What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

LU: The Strife of Brian (RE: Hagan & Reynoldson)

StEely Matt

Juniors
Messages
467
The strife of Brian, little of his doing…

Written by: Adrian Rovere
August 25th, 2007 03:20 PM

http://www.leagueunlimited.com/article.php?newsid=14680

Isn't life funny. Everyone has worked themselves into a lather over the Kirk Reynoldson affair when the solution to this problem is staring us in the face! Michael Hagan.

Having brought Reynoldson to Newcastle, and one would assume was complicit in the implementation of the controversial clause in his contract which has created all the kerfuffle, the now Parramatta coach must surely do the honourable thing and snaffle up his former charge for season 2008. And to ease the financial burden, l feel certain that the Knights would contribute upwards of $50,000, leaving the Eels with a shortfall of a mere $150,000 to make up, give or take a dollar. I'd be only too happy to broker the deal at no cost to either party and hey presto, everyone including yours truly ends up with that warm and fuzzy feeling all of us constantly seek.

But nah, it's been nothing but a deafening silence from Mr Hagan who rather curiously has escaped any criticism over this entire unhappy saga. Gee, I would have thought a diligent News Limited journo would have latched onto this angle by now. Still time boys, oh and girls, can't forget the cerebral Rebecca Wilson, whose contributions on this topic have been the stuff of Walkleys...not.

I would love to personally get Hagan's response to my recommendation on how to resolve the Reynoldson issue. But given the time that's elapsed since the story broke and he hasn't said "boo" or been asked to say "boo", he's unlikely to want to share his thoughts with someone who rates him as Queensland's worst ever coach and who's of the firm belief that his contribution to Newcastle's 2001 premiership, would have been of a minor nature. Such statements do not exactly endear myself to Mr Hagan. In no way is it personal. These are my opinions and observations based on the evidence as I see it.

So we can take it that Parramatta's zero interest in Reynoldson suggests that it agrees with the Newcastle club, that the bearded backrower isn't worth $200,000 for season 2008. Their evaluation of where he sits in the market place would most likely come in below such a figure. But the Eels and the Knights wouldn't be by themselves in their appraisal of Reynoldson. I'd reckon if you surveyed all sixteen clubs, there would not be one willing to part with $200,000 for a player that's pushing thirty and who doesn't bring a great deal to the table at NRL level.

I don't necessarily share the opinion of former international Peter Tunks, who likened Reynoldson's form to that of Jim Beam Cup standard. A bit harsh but probably not a long way from the truth. If you were to make a real estate analogy, and put Reynoldson up for public auction, a realistic reserve price would be around the $90,000 mark with a vendor bid, which in this case is the Newcastle club, at around the $80,000 level. For the uninitiated, the vendor bid is a figure not far below what you would be willing to accept. Such a bid can only be made once and must be revealed at the time it is submitted. The vendor is not obligated to exercise this right.

Penrith, Canberra and North Queensland have emerged as clubs who would sign Reynoldson, but the money they are talking isn't in the same postcode as the $200,000 jackpot that the Knights must fork out if he plays one more first grade game. Panthers general manager Mick Leary summed it up best when he said his club would accommodate Reynoldson "if we get him at the right price". Basically he's after a bargain buy and that's fair enough. In the cut and thrust of professional sport, clubs are duty-bound to be fiscally responsible.

What about the latest attack on Brian Smith by the Daily Bellylaugh (AKA Daily Telegraph). The backpage of Friday's edition (24-7-07) carried the damning headline: "Brian cost me $2 million", which talked about the financial losses incurred by advertising guru John Singleton, in regards to the launch of his beer in the Hunter region using three players in the advertising campaign who aren't going to be with the club in 2008.

But instead of directing his wrath at Smith and the Knights club, Singo should be conducting an internal investigation as to which member of his marketing team was responsible for choosing three run-of-the-mill first graders in Clint Newton, Adam Woolnough and Kirk Reynoldson to appear in the commercials, when there were superior candidates in Kurt Gidley, Steve Simpson and Jarrod Mullen, who played in this year's State of Origin series and are signed with the Knights long term. I dare say such a flawed decision is certain to be met with severe consequences. And rightly so…

It seems the general public has to accept that the Daily Bellylaugh is going to "give it" to Brian Smith every opportunity it gets. Take the recent report by Barry Toohey that Danny Buderus is seriously considering playing in England. Whacky-doo! The Knights could win the premiership next year and no one would begrudge Buderus if he signed a lucrative contract to play in the English Super League for season 2009 and beyond. Toohey puts a negative spin on a situation that could quite easily eventuate and would be of little shock to anybody.

One of the most disturbing claims doing the rounds over this sordid affair, is that the Knights management after giving Smith the imprimatur to conduct the player cleanout, is going to cast him asunder. If that were to be true, then anyone who'd be party to such a betrayal could only be described as a "conniving coward". Let's hope it is nothing more than a viscous rumour.

