Coaching issues

[Coastalraider]

To me, it’s less about the cattle and more about the lack of structure that we display every single year. We have become one of the most boring, predictable and frustrating teams to watch and nothing seemingly ever gets done to address it.

Even now, all our young exciting outside backs talent is having the handbrake so firmly applied by the playmakers seemingly having no idea about the offense they are running, if it continues as it has we are never going to see them get close to their upside.

Regarding our two better years under Rick’s tenure (2016 and 2019) - I think it’s again telling that it’s taken the cattle to overcome the poor system instead of the system enhancing individual player skills. 2016’s success lay very much with Hodgo calling the on-field shots and Jack giving us excellent attacking shape from fullback. Leipana wouldn’t have exceeded without those guys creating that environment. Bateman was the elevator in 2019. But was he ever put into space or part of plays that created overlaps? No, he had to improvise.

Who knows what kind of ceiling we’d have hit if we had coaching to enhance the sum of our parts instead of individuals having to put the team on their backs?

He's right, you know.

About the cattle, or the lack of structure?

About everything dammit!

[The Nickman]

*chef’s kiss*

[Leebola]

To me, it’s less about the cattle and more about the lack of structure that we display every single year. We have become one of the most boring, predictable and frustrating teams to watch and nothing seemingly ever gets done to address it.

Even now, all our young exciting outside backs talent is having the handbrake so firmly applied by the playmakers seemingly having no idea about the offense they are running, if it continues as it has we are never going to see them get close to their upside.

Regarding our two better years under Rick’s tenure (2016 and 2019) - I think it’s again telling that it’s taken the cattle to overcome the poor system instead of the system enhancing individual player skills. 2016’s success lay very much with Hodgo calling the on-field shots and Jack giving us excellent attacking shape from fullback. Leipana wouldn’t have succeeded without those guys creating that environment. Bateman was the elevator in 2019. But was he ever put into space or part of plays that created overlaps? No, he had to improvise.

Who knows what kind of ceiling we’d have hit if we had coaching to enhance the sum of our parts instead of individuals having to put the team on their backs?

Nailed it.

[Andymachine]

Rickmando is on the money and so is Perthraider86. I'd love for Ricky to be our version of Gus and take a step back from the hands on coaching because our attack has never really looked good outside of 2016-2018 (it wasn't even good in 2019 but our defence really pulled it together that year), and our defence is shaky at best and always has been except for in 2019/20! At this point in time he's had long enough and I don't think he's capable of getting the team humming.

On the personnel front, Ricky has done a pretty good job in pulling together a squad with potential. I think the team loves him and I like the way he recruits and gets players' families involved. We're a long way from being a force though so we'll see how things pan out. He finally saw the light in dropping Emre and 'resting' Whitehead so those are 2 positive moves that he's been slow to make but he got VERY lucky that Wighton knocked back his $1.1M, 4 year offer! Absolutely kissed on the ass by a fairy there. I like Ricky and I like him being involved with the club. I just don't think he's a particularly good coach based on the issues that have perpetuated the team under his tenure.

[BJ]

Ricky would be better with an assistant who’s skilled at coaching attacking structures.

I don’t think his strength is in an administration role like Gus Gould.

Ricky’s main strength is probably his hands on engagement with players at a deeply personal level. Some Players really buy into Rick’s passion, drive to win and team first mentality.

Goulds strength is probably at the executive level and broader club engagement level.

Ricky’s the General fighting with his troops on the front line, Gus is the Field Marshal fighting from the operations room.

[Regs Revolution]

Ricky would be better with an assistant who’s skilled at coaching attacking structures.

I don’t think his strength is in an administration role like Gus Gould.

Ricky’s main strength is probably his hands on engagement with players at a deeply personal level. Some Players really buy into Rick’s passion, drive to win and team first mentality.

Goulds strength is probably at the executive level and broader club engagement level.

Ricky’s the General fighting with his troops on the front line, Gus is the Field Marshal fighting from the operations room.

Spot on!

