Rumours and Stuff

[Gronk]

Terry Fearnley was a great coach and very unlucky not to have won a premiership. Glover you unco bastard!

Mr Fearnley (as I called him) used to run city errands for a outer metro law firm ~ 20 years ago. I bumped into him a few times up this end of the city and a) he was shocked that knew who he was and b) was the nicest most humble man you would ever want to meet. He still watched footy then, but was not super into it (I concluded). Terry Fearnley passed in 2015.

 

[Legal Eel]

There is such a thing as constructive dismissal ?

I'm actually not certain constructive dismissal would apply here.

I take your point that Sivo could argue he was being "managed out", but although I am not an employment lawyer per se, I am not certain that would apply here.

The only reason I would say that is because I don't believe Sivo is guaranteed a position in any grade. The fact that you are "selected" each week as opposed to appointed to a role would indicate that the selecting parties have an unfettered discretionary preference.

In short, in my opinion I'm not certain Constructive Dismissal, but with the current litigation climate in rugby league, who the hell knows?

 

[Eelementary]

I don't think he's coasting and he's had various degrees of success but he's reached his ceiling and time is up...
Time for a new direction, new voice, new strategy...everything is tired...

By "coasting", I mean he has had no pressure on him from above to deliver results.

 

[Micheel]

No, what you guys have jumped on is the speculation that the board have decided to give BA every opportunity to turn this around.

There is no doubt that the board sits at regular intervals and it would be incumbent on them to discuss the performance of the team including BA.

Like you, I listen to podcasts and watch NRL shows. I lap them up. What is obvious is that these journos take a snippet of info and extrapolate it into a story. They join the dots based on what they perceive is logic. I hear them actually brain storm speculation or narratives on the Telecrap or 2MMM podcast. The flip flop based on what they like the sound of best. Sometimes Ready will start with a narrative and then after chatting it over with Chammas or Rothfield, they will arrive at a totally different story. I hear Ready say "I like that". Like he has accepted a more saleable story for clicks.

I have little faith on the inside information being anything other than "there was a board meeting" and maybe to the answer re: Bennett "nothing was resolved". From there I reckon the rest of the story is just join the dots and merkins here (who already have an entrenched bias) want to believe it. Me, I'm more of an agnostic about a lot of things and in this case I know that there could be multiple scenarios playing out. PLUS the mindset would be very much framed around not dragging us through a basketcase situation like many many clubs have been through in the past. Every coach transition involving Phil Gould has ended up ugly. Hasler got chopped by the dogs then by Manly (is still in court with Manly). The only thing I am positive about it that they will be desperately wanting to avoid this.

Ironically, the Bennett to Demetriou transition was very smooth but didn’t work out.
Given a choice I’d take ugly if we come out the other side in better shape.
But I take your point, given how much of a basket case we were for a few years, the club wants to appear professional and stable.
As justifiably pissed as we all are, their action to date do say to potential coaches “we’ll treat you fairly and won’t drag you through the mud”.

 

[Wally21]

Not true. See above.

Crap. Read your own stats. D has been on the downhill slide since 2020. But please tell me why I’m wrong and how I’ve misinterpreted your stats

 

[Happy MEel]

He’s shown he’s a good coach.

*person

 

[Joshuatheeel]

I reckon the eels have an “aging” squad is a bit overstated.

Gutho, is off contract next year. But is still going good enough plus can move spots if required. He is off contract next year.

Moses, halves get better with age.

Our pack, Lane, Matterson and Cartwright are only 30 this year. First 2 are only contracted until 32. While Paulo/RGC are only 32 next year. RCG is off contract next year Paulo the year after.

Offa is only 30 next year.

So the oldest we have on contract will be Paulo in 2026 at 33.

Look at the Dolphins, age isn’t a worry for their pack, their ages this year - Bromwich 35 and 33, Nicholls 34, Kaufusi 32.

But in saying that we do need some more youth and obviously speed in our side.

we do have the following youngsters all who are a chance of getting NRL time next year:

Talagi - only 19. He is going ok
Arthur - only 19. Looks promising
Guymer - 20. Developing ok.
Richard Pensini - reckon he wouId have been a smokie for a backline spot this year if not injured. Hopefully recovers well
AMS - promising but probably more a back up
Sam T - probably couple years away.

Then in forwards we have players 25 or younger, in Hopgood who is pretty young. Then fringe forwards Moretti, Doorey, Tuilagi and Greig.

So with Lomax coming, Russell/Pensini being young and Talagi, plus with the injured players coming back, there is a fair bit of youth in the backs. If we could recruit another promising youngster with some NRL experience (maybe Armstrong?), the backs are looking good.