Smith's great qualities as a coach were in evidence at Energy Australia Stadium against the Cowboys. Emerging from a week's bashing from the media and disruptive preparation in which he lost inspirational forward Steve Simpson, he was able to inspire his team to a spirited and gutsy performance against one of the competition heavyweights,

But for touches of brilliance from Matty Bowen and a miraculous intercept try by Ashley Graham at a crucial moment in the game, the result could easily have been reversed.

Knights supporters should be immensely proud of the seventeen players who took part along with a coach who if he receives a fair go in all aspects of the game, will bring to club the most success it's had since the premiership-winning season of 2001.
 

Hurriflatch

Referee
Messages
22,093
While I don't think Hagan has to say anything or even should say anything but the point that the whole deal the Reynoldson had was signed before Smith got there but he was the person forced to deal with a contract that should never have been offered to Reynoldson is true.
 

Stagger eel

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
65,711
Adrian Rovere is an absolute goose, he's a seriel pest in the talk back circuit for sporting shows on the radio, if you believe Adrian, you'd think that Lockyer is the worst player to lace a boot, Ricky Stuart is the worst coach to hold a clip board and SBW is the greatest thing in the history of the game.

I would suggest you take what he says with a grain of salt, the guy has no credibility.
 

Hurriflatch

Referee
Messages
22,093
Stuart is a sh*t coach

He has previous just been in charge of very good sides that even Paul Langmack could get to the 3rd week of the finals.
 

Y2Eel

First Grade
Messages
8,176
Guys a knob...

When Hagen Signed Kirk he was playing really good football 200,000 isnt much piggy is probably on the same or more and he and Kirk are/were on the same playing level..

Also i doubt Hagen would have Dragged Kirk along to the 14th, If he wasnt wanted tell him first round and not play him in first grade.. Playing the man in 1 short of the 15 is just cruel...

Hagen's not to blame Smith is....
 

Hurriflatch

Referee
Messages
22,093
Typical anti-Smith response


Reynoldson had played 13 games before Taia arrived once he got there Smith only played him once more due to other players being out

and if Reynoldson had played 14 games or 4 games doesn't change a thing
 

Ron Jeremy

Coach
Messages
25,665
Did Hagan sign kirk? can someone answer this!

If Steve Crowe was appointed in charge of recruitment in late 2005? then maybe it was Sargant that recruited him, and lets be honest, kirk was playing blooody well in 2004 and alot of clubs were after him!

The article is typical 'all hagans fault' stupidity!

Get a life and atleast try and argue reasonably instead of blaming Hagan for everything and praising Smith for coming last.
 

Y2Eel

First Grade
Messages
8,176
Hurriflatch said:
Typical anti-Smith response


Reynoldson had played 13 games before Taia arrived once he got there Smith only played him once more due to other players being out

and if Reynoldson had played 14 games or 4 games doesn't change a thing

Hey i like Smith..

But to get a guy to 13 games and all the hoohaa starts its a bit piss weak..

If he isnt worth the cash tell him at the start of the season... Write him a new contract before it all boils out of hand...
 

Ron Jeremy

Coach
Messages
25,665
Hurriflatch said:
Typical anti-Smith response


Reynoldson had played 13 games before Taia arrived once he got there Smith only played him once more due to other players being out

and if Reynoldson had played 14 games or 4 games doesn't change a thing

This is another thing, Newcastle Knights fans are saying they've used 37 players this year, maybe so....but its not due all to injury. Zeb, Luke, Vuna were i'm pretty sure midseason transfers before Mullen & Burderus got injured, and Kirk isn't playing any grade, stats can be very wrong and lisleading sometimes.
 

Hurriflatch

Referee
Messages
22,093
Hagan may not have handed Reynoldson the contracty but he definatly would've had input into the length and $$$ of it.

It's not Hagan's fault as such but even you Ron have to admit that Smith had no input into what was done with Reynoldson but was forced to work under the conditions of the contract the best he could.

Smith has the right as coach to not want Reynoldson at the club, the previous Knights management which consisted amongst others of Hagan (not not only him) signed him to this deal.

Is it 100% Hagan's fault - No
but it also isn't Smith's fault Reynoldson was signed to this contract
 

Ron Jeremy

Coach
Messages
25,665
Hurriflatch said:
Stuart is a sh*t coach

He has previous just been in charge of very good sides that even Paul Langmack could get to the 3rd week of the finals.