[reptar]

If Ricky was any good he’d stop all this Hubbl nonsense. Thx.

[Seiffert82]

What is this ideal 'attacking structure' that everyone is referring to?

I think many people confuse a backline that plays with depth as some sort of magical attacking structure. That's can be effective if you have elite speed on both sides of the field, but not so much if your centres are powerful ball runners.

Other people talk about the attacking genius of having a ball playing lock that can pass both sides of the ruck, allowing the halves to play wider. Others talk about how great it is to have a ball playing fullback that provides an extra link on both sides of the ruck. Not all teams are blessed with players who can regularly do those things.

Every single team relies on individual player brilliance and/or a good kicking game to score points. Brisbane have the most basic attacking structure on the planet. There is nothing at all remarkable about what they do, other than have incredibly fast players, a fullback who has the licence to roll the dice with his dubious decision making and a good kicking game.

IMO our biggest issue is having dummy halves who play with zero vision and has poor decision making.

Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk

[Hong Kong Raider]

A team like the Warriors have good attacking structures. You notice it pre and post Andrew Webster. I wouldn't say they have elite speed in the backline - CNK, Montoya, Berry, Pompey last year and RTS aren't particularly fast. But their systems / structures are good in creating a 3 v 2 or isolating a winger so that DWZ is unmarked. Even isolating AFB two passes wide of the ruck. We've seen how average players before they joined the Warriors like Jackson Ford excel in that structure this year and last.

We tend to score our tries from a kick or a dummy half crash over play if in the 20. We are more comfortable outside the 20 in our own half. It's great now that we are using our backline in our half to shift it wide because we previously didn't.

This is an area of Ricky's coaching that he needs to improve. Our attack hasn't been good for a long time. We need to convert points with our possession and territory. Ricky's at least picked (relatively) fast players this year. He's very good at managing players and motivating them personally. But he needs to improve on the technical and tactical side of coaching.

[The Nickman]

What is this ideal 'attacking structure' that everyone is referring to?

I think many people confuse a backline that plays with depth as some sort of magical attacking structure. That's can be effective if you have elite speed on both sides of the field, but not so much if your centres are powerful ball runners.

Other people talk about the attacking genius of having a ball playing lock that can pass both sides of the ruck, allowing the halves to play wider. Others talk about how great it is to have a ball playing fullback that provides an extra link on both sides of the ruck. Not all teams are blessed with players who can regularly do those things.

Every single team relies on individual player brilliance and/or a good kicking game to score points. Brisbane have the most basic attacking structure on the planet. There is nothing at all remarkable about what they do, other than have incredibly fast players, a fullback who has the licence to roll the dice with his dubious decision making and a good kicking game.

IMO our biggest issue is having dummy halves who play with zero vision and has poor decision making.

Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk

This is a joke post, right?

I’m assuming this is a joke.

Haha ok, you got us, Seiff…. Fairgoitall.

[Finchy]

What is this ideal 'attacking structure' that everyone is referring to?

I think many people confuse a backline that plays with depth as some sort of magical attacking structure. That's can be effective if you have elite speed on both sides of the field, but not so much if your centres are powerful ball runners.

Other people talk about the attacking genius of having a ball playing lock that can pass both sides of the ruck, allowing the halves to play wider. Others talk about how great it is to have a ball playing fullback that provides an extra link on both sides of the ruck. Not all teams are blessed with players who can regularly do those things.

Every single team relies on individual player brilliance and/or a good kicking game to score points. Brisbane have the most basic attacking structure on the planet. There is nothing at all remarkable about what they do, other than have incredibly fast players, a fullback who has the licence to roll the dice with his dubious decision making and a good kicking game.

IMO our biggest issue is having dummy halves who play with zero vision and has poor decision making.

Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk

This is crazy talk Seiff. You don't need elite speed to put on a backline move (although it helps). We actually have that speed currently anyway in Savage and Schiller.

You still need depth and actual ball-playing moves to take advantage of powerful ball-running centres too. How often do you hear of players like Best, Staggs, Manu needing more "early ball". It gives them time and space to do what they need to do. You can't just give them a crash ball 2m out from the try line and say "do your best".

