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!
They have contracts and don't have to go anywhere. There'll be no falling on swords for any coach. They shouldn't be putting in for a coach either. They are professionals and competitors. All this talk of dying for coaches is media bullshit. I like my boss but I work hard because I care about my professional reputation, not to help him keep his job.
I agree with all of that. But you seemed to suggest that Arthur was central to any short-term success. So I again ask the original question, what would be the point of keeping Arthur for longer rather than ripping the bandaid off and getting the new regime down to work?
What happens to your professional reputation when you retire though... what's that actually worth?
No I’m saying he might be.
If the coach and players wanted him to remain until the end there might be an argument for keeping him. The incoming coach could contribute to recruitment/retention for the following year without running the team full of merkins he doesn’t want.
So which is it? Is he responsible for the squad or not? I think we have a decent squad right now which is not playing to its potential. It’s certainly far better than a 14th place team. If we miss the finals for the second consecutive year it’ll be a huge failure.
JWH does exactly that every second tackle, and the media regards it as his enforcers role. What Sivo did was stupid in the context of the game, not sure in reality it was more than a penalty and move on. Yep, even giving up a penalty on 4th was dumb, but the officials were horrid during the whole game.
I'm starting to think that pou IS Brad Arthur
www.nrl.com
