What should we do with Kearney? #2

[BunniesMan]

I fear what I have to say will be dismissed as trolling, but it's not and I'll give it a go anyway.

Kearney isn't your problem. Be honest with yourselves, look at the preseason predictions, how many people had Parramatta in the 8?

I don't think Kearney is as bad as Eels fans or footy fans in general think he is. Coaches are always the last to get gratitude and the first to get blame, but it's not always their fault. I'd stick with him until halfway through next season at least.

 

[lingard]

Do you know anything about the history of this club?
We won the wooden spoon the year my oldest sister was born, my younger sister was born and the year I was born. That's just three wooden spoons of many.

Get off this bloody forum quick! You`ll only jinx us.

 

[bartman]

No-one's mentioned the Sun Herald snippet about the online petition yet?

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ther-to-boost-strikepower-20120428-1xrlo.html

NET ATTACK ON KEARNEY

The Parramatta faithful are getting impatient with coach Stephen Kearney. One fan, Jeremy Heathcote, has started a petition on change.org demanding his immediate sacking. ''Parramatta Eels have a strong history of success and the current coach is bringing the club down. Discussing the removal of two of the stalwarts of the game (Luke Burt and Nathan Hindmarsh) is the last straw. We urge the board of Parramatta Eels to do the right thing and remove Stephen Kearney from head coaching duties.'' So far, 28 people have signed - although that number is likely to balloon if the Eels lose against Wests Tigers today.

From the petition organiser's reasoning on the page: "Fans have had enough of the poor performances and want to see another Premiership. Many of our fans haven't had the privilege of seeing us win. We need a coach who can get us not only to the finals but also have a shot at wining. Kearney is simply not the man for the job and must be stood down as first grade coach. Give him an assistant role where he excels and bring someone competent to the team."

Onya Jezza, it's more than doubled today - now 59 signatures. (I've signed :thumn.)

 

[Suitman]

Onya Jezza, it's more than doubled today - now 59 signatures. (I've signed :thumn.)

I'm not signing it, as I think by not signing it, it's in the best interests of the club moving forward. :thumn

Suity

 

[bartman]

I respect your opinion Suity, and respectfully differ in my view of the best interests of the club moving forward.

 

[Parra Pride]

I fear what I have to say will be dismissed as trolling, but it's not and I'll give it a go anyway.

Kearney isn't your problem. Be honest with yourselves, look at the preseason predictions, how many people had Parramatta in the 8?

I don't think Kearney is as bad as Eels fans or footy fans in general think he is. Coaches are always the last to get gratitude and the first to get blame, but it's not always their fault. I'd stick with him until halfway through next season at least.

Our team doesn't play well in the structured enviroment Kearney is trying to implement, it's painfully obvious yet our coach still hasn't worked it out.

#He'sNeedsToGetAClue

 

[High Flyers]

Our team doesn't play well in the structured enviroment Kearney is trying to implement, it's painfully obvious yet our coach still hasn't worked it out.

#He'sNeedsToGetAClue

Doesn't every team have a "structure"? If so, what is it about Kearneys structure that you don't like?

I hear people say structure is the problem with Kearney but no one goes into detail about it. What is it exactly that is the problem?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Our team doesn't play well in the structured enviroment Kearney is trying to implement, it's painfully obvious yet our coach still hasn't worked it out.

#He'sNeedsToGetAClue

Other teams that don't play well with structure are also weak as piss - clubs like the Tigers and the Warriors that have one good year followed by three or four shit years.

We need to change to become a club that plays well with structure, and that mans sticking to structure and keeping the players who play well and getting rid of the ones who don't - in all grades.

The alternative is pandering to weak-willed players and nothing changing. If we stick to our structure and our long-term plan we can become a strong, successful club. If we don't try and change it we will stay a club that is mostly shit and a complete joke, but surprise everyone every four years and come close to a premiership (but not close enough).

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Doesn't every team have a "structure"? If so, what is it about Kearneys structure that you don't like?

I hear people say structure is the problem with Kearney but no one goes into detail about it. What is it exactly that is the problem?

There are two structures at work here.

The first is the structured gameplan - where only a couple of players have the freedom to play what they see while everyone else sticks to a clearly defined role. This is how Bennett, Hasler and Bellamy coach their teams.

The second structure is the one through which the club is built for long-term success; essentially a succession plan for the first grade roster. Recruitment, retention and junior development. This is something we haven't had since Brian Smith, but which Kearney and Nolan know well from their time at Melbourne and Brisbane, respectively.

 

[Chipmunk]

Other teams that don't play well with structure are also weak as piss - clubs like the Tigers and the Warriors that have one good year followed by three or four shit years.