With our forwards it won’t take to much to add some “youth” to the side. We have a few fringe edge options plus Guymer. Hopgood is young. Also wouldn’t be surprised if MA jags a bench spot next year. Suddenly if MA, and one of those options jag a spot, the pack isn’t that old.

With Sam T still a while away, maybe we need to try to pick up a young prop. Additionally we have some cash available leading into 2026 so we could recruit too.

So I don’t think the squad is as “older” as some claim. There is a decent blend. BTW not saying our squad is perfect, there are issues like back depth this year.

 

[Happy MEel]

No, what you guys have jumped on is the speculation that the board have decided to give BA every opportunity to turn this around.

There is no doubt that the board sits at regular intervals and it would be incumbent on them to discuss the performance of the team including BA.

Like you, I listen to podcasts and watch NRL shows. I lap them up. What is obvious is that these journos take a snippet of info and extrapolate it into a story. They join the dots based on what they perceive is logic. I hear them actually brain storm speculation or narratives on the Telecrap or 2MMM podcast. The flip flop based on what they like the sound of best. Sometimes Ready will start with a narrative and then after chatting it over with Chammas or Rothfield, they will arrive at a totally different story. I hear Ready say "I like that". Like he has accepted a more saleable story for clicks.

I have little faith on the inside information being anything other than "there was a board meeting" and maybe to the answer re: Bennett "nothing was resolved". From there I reckon the rest of the story is just join the dots and merkins here (who already have an entrenched bias) want to believe it. Me, I'm more of an agnostic about a lot of things and in this case I know that there could be multiple scenarios playing out. PLUS the mindset would be very much framed around not dragging us through a basketcase situation like many many clubs have been through in the past. Every coach transition involving Phil Gould has ended up ugly. Hasler got chopped by the dogs then by Manly (is still in court with Manly). The only thing I am positive about it that they will be desperately wanting to avoid this.

You’re conveniently ignoring the fact that we’ve been giving BA every opportunity to succeed for the last 11 years. Someone posted that we’ve extended him 5 f**king times. That’s the very meaning of giving every opportunity to succeed. Taking a position that the board will probably continue to do the same is not just justified, it’s highly likely.

You taking the opposing view is the more ridiculous argument.

 

[Soto]

If we remove all the pros and cons and any emotional attachment to this, what is the reasonable amount of time?
I think a coach generally speaking should have 5-7 yrs. If no premiership then next..
Why i say 5-7 is because it allows coaches to go and recruit the types of players they want to execute their game plan....
First couple of years you may have inherited the roster, by year 3 you're shaping the roster....

 

[hineyrulz]

You’re conveniently ignoring the fact that we’ve been giving BA every opportunity to succeed for the last 11 years. Someone posted that we’ve extended him 5 f**king times. That’s the very meaning of giving every opportunity to succeed. Taking a position that the board will probably continue to do the same is not just justified, it’s highly likely.

You taking the opposing view is the more ridiculous argument.

More extensions than finals win. In 11 seasons lol. Yeah we haven’t given poor Brad a decent shake.

 

[Gronk]

You’re conveniently ignoring the fact that we’ve been giving BA every opportunity to succeed for the last 11 years. Someone posted that we’ve extended him 5 f**king times. That’s the very meaning of giving every opportunity to succeed. Taking a position that the board will probably continue to do the same is not just justified, it’s highly likely.

You taking the opposing view is the more ridiculous argument.

How have I taken any view other than "the journalists are probably making shit up" ?

 

[Twizzle]

ou’re conveniently ignoring the fact that we’ve been giving BA every opportunity to succeed for the last 11 years.

sorry mate but you're ignoring the "years of the plumber" when BA was screwed but got a team of nuffies to the finals after getting screwed and winning a wooden spoon,

that is his strength, but unfortunately its his limitations as well which is something I think we all agree on as we need more than just getting to the finals

 

[Twizzle]

 

[Legal Eel]

I reckon the eels have an “aging” squad is a bit overstated.

Gutho, is off contract next year. But is still going good enough plus can move spots if required. He is off contract next year.

Moses, halves get better with age.

Our pack, Lane, Matterson and Cartwright are only 30 this year. First 2 are only contracted until 32. While Paulo/RGC are only 32 next year. RCG is off contract next year Paulo the year after.

Offa is only 30 next year.

So the oldest we have on contract will be Paulo in 2026 at 33.

Look at the Dolphins, age isn’t a worry for their pack, their ages this year - Bromwich 35 and 33, Nicholls 34, Kaufusi 32.

But in saying that we do need some more youth and obviously speed in our side.

we do have the following youngsters all who are a chance of getting NRL time next year:

Talagi - only 19. He is going ok
Arthur - only 19. Looks promising
Guymer - 20. Developing ok.
Richard Pensini - reckon he wouId have been a smokie for a backline spot this year if not injured. Hopefully recovers well
AMS - promising but probably more a back up
Sam T - probably couple years away.

Then in forwards we have players 25 or younger, in Hopgood who is pretty young. Then fringe forwards Moretti, Doorey, Tuilagi and Greig.

So with Lomax coming, Russell/Pensini being young and Talagi, plus with the injured players coming back, there is a fair bit of youth in the backs. If we could recruit another promising youngster with some NRL experience (maybe Armstrong?), the backs are looking good.

With our forwards it won’t take to much to add some “youth” to the side. We have a few fringe edge options plus Guymer. Hopgood is young. Also wouldn’t be surprised if MA jags a bench spot next year. Suddenly if MA, and one of those options jag a spot, the pack isn’t that old.

With Sam T still a while away, maybe we need to try to pick up a young prop. Additionally we have some cash available leading into 2026 so we could recruit too.

So I don’t think the squad is as “older” as some claim. There is a decent blend. BTW not saying our squad is perfect, there are issues like back depth this year.

excellent post.

buying into your persuasive optimism, we are probably a decent first grade level winger, hooker and prop/backrower from a stronger squad - but I still think we need a new voice and new structures, or we are just reverting to the same mediocrity.

 

[Happy MEel]

How have I taken any view other than "the journalists are probably making shit up" ?

I propose they’re not and have some contacts that may have given some idea of what’s going on.

Regardless, whether we’re jumping on the journo’s comments or taking our own view based on the last 11 years, the position we’re taking is more than reasonable.

 

[Happy MEel]

sorry mate but you're ignoring the "years of the plumber" when BA was screwed but got a team of nuffies to the finals after getting screwed and winning a wooden spoon,

that is his strength, but unfortunately its his limitations as well which is something I think we all agree on as we need more than just getting to the finals

I disagree mate. I’ve just said the board have given him every opportunity to succeed. Too many opportunities as it seems. They’re loyalty is admirable but foolish.

 

[yy_cheng]

No, what you guys have jumped on is the speculation that the board have decided to give BA every opportunity to turn this around.

There is no doubt that the board sits at regular intervals and it would be incumbent on them to discuss the performance of the team including BA.

Like you, I listen to podcasts and watch NRL shows. I lap them up. What is obvious is that these journos take a snippet of info and extrapolate it into a story. They join the dots based on what they perceive is logic. I hear them actually brain storm speculation or narratives on the Telecrap or 2MMM podcast. The flip flop based on what they like the sound of best. Sometimes Ready will start with a narrative and then after chatting it over with Chammas or Rothfield, they will arrive at a totally different story. I hear Ready say "I like that". Like he has accepted a more saleable story for clicks.

I have little faith on the inside information being anything other than "there was a board meeting" and maybe to the answer re: Bennett "nothing was resolved". From there I reckon the rest of the story is just join the dots and merkins here (who already have an entrenched bias) want to believe it. Me, I'm more of an agnostic about a lot of things and in this case I know that there could be multiple scenarios playing out. PLUS the mindset would be very much framed around not dragging us through a basketcase situation like many many clubs have been through in the past. Every coach transition involving Phil Gould has ended up ugly. Hasler got chopped by the dogs then by Manly (is still in court with Manly). The only thing I am positive about it that they will be desperately wanting to avoid this.

Then why do we have to source rumours?

I get sourcing like signings and official stuff from nrl or parraeels website but why do have to source from podcasts, websites and news media of they are extrapolating stuff

 

[Happy MEel]

excellent post.

buying into your persuasive optimism, we are probably a decent first grade level winger, hooker and prop/backrower from a stronger squad - but I still think we need a new voice and new structures, or we are just reverting to the same mediocrity.

I agree with this but I’d be pushing for an elite or thereabouts hooker. That’s where the money should go. If we can get a genuine first grader on the wing and try to replace Lane with a Papalii-type edge forward and Matto or Junior for a hard running pig we look much better.

 

[eel01s]

I know TCT can't bite the hands that feed them, but their argument that Bennett is past it and not a good choice to coach any team is laughable and just about destroys any credibility they thought they had.

You shouldn't keep a coach for more than 5 years without winning a Comp. For a decade, you would think at least two Comps.

 

[Pazza]

I know TCT can't bite the hands that feed them, but their argument that Bennett is past it and not a good choice to coach any team is laughable and just about destroys any credibility they thought they had.

You shouldn't keep a coach for more than 5 years without winning a Comp. For a decade, you would think at least two Comps.

at minimum a functional football program