect timing) when defending Kearney, who is now in his second year, not first, like those guys........is it because you argue with EVERYTHING that you sometimes lose focus?

I bring them up because they're in their first year at their clubs. Try and keep up.

 

[Kornstar]

I bring them up because they're in their first year at their clubs. Try and keep up.

Yep, and how is that relevant to Kearney this year?

You can't judge Kearney on last year, therefore, you can't judge those 3........but you keep bringing them up in relation to how shit Kearney is doing this year?????

 

[bartman]

But you're assuming coaching performance is all about wins and losses. The fact is that coaching performance is about development of the team, and wins and losses should eventually fall out of that, but not necessarily straight away.

To an extent that's right, but I think you undersell the importance to a club of maintaining a decent win ratio. When a club starts to bleed sponsors and lose memberships year on year due to poor performance not developed between seasons by the coach, then it becomes a bottom line issue. They can have all the (misplaced) belief and patience they can muster in Kearney, but if the operations start bleeding because he isn't maintaining enough wins, then they will turn on him. And that's even before the self-interest of what they need to be seen to be doing before elections in December and next April even comes into play....

Re your example, Wayne Bennett is having a worse year as a coach in 2012 than 2009, yes. In the same way Fuifui is having a worse year as a player. Do you think Bennett will bounce back next year? Do you think Fuifui will? Even Jack Gibson had a failed run late in his coaching career. Trying to generalise about (or absolve) coaches' first years is counter productive imo.

No, that if coaches who won in their first year turned out to be ordinary, and coaches who finished near the bottom in their first year turned out to be guns, then it is strong evidence that a coach's first year in charge can't be judged on wins and losses.

I think it's a random factor. Some coaches with poor early performances turn out to be guns, some/many never do. Some coaches who shine early go on to maintain success, some/many splutter and fade. There are no facts, you've cherry-picked a couple of examples rather than done a comprehensive sweep and tallied the numbers to support your assertion.

No it's factual, and I just showed you why.

No it's not, and no you didn't :lol:. You might have showed yourself, but I suspect that's a much easier audience to convince.

I just gave you the factual examples of Hagan, Stuart and Hasler's rookie seasons.

You've cherry-picked examples, rather than comprehensively searched for facts. Excusing Kearney's first year is neither here nor there. Judging Kearney's employment with us based on his performance at the half-way point is a valid measure of whether the second half is going to represent best value or whether the club should cut its losses. It did an assessment on Anderson in terms of cutting losses there, but clearly got it very wrong.

A team's performance is dependent on everybody in the club; not just the coach. Otherwise Wayne Bennett and Des Hasler's teams would finish 1st and 2nd every year.

True, everybody has a role to play. But Bennett and Hasler have proved they're up to it, and command respect. Kearney is not up to the role he is employed in, and would be losing the respect of the league world fast. Just because he still has the support of our Board doesn't mean he deserves that respect, or that we should treat that support as noteworthy - there are so many other factors at play in that equation (see first paragraph). Our Board may be like those who still protested the earth was flat until the very last day...

When it comes to logic I'm just a natural. Sounds like you should ask for your HECS fees back though.

As you've clearly proven :lol:. Thanks but I think my HECS fees were good value for money in comparison.

 

[Eels Dude]

I think it's a random factor. Some coaches with poor early performances turn out to be guns, some/many never do. Some coaches who shine early go on to maintain success, some/many splutter and fade. There are no facts, you've cherry-picked a couple of examples rather than done a comprehensive sweep and tallied the numbers to support your assertion.

Some coaches also get stamped 'Never to coach first grade again'. If Kearney gets the sack which looks inevitable he'll become like Paul Langmack and get that big red stamp on his forehead as he packs up his office.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yep, and how is that relevant to Kearney this year?

You can't judge Kearney on last year, therefore, you can't judge those 3........but you keep bringing them up in relation to how shit Kearney is doing this year?????

I keep bringing them up in relation to judging coaches in their first year. That's why Kearney's record last year is irrelevant.

So I agree Kearney should be judged on this year, but this year isn't over. We have a lot of new players and a lot of injuries so far. I reckon we will finish the year well and if we don't then I was wrong. Just like I was wrong when I thought we would start the year well. Either way I don't think it will reflect wholly on the coach.

The thing is I agree totally with what Kearney is trying to do here and so far I have agreed with all of his signings and all the players he has let go. The only point I disagree on is the fact we're throwing massive coin at T-Rex because I think he's overrated. But I trust the coaching staff to identify talent and manage the salary cap.

 

[bartman]

Some coaches also get stamped 'Never to coach first grade again'. If Kearney gets the sack which looks inevitable he'll become like Paul Langmack and get that big red stamp on his forehead as he packs up his office.

I think he'll get that stamp even if they let him see out his contract to be honest.

But based on performances thus far, the chances of Kearney surviving past end of the year (FC elections in December) or the first few games of next year (LC elections in late April) have to be slim.

 

[IFR33K]

I think he'll get that stamp even if they let him see out his contract to be honest.

But based on performances thus far, the chances of Kearney surviving past end of the year (FC elections in December) or the first few games of next year (LC elections in late April) have to be slim.

The end is near, one would think. Thank f**k for that

 

[IFR33K]

When are we mathematically out of finals contention?

October 2010

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Some coaches also get stamped 'Never to coach first grade again'. If Kearney gets the sack which looks inevitable he'll become like Paul Langmack and get that big red stamp on his forehead as he packs up his office.

Right, but how would that help us as a club? Once Kearney is gone his fate will have no bearing on our club. So why does it matter?

This is why I can't take the Kearney haters seriously. Their arguments all boil down to vindictiveness over a scapegoat. Even the rationale they attribute to the board's decisions (ignorant petty mindedness) says more about them than it does anything about the board.

DeanPay98's psychiatrist would call that 'projection'.

 

[bartman]

Right, but how would that help us as a club? Once Kearney is gone his fate will have no bearing on our club. So why does it matter?

I think he was just answering your point about what can come of first year coaches with poor early records.

This is why I can't take the Kearney haters seriously. Their arguments all boil down to vindictiveness over a scapegoat. Even the rationale they attribute to the board's decisions (ignorant petty mindedness) says more about them than it does anything about the board.

I don't think there is vindictiveness or a scapegoat involved in many people's arguments behind why they've concluded that Kearney can't coach.

It's just down to observations (across many fronts - use of interchange, half time talks, game plans, motivation, influence) that the guy simply can't get the best performance out of the team he is building, and the desire to see our club not continue to sell itself down the river by keeping this charlatan in employment beyond his depth.

DeanPay98's psychiatrist would call that 'projection'.

More likely he'd just call it well-adjusted reasoning?

 

[Eels Dude]

Right, but how would that help us as a club? Once Kearney is gone his fate will have no bearing on our club. So why does it matter?

This is why I can't take the Kearney haters seriously. Their arguments all boil down to vindictiveness over a scapegoat. Even the rationale they attribute to the board's decisions (ignorant petty mindedness) says more about them than it does anything about the board.

Once Kearney is gone I don't care what happens to him. If another club is willing to give him a shot well good luck to him. But if he is unemployable as a head coach again it could be argued that it's a just reward for the misery he's put Eels fan in the last 2 years, and for what he did to the club by setting us back even further. But you're actually right to a certain extent in regards to your latter point.

 

[lingard]

We're at that stage where Cronulla were recently where no-one wanted to go there except for some random player chasing the big buck or the players unwanted by other clubs for misdemeanours.
We need a NRL scandal involving a good player who no-one will touch then we just may able to recruit someone credible.

Robert Lui? To play five-eight?