We need to change to become a club that plays well with structure, and that mans sticking to structure and keeping the players who play well and getting rid of the ones who don't - in all grades.

The alternative is pandering to weak-willed players and nothing changing. If we stick to our structure and our long-term plan we can become a strong, successful club. If we don't try and change it we will stay a club that is mostly shit and a complete joke, but surprise everyone every four years and come close to a premiership (but not close enough).

So if your coaching staff wants to play with that kind of structure (and I am not saying there is anything wrong with the idea of structure) then why would you bother spending $550k on Sandow for 4 years when it was pretty obvious to everyone that he was never going to be able to fit into that kind of environment..

The only time we have looked any good this year is when Hayne or Sandow or today everyone, just decided to ditch the structure and play what was in front of them..

 

[Chipmunk]

Other teams that don't play well with structure are also weak as piss - clubs like the Tigers and the Warriors that have one good year followed by three or four shit years.

We need to change to become a club that plays well with structure, and that mans sticking to structure and keeping the players who play well and getting rid of the ones who don't - in all grades.

The alternative is pandering to weak-willed players and nothing changing. If we stick to our structure and our long-term plan we can become a strong, successful club. If we don't try and change it we will stay a club that is mostly shit and a complete joke, but surprise everyone every four years and come close to a premiership (but not close enough).

OK, I am going to put it out there and Im sure I will get howled down for it.

What do Parra, the Warriors and the Wests Tigers have in common that the Storm and Broncos dont?

The club might have to change, but concentrating on junior development with the demographics of our current juniors and recruiting players that fit into that same demographic is never going to get you close to be able to play like the Storm and the Broncos.

I think the coaching staff and the playing group are "fighting against each" other and will continue to do so

 

[Poupou Escobar]

So if your coaching staff wants to play with that kind of structure (and I am not saying there is anything wrong with the idea of structure) then why would you bother spending $550k on Sandow for 4 years when it was pretty obvious to everyone that he was never going to be able to fit into that kind of environment..

Being the halfback, Sandow is one of the few who have the freedom to play what they see. Like the big three at Melbourne.

This is why Sandow was sent to Wenty. In our attack he is free to play what's in front of him but his confidence is down because of his defensive lapses. Unconfident players aren't going to create tryscoring opportunities.

So the spine are really the only guys who are free to be creative in a structured attack. The alternative is giving this freedom to everyone, including edge forwards (Mateo) or outside backs (Inu).

Setting everyone loose is great when it comes off (Eels '09, Warriors '11) but it goes wrong far more often than it goes right.

The only time we have looked any good this year is when Hayne or Sandow or today everyone, just decided to ditch the structure and play what was in front of them..

The structure was no different in the final 15 minutes than it was in the first 65. We just had more ball, and hung onto it better, against a side that doesn't defend very well.

If we held the pill in the first half and the Tigers kept giving it back to us we would have scored heaps of points. Instead they completed their sets and we didn't.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

OK, I am going to put it out there and Im sure I will get howled down for it.

What do Parra, the Warriors and the Wests Tigers have in common that the Storm and Broncos dont?

Well I hope you don't mean Polynesians because that's bullshit. Clubs recruit their juniors form all over Australia (and Fiji in our case).

Do you think the Storm's juniors are all from Melbourne? I would be surprised if any of them are.

The club might have to change, but concentrating on junior development with the demographics of our current juniors and recruiting players that fit into that same demographic is never going to get you close to be able to play like the Storm and the Broncos.

I disagree. Talented kids with good attitudes can be taught anything.

I think the coaching staff and the playing group are "fighting against each" other and will continue to do so

If they are I hope Kearney and Nolan win. They know what's required; very few of our current playing group do.

 

[Chipmunk]

Being the halfback, Sandow is one of the few who have the freedom to play what they see. Like the big three at Melbourne.

This is why Sandow was sent to Wenty. In our attack he is free to play what's in front of him but his confidence is down because of his defensive lapses. Unconfident players aren't going to create tryscoring opportunities.

So the spine are really the only guys who are free to be creative in a structured attack. The alternative is giving this freedom to everyone, including edge forwards (Mateo) or outside backs (Inu).

Setting everyone loose is great when it comes off (Eels '09, Warriors '11) but it goes wrong far more often than it goes right.



The structure was no different in the final 15 minutes than it was in the first 65. We just had more ball, and hung onto it better, against a side that doesn't defend very well.

If we held the pill in the first half and the Tigers kept giving it back to us we would have scored heaps of points. Instead they completed their sets and we didn't.

I dont argue thats what should be happening with Sandow, but is it what he has been instructed? With the exception of making some individual runs in the first couple of games he has shown very little of playing what is in front of him. Admittedly he has been in a beaten side most times so he hasnt possibly had the opportunities, but he looked lost most times he is getting the ball and doesnt know what to do.