You have know idea Flatch honestly. If you cannot see how much Cronulla have improved this year defensively and tactically then you should take up AFL. Cronulla have one of the best for and againsts in the comp, and if it wasn't for massive injuries would be currently top 4.
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,907
:lol: :lol: :lol: .... blame hagan? :lol: ... omg #-o ...... well then surely newcastle SHOULD have kept hagan on at the club until all the contracts he'd created had expired - oh hang on that wouldn't work would it
 

Hurriflatch

Referee
Messages
22,093
I'm not disagreeing that this article is a bit stupid and the ONLY vaild point in it is that Smith had no input into Reynoldson based on his 2007 for Kirk is not worth 200k for 2008

the rest of the article is pretty bloody stupid
 

Ron Jeremy

Coach
Messages
25,665
Hurriflatch said:
Hagan may not have handed Reynoldson the contracty but he definatly would've had input into the length and $$$ of it.

It's not Hagan's fault as such but even you Ron have to admit that Smith had no input into what was done with Reynoldson but was forced to work under the conditions of the contract the best he could.

Smith has the right as coach to not want Reynoldson at the club, the previous Knights management which consisted amongst others of Hagan (not not only him) signed him to this deal.

Is it 100% Hagan's fault - No
but it also isn't Smith's fault Reynoldson was signed to this contract

I agree, Brian is entitled to do what he likes with Reyno, got know dramas with that, however it isn't very ethical but thats business, not about ethics, just performance.

Smith really would've known earlier in the year that he didn't want him, it wasn't like he just woke up one morning and said he doesn't want him, Brian is wrong though in that regard.
 

Angry_eel

First Grade
Messages
8,633
But why blame Hagan when he's gone? Hagan has nothing to do with thi, why should he speak? Sure, he has some clause but if Smith didn't think Kirk was upto it then he shouldn't have played him at all.
 

Y2Eel

First Grade
Messages
8,176
Hurriflatch said:
Hagan may not have handed Reynoldson the contracty but he definatly would've had input into the length and $$$ of it.

It's not Hagan's fault as such but even you Ron have to admit that Smith had no input into what was done with Reynoldson but was forced to work under the conditions of the contract the best he could.

Smith has the right as coach to not want Reynoldson at the club, the previous Knights management which consisted amongst others of Hagan (not not only him) signed him to this deal.

Is it 100% Hagan's fault - No
but it also isn't Smith's fault Reynoldson was signed to this contract

Smith also didnt have input into Joeys contract.. Thats what you are delt when you change clubs as coach...

The only problem there is, Is the way it was all handled... SMith would have known before Kirk played the 5th game he was on too much tell him then it wouldn't have made the papers...
 

Ron Jeremy

Coach
Messages
25,665
Hurriflatch said:
I'm not disagreeing that this article is a bit stupid and the ONLY vaild point in it is that Smith had no input into Reynoldson based on his 2007 for Kirk is not worth 200k for 2008

the rest of the article is pretty bloody stupid

You know when a wanker Newcastle fan has written it, just look at the first paragraph to see how many times Hagan is mentioned, and then later on in it praises Smith for the great year:lol:

They really have no idea. If QLD selectors saw potential in him then thats enough for me, they have more idea about coaching then any of those inbreds located in arguarbly the ugliest town in NSW.
 

Hurriflatch

Referee
Messages
22,093
Hagan shouldn't speak and he has nothing to do with Reynoldson playing 14 games this year, but I still say that the sections of the media that are bagging Smith for playing Kirk in 14 games would still be bagging Smith if Kirk played 4 games

But Hagan did have a lot to do with Reynoldson needing 15 games to get 200k for 2008.

To suggest Hagan should speak about it or honour the 200k deal is just plain stupid and pathetic though.
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
78,907
I put the blame for the reynaldson situation on 2 ppl - Kirk and his manager

I can only imagine that Newcastle didn't want to sign him for that extra season and the manager proposed something a bit out of the norm to get a potential extra season .... but that sort of clause is leaving yourself open to exactly what has happened.

I don't blame whoever originally created the contract at Newcastle - they made a business decision.

I don't blame Smithy - he obviously doesn't feel Kirk is part of the team's future, so he is making a business decision by cutting him free .... I think brian's hand was forced to rebuild the club when johns retired and injuries struck - he decided to go for broke in rebuilding and thats his right as the coach/manger of the team.

I feel a bit sorry for Kirk cos he seems like a nice guy - but at the end of the day, footy is a business and he and his manager left themselves open to this business decision.
 

Ron Jeremy

Coach
Messages
25,665
Angry_eel said:
But why blame Hagan when he's gone? Hagan has nothing to do with thi, why should he speak? Sure, he has some clause but if Smith didn't think Kirk was upto it then he shouldn't have played him at all.

They are a defensive bunch of twats, they dont wanna be humiliated and say they should've kept Hagan after all the wanking over Smith earlier in the year.

They are embarrased and looking for a scapegoat.

As i said earlier, i'm pretty sure Hagan didn't have control over recruitments, and if he did ( which i doubt) then who can argue with signing kirk based on his 2004 form?
 
Top