We've actually seen our team team do a good backline move on the rare occasion, but then it's not sighted again. Other teams do it nearly every attacking set. Sometimes it results in points, sometimes it gets shut down. We seem to try it once, score a try off it, then never try it again.

[Coastalraider]

We seem to be able to shift the ball this year but still lack either the off the ball runners to manipulate the defensive lines decision making or a ball carrier to straighten and engage the line prior to the pass to create space.

The Hudson try against the titans was a rare glimpse of players running oppositions lines and engaging defenders to open a channel - and it was a basic play well executed.

We need more that getting the ball to the right player, all those around him need to be actively in the play as well - that’s we’re the crash ball style breaks downs. If you can’t beat them one on one it’s play over.

[Bluesbrother]

Not sure why some posters want us to play like other teams?

If you copy and paste the Penrith model to us, sure, we could do it but then it comes down to execution. When you have Chevy vs Edwards, Cleary vs Fogarty, Luai vs Strange and Yeo vs Smithies, we can all see what happens there. It's a KO victory to Penrith inside 10 seconds.

Same can be said for the Roosters, Storm and Brisbane. If we copy them and try to play their style we will get smacked from pillar to post.

The style of football we have played over Ricky's tenure has been different depending on the players we have had. Additionally, it's been a successful 10 years with 2 x preliminary finals and a grand final appearance which we narrowly lost to an emphatically better roster and a bludger of a call. We haven't had rosters like other teams. Our grand final halback was Aidan Sezer. We've had to be different and we will have to be again, moving into the future. Until, I hope, these 3 stars come into their prime years. Then, maybe we can start to play the dictating game and set the bar for attack in the NRL. For now though, we don't have to weapons to fight Penrith, Melbourne, Roosters and Brisbane in hand to hand combat. We need to play differently if we want to beat them.

Moving on to our attack in 2024. It's substantially better that 2023. We're heading in a positive direction.

All this chat about attack for me is overstated. Defence wins premierships, we need to focus on this area. It's less reliant on talent and it's something we should be and need to be better at.

[Coastalraider]

I agree we look to have progressed.

But your argument is based on smoke and mirrors - those panthers players don’t just win the 1 on 1 battles because they are better players and the style suits them better - they win because they have played that style since they were teenagers together and it’s fluent and natural today.

Are they elite therefore successful, or are they elite because of years of high quality coaching and repetitively drilled systems?

Of the 4 Penrith players you mentioned I’d argue that on pure talent alone Edwards, Luia and potentially Yeo are FAR more a product of the system than stand out natural talent.

We are in the enviable position of having potentially elite talent in our squad for a decade. It would be a shame to not use these rebuild/development years to actually develop because an 18 year old half isn’t as good as Nathan Cleary is.

[Bluesbrother]

The Panthers have done an amazing job whatever way you look at it. I think you'll find the way the club is structured now from 16's up is they have a focus on developing NRL players, not winning games. The personal involved at every level are educators.

Harold Matts - Rourke O'Sullivan - Teacher at Erindale College

SG Ball - Peter Marapodi - teacher, was at St Edmunds.

21's - not sure

NSW Cup - Brock Sheppard, career coach and former teacher.

NRL Assistant coach - Justin Giteau - 20 + years teaching and coaching experience.

These guys are all in the business of education. Being a head coach in the NRL isn't necessarily much about coaching, it's player management and environment management, staff management - culture.

We've made adjustments and got a lot of good educators involved at every level.

[Coastalraider]

I don’t disagree with that at all, some very promising signs moving forward. But that’s not what I was arguing - saying we can’t play a good style of football because we don’t have penriths spine ignores the fact that penriths spine weren’t elite when they started playing that style.

I agree we are progressing, and like a lot of the moves we are making, but that doesn’t make us closed to criticism. We have what could be a generational spine on board from 2025, it would be a damn shame to underutilise it because our game plan revolves around our back 5 rucking it out, and our middles trying to crash over in the red. Oh, and brawling.

[BadnMean]

I don’t disagree with that at all, some very promising signs moving forward. But that’s not what I was arguing - saying we can’t play a good style of football because we don’t have penriths spine ignores the fact that penriths spine weren’t elite when they started playing that style.

I agree we are progressing, and like a lot of the moves we are making, but that doesn’t make us closed to criticism. We have what could be a generational spine on board from 2025, it would be a damn shame to underutilise it because our game plan revolves around our back 5 rucking it out, and our middles trying to crash over in the red. Oh, and brawling.

I see what you're saying. There are teams who can throw 3 different organised shapes at you in a set- sometimes variations on the same play depending on how they see the defence react.

To some degree that's players- you need a quality organiser and quality delivery to set the timing and to be able to run those plays in your sleep in order to run them amid the chaos. But unless you drill them and the coach pushes you to run the game that way, it won't happen. That's why it stands out like the proverbials when someone actually does run a hard line for us or we manage a set play in a set.

All teams practice those things but I'm fairly certain by now Ricky just tells them to go out, get to their kicks and play whats in front of them. Because Ricky could do all the organising, be thinking two plays ahead and still react to any opportunity that emerged he just thinks others can do all that normally too. They can't, so we look a bit scrambly and manage the odd structured play when we can.

Teams like Melbourne know which 3 plays are coming next if they get to the left post 40m out, or a 6 again at the 15m line right post etc. With potential for variation or inspiration within that structure if Munster wants. It's a different style and why they can slot players in and out easier. And they have the coach to change those set plays some weeks (blowing us off the park in the semi with pace, width and deft kicks is burned into my brain).

Ricky clearly doesn't want to coach that way. Problem is you need to create opportunities somehow. Melbourne will do it by testing you thoroughly and methodically and seeing what works and then breaking you down that way. If we want to do it off the cuff you need some creative ball play (Hodgo) and some magic (Leipana, Bateman) and Jack could run a pretty good left sweep at his peak.

Right now we have Strange's running and stepping (as a rooky) and Fogs boot and give it to Timoko. We're a creative ball player short to play that way until Chevy gets a season under his belt and blooms imo. Or until we get a better hooker.

[Finchy]

I agree we look to have progressed.

But your argument is based on smoke and mirrors - those panthers players don’t just win the 1 on 1 battles because they are better players and the style suits them better - they win because they have played that style since they were teenagers together and it’s fluent and natural today.

Are they elite therefore successful, or are they elite because of years of high quality coaching and repetitively drilled systems?

Of the 4 Penrith players you mentioned I’d argue that on pure talent alone Edwards, Luia and potentially Yeo are FAR more a product of the system than stand out natural talent.

We are in the enviable position of having potentially elite talent in our squad for a decade. It would be a shame to not use these rebuild/development years to actually develop because an 18 year old half isn’t as good as Nathan Cleary is.

I’d argue Luai is more a natural talent. His strength is his unpredictable running and stepping, similar to a Munster or a Benji. I don’t see much in his game as being a “product of the system”.

Yeo and Edwards yes. They were quite average earlier in their careers. Yeo developed into an elite passing link-man, Edwards more an effort-based player.

A few years back Penrith were seriously considering cutting Edwards lose for Caleb Aekins he was going that badly, and we got Aekins thinking we got the better deal. Look how that turned out!

[The Nickman]

I agree we look to have progressed.

But your argument is based on smoke and mirrors - those panthers players don’t just win the 1 on 1 battles because they are better players and the style suits them better - they win because they have played that style since they were teenagers together and it’s fluent and natural today.

Are they elite therefore successful, or are they elite because of years of high quality coaching and repetitively drilled systems?

Of the 4 Penrith players you mentioned I’d argue that on pure talent alone Edwards, Luia and potentially Yeo are FAR more a product of the system than stand out natural talent.

We are in the enviable position of having potentially elite talent in our squad for a decade. It would be a shame to not use these rebuild/development years to actually develop because an 18 year old half isn’t as good as Nathan Cleary is.

I’d argue Luai is more a natural talent. His strength is his unpredictable running and stepping, similar to a Munster or a Benji. I don’t see much in his game as being a “product of the system”.

Yeo and Edwards yes. They were quite average earlier in their careers. Yeo developed into an elite passing link-man, Edwards more an effort-based player.

A few years back Penrith were seriously considering cutting Edwards lose for Caleb Aekins he was going that badly, and we got Aekins thinking we got the better deal. Look how that turned out!

And yet, you switch the two players and you probably largely switch their career trajectories.

Go figure!

[Coastalraider]

I don’t disagree with that at all, some very promising signs moving forward. But that’s not what I was arguing - saying we can’t play a good style of football because we don’t have penriths spine ignores the fact that penriths spine weren’t elite when they started playing that style.

I agree we are progressing, and like a lot of the moves we are making, but that doesn’t make us closed to criticism. We have what could be a generational spine on board from 2025, it would be a damn shame to underutilise it because our game plan revolves around our back 5 rucking it out, and our middles trying to crash over in the red. Oh, and brawling.

I see what you're saying. There are teams who can throw 3 different organised shapes at you in a set- sometimes variations on the same play depending on how they see the defence react.

To some degree that's players- you need a quality organiser and quality delivery to set the timing and to be able to run those plays in your sleep in order to run them amid the chaos. But unless you drill them and the coach pushes you to run the game that way, it won't happen. That's why it stands out like the proverbials when someone actually does run a hard line for us or we manage a set play in a set.

All teams practice those things but I'm fairly certain by now Ricky just tells them to go out, get to their kicks and play whats in front of them. Because Ricky could do all the organising, be thinking two plays ahead and still react to any opportunity that emerged he just thinks others can do all that normally too. They can't, so we look a bit scrambly and manage the odd structured play when we can.

Teams like Melbourne know which 3 plays are coming next if they get to the left post 40m out, or a 6 again at the 15m line right post etc. With potential for variation or inspiration within that structure if Munster wants. It's a different style and why they can slot players in and out easier. And they have the coach to change those set plays some weeks (blowing us off the park in the semi with pace, width and deft kicks is burned into my brain).

Ricky clearly doesn't want to coach that way. Problem is you need to create opportunities somehow. Melbourne will do it by testing you thoroughly and methodically and seeing what works and then breaking you down that way. If we want to do it off the cuff you need some creative ball play (Hodgo) and some magic (Leipana, Bateman) and Jack could run a pretty good left sweep at his peak.

Right now we have Strange's running and stepping (as a rooky) and Fogs boot and give it to Timoko. We're a creative ball player short to play that way until Chevy gets a season under his belt and blooms imo. Or until we get a better hooker.

Another glaring point to this was Huddos comments after his first origin camp about how easy it was because his inside/outside players were creating space for him, it wasn’t just a case of him trying to create it himself.

[The Nickman]

It's absolutely ludicrous that people keep trying to paint our issues in attack over the last 10 years as merely personnel problems rather than inherently bad coaching and systems.

CNK is the prime example of this, there's really not much else to be said that hasn't been said already.

[Finchy]

And the fact that Huddo had to suggest to Fog last year that perhaps he should practice kicking field goals, tells me that the attack coaching leaves much to be desired.

Remember Fog had never kicked a field goal in his career prior to the second Dolphins game last year. Even in that game he flat out refused to even attempt one in prime position, to the point his team mates were yelling at him. Glad he finally nailed one at the very end of extra time.

It shouldn’t take a second rower to suggest you should practice aspects of your game.

The coaching stuff should be drilling in all sorts of attacking structures to our squad. 10 years of dross tells me they don’t do enough.

[NoMan]

I think the team knows how to attack, the players have no problem doing it in other grades and 95% of it is learnt before playing first grade. I think Ricky just has had a very low risk tolerance and thinks the team has to "earn" the right to attack. That is maybe slowly changing based on some performances this year.

[Seiffert82]

What is this ideal 'attacking structure' that everyone is referring to?

