All this talk about getting rid of our coach because he is no good has got me thinking. Maybe the problem isn't the coach. Maybe the problem is something else.
Everybody has been saying that our attack is below par and in defence we continue being short out wide. But I can clearly remember the previous 2 coaches being blamed for the same problems. But if we look now, these previous 2 coaches, ( Ricky and Kearney ) both have solid attacking and defensive teams they have moved onto and on current form will both make the top 8. Did these 2 coaches suddenly become better at their job, or is the reason they failed at Parra not their own fault? Could it be the culture at the club? Could it be the people running the place? Is the coach totally in charge? Is the coach given the support and assistance needed? Is there to much influence and input from the boardroom?
BA might be a bad coach, but from the outside looking in, and going by the way that our previous 2 coaches are now performing, the problem could be not the coach but the club itself.
Replies
But the roster fine when most fans and experts had the Eels in their top 8 and even top 4 before round 1. Did these same players become below average recently?
BA had 5 years to build a dominant pack but failed hence 2 from 9.
BA is the main reason why we need a major rebuild, especially in the middle.
Jnr Paulo alone wont resolve anything
I can understand your thoughts, but what I'm saying is that maybe BA is not the only and final decision maker. Maybe he is restricted in what he wants and needs. I'm simply following the trend and progression of the previous 2 coaches. Maybe the entire structure at the club needs an overhaul. If this is the case, it would be impossible for BA to say so publicly. If he was to come out and say that he doesn't get what he wants or needs he would be insanely dismissed.
Gurr would know absolutely zero on the who's who in the NRL after spending the last 15 years overseas
The question is why has there been no head of football for the past 3 years? Is that the choice of BA, or is it just a cost cutting decision?
Ideally a club should employ a head coach and leave everything else to him. The head coach should then hire whatever help he requires. The future contracts for the head coach can simply be determined by the results he gets throughout the period of time he is given. Therefore, other than injuries, the head coach is the only person responsible for the teams success or failure.
We have changed coaches, back office front office players the lot yet we still can’t get any consistency and mental toughness in the place. It certainly comes down to culture. How do we fix it, who knows I guess we have to recruit the right coaches and players and make this the priority. Eg players like Moses and Norman who melt when the blow torch is applied don’t help, you need players like Cronk or even green who are calm and make it simple and build a foundation to then add some polish to. We always go for the fancy and that is why we have 10 minutes of brilliant stuff like yesterday and 30 minutes of utter crap where we lose the game and the rest is in between. Our last tackle options last night were diabolical and if we had accountability both halves would be dropped. Of course that is not practical so it again comes down to the roster that has been put together. As an eels fan for over 40 years we have been the laughing stock of the nrl for probabaly 30 of those years, surely its time we fixed it once and to all and become the powerhouse that we should be
Agree I didn’t say we should sack ba now, but the planning can still be done now and ba might still be the coach. management all need to sit down and work out what we want to be and what we need to get there including what type of players we need.
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next