Fair comment on the lack of ball changed things from the first half, but we were still predominantly one out or one pass off the ruck for 5 tackles for the first 67 mins. We took maybe 1-2 hit-ups and threw the ball wide in the last 13. If the score was 6-0 instead of 31-0 we wouldnt have thrown the ball around like we did.

 

[Chipmunk]

Well I hope you don't mean Polynesians because that's bullshit. Clubs recruit their juniors form all over Australia (and Fiji in our case).

Do you think the Storm's juniors are all from Melbourne? I would be surprised if any of them are.



I disagree. Talented kids with good attitudes can be taught anything.



If they are I hope Kearney and Nolan win. They know what's required; very few of our current playing group do.

Storm dont have any juniors and wont have any to an NRL level anytime soon. Doesnt stop them being at the top of the ladder consistently each year. We concentrated on our juniors from 1987 to 1995 and look where that got us.

Its easier to improve the talents of the players you have and mould them together rather than teach them all something that they know nothing about.... The current players wont respond to what Kearney wants week in week out, so if he wants them to be like that he needs to get rid of those players (Hayne and Sandow included) and find the right players that wont to play his game plan.... But the club cannot go around and replace 25 players and hope to find 25 quality players that are going to fit into our system

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I dont argue thats what should be happening with Sandow, but is it what he has been instructed? With the exception of making some individual runs in the first couple of games he has shown very little of playing what is in front of him. Admittedly he has been in a beaten side most times so he hasnt possibly had the opportunities, but he looked lost most times he is getting the ball and doesnt know what to do.

Put it this way - if he was being scripted like everyone is saying, then he would know exactly what to do; whatever the gameplan says to do.

The reason he looks lost is because he knows it's up to him to be creative and he's not seeing any opportunities. That's confidence but it's also the fault of his teammates not bending the defence back and not getting quick play-the-balls.

No playmaker will have much success against a straight defensive line that is moving up quickly.

That said, there have been a couple of chances (messy or retreating defensive lines) that he hasn't taken, which is all about confidence. That's why he was sent back to Wenty.

Fair comment on the lack of ball changed things from the first half, but we were still predominantly one out or one pass off the ruck for 5 tackles for the first 67 mins. We took maybe 1-2 hit-ups and threw the ball wide in the last 13. If the score was 6-0 instead of 31-0 we wouldnt have thrown the ball around like we did.

We threw the ball around because we were inside the opposition 20. That was because they gave us cheap ball in good field position.

We've been doing that all year close to the opposition tryline. The problem is we have so many new backs that the combinations just aren't there yet and so we've had a lot of issues with our edge players misreading our halves and fullback.

But they'll come good. Roberts, Sandow and Hayne all look to me like they're free to play off the cuff, at least inside the twenty metre zone. When we get that right I'm guessing it will be expanded to include the entire attacking half.

 

[Chipmunk]

We threw the ball around because we were inside the opposition 20. That was because they gave us cheap ball in good field position.

We've been doing that all year close to the opposition tryline. The problem is we have so many new backs that the combinations just aren't there yet and so we've had a lot of issues with our edge players misreading our halves and fullback.

But they'll come good. Roberts, Sandow and Hayne all look to me like they're free to play off the cuff, at least inside the twenty metre zone. When we get that right I'm guessing it will be expanded to include the entire attacking half.

Thats absolute bulls$%^ that we have been throwing the ball around when we get to the opposition 20. All year and last year we have looked like 17 players who met in the carpark with no one knowing what we have to do. Early in the game when we get our chances and we can get Hayne on a short side in the opposition 20 then he will put on something. As the game goes on we just get lost in the opposition 20 and end up coming up with poor decisions.

I dont think the Hayne/Roberts/Sandow/Keating 'spine' are the right 4 players that Kearney needs to implement the attack structure he wants and Im almost certain that they never will be. So he either gets rid of them or find a new plan that suits that combination of 4 players.

 

[yy_cheng]

poops is right. the gameplan is ruck it one out and when we are down by more than 20 with 15 to go throw the ball around

 

[Gronk]

What to do with Kearney ? I've changed a bit. Perhaps mellowed in my old age.

No point sacking anyone now. The season is over and we will probably come last. Review later on but I'm thinking that we stick with the Kearney, Arthurs, Nolan combo and see what happens.

Yesterday's rally will no doubt remind the players that there is actually a fine line between winning and losing. Hold the ball, don't miss the crucial tackles and play smarter and you'll jag a few. Just look at the sharks. They play tight footy and complete their sets and it creates momentum.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Nothing you can do about it anyway Gronk. Just have to put up with another wasted season and hope next year is better.