I think many people confuse a backline that plays with depth as some sort of magical attacking structure. That's can be effective if you have elite speed on both sides of the field, but not so much if your centres are powerful ball runners.

Other people talk about the attacking genius of having a ball playing lock that can pass both sides of the ruck, allowing the halves to play wider. Others talk about how great it is to have a ball playing fullback that provides an extra link on both sides of the ruck. Not all teams are blessed with players who can regularly do those things.

Every single team relies on individual player brilliance and/or a good kicking game to score points. Brisbane have the most basic attacking structure on the planet. There is nothing at all remarkable about what they do, other than have incredibly fast players, a fullback who has the licence to roll the dice with his dubious decision making and a good kicking game.

IMO our biggest issue is having dummy halves who play with zero vision and has poor decision making.

Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk

This is crazy talk Seiff. You don't need elite speed to put on a backline move (although it helps). We actually have that speed currently anyway in Savage and Schiller.

You still need depth and actual ball-playing moves to take advantage of powerful ball-running centres too. How often do you hear of players like Best, Staggs, Manu needing more "early ball". It gives them time and space to do what they need to do. You can't just give them a crash ball 2m out from the try line and say "do your best".

We've actually seen our team team do a good backline move on the rare occasion, but then it's not sighted again. Other teams do it nearly every attacking set. Sometimes it results in points, sometimes it gets shut down. We seem to try it once, score a try off it, then never try it again.

Yep, giving elite attacking players 'early ball' is exactly how most NRL teams score points. To me that's more about execution than structure.

When Hodgo first came in he transformed our attack because he played with vision out of dummy half, executed well, was an attacking threat and most of all he made good decisions. Later in his career here he slowed down, overplayed his hand and it bogged down our attack. Same player, same coach, different outcome.

I go back to my original point. Everyone talks about our gameplan lacking "attacking structure", but it's a lame thing to say without explaining exactly what you think that looks like. It usually depends on the skills and physical attributes of the players you have available to you.

Put Dylan Edwards and Nathan Cleary in our lineup, with Stuart as coach and see what that looks like. I guarantee it will be different.

So, we have one of the best forward packs in the NRL, one of the youngest back lines, hard running line breaking centres, a below average dummy half, and a halfback that has a good short kicking game. On that basis do you play with a deep backline in the attacking 20?

Lots of people think so, because the 'shape' looks cool, but it's a terrible idea.

Likewise, do you structure your attack around having a ball-playing fullback when the guy we have has 2 NRL games to his name?

How about we turn Horsburgh and Smithies into Yeo because that works for Penrith?

Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk

[Seiffert82]

It's absolutely ludicrous that people keep trying to paint our issues in attack over the last 10 years as merely personnel problems rather than inherently bad coaching and systems.

CNK is the prime example of this, there's really not much else to be said that hasn't been said already.

There's also every chance we aren't as bad as is being portrayed.

Since Stuart started, the points we've scored in attack compared to the NRL average looks like this:
2014 94.3%
2015 118.4%
2016 137.0% best in NRL
2017 113.4%
2018 115.2% 2nd best in NRL
2019 110.5%
2020 106.6%
2021 86.6%
2022 100.9%
2023 89.1%
2024 109.5%

So, recently we have been well below average, but in 8 of 11 seasons our attack has been above NRL average, and between 2015 and 2019 we were one of the best in the comp.

I think the conclusion that Stuart coaches inherently 'bad systems' is not entirely objective. However I also think we could be better in time.

Sent from my CPH2021 using Tapatalk

[Finchy]

I also don't think attributing 'good' attack years (points scored) to Ricky's good coaching is entirely objective either. Looks how we scored most of those points - was it structured attack based on a targetted game plan to exploit opposition weaknesses, or lucky crash-ball plays coupled with sheer individual brilliance (Leipana/Austin) that papered over other issues?

[Coastalraider]

And the fact that Huddo had to suggest to Fog last year that perhaps he should practice kicking field goals, tells me that the attack coaching leaves much to be desired.

Remember Fog had never kicked a field goal in his career prior to the second Dolphins game last year. Even in that game he flat out refused to even attempt one in prime position, to the point his team mates were yelling at him. Glad he finally nailed one at the very end of extra time.

It shouldn’t take a second rower to suggest you should practice aspects of your game.

The coaching stuff should be drilling in all sorts of attacking structures to our squad. 10 years of dross tells me they don’t do enough.

Add to that when asked about the ‘mousetrap’ play we did a couple of weeks back, Fog responded that it was another Huddo idea they had been working on at training.

[The Nickman]

I also don't think attributing 'good' attack years (points scored) to Ricky's good coaching is entirely objective either. Looks how we scored most of those points - was it structured attack based on a targetted game plan to exploit opposition weaknesses, or lucky crash-ball plays coupled with sheer individual brilliance (Leipana/Austin) that papered over other issues?

Apparently there's no such thing as structured attack or targeted game plan, apparently every team is just out there having a go and some do it better than others.

[Seiffert82]

I also don't think attributing 'good' attack years (points scored) to Ricky's good coaching is entirely objective either. Looks how we scored most of those points - was it structured attack based on a targetted game plan to exploit opposition weaknesses, or lucky crash-ball plays coupled with sheer individual brilliance (Leipana/Austin) that papered over other issues?

Maybe it's both. Like almost every NRL team.

I'm not saying Stuart is the best attacking coach in the world, but to suggest when we are good in attack it's just a couple of players, and when we are bad it's just poor coaching is a pretty naive way of looking at how professional sport generally works.

It's not unique to the NRL or to the Raiders. The same discussion happens in every sport forum on the planet.

Ivan Cleary was getting hammered when he was coaching the Tigers. They had the second worst attack in the NRL in 2018 before leaving. When he got sacked by Penrith in 2016 they had the worst attack in the NRL.

He therefore must be a **** attacking coach, as demonstrated at two clubs no less.

[Bluesbrother]

I also don't think attributing 'good' attack years (points scored) to Ricky's good coaching is entirely objective either. Looks how we scored most of those points - was it structured attack based on a targetted game plan to exploit opposition weaknesses, or lucky crash-ball plays coupled with sheer individual brilliance (Leipana/Austin) that papered over other issues?

This sort of comment neglects a few key factors + I think it's impossible for us to know as fans. Ask the players, then maybe you will know.

Why did we use "crash balls" hmmm, we had some elite forwards running off one of the best ball playing 9's in rugby league history. Why wouldn't you use those strengths?

The fact we continued to do this with lesser players is the issue for mine. You need to evolve. Which we have done this season quite obviously.

[Bluesbrother]

Which players have gone backwards since joining the raiders? That's the way you judge coaches/the impact of anything. Take a snapshot before, baseline. Then measure the improvement, the affect.

Let's be reasonable here. Ricky haters, tell us, who's gone backwards?

[Finchy]

Which players have gone backwards since joining the raiders? That's the way you judge coaches/the impact of anything. Take a snapshot before, baseline. Then measure the improvement, the affect.

Let's be reasonable here. Ricky haters, tell us, who's gone backwards?

I'm not a "Ricky hater", but I also don't think his **** doesn't stink.

I don't think what you've listed above is the only way to judge coaching. Plenty of players left the Raiders and played better footy elsewhere.

I would say the below list of players played worse footy since joining the Raiders (Ricky-era only). But I'm not silly enough to attribute all of that to "poor coaching". Some of it is age/off-field dramas/injury/development/etc.

Just like the plenty of players that have come here and performed well isn't all down to "good coaching". Most of it is individual talent and self-driven determination or opportunity (like Tapine, Papa, Austin, Rapa, etc).

Sisa Waqa
Frank-Paul Nuuausala
Junior Paulo
Scott Sorensen
Dave Taylor
Charlie Gubb
Liam Knight
Curtis Scott
Corey Harawira-Naera
Ryan James
Caleb Aekins

[-TW-]

Junior Paulo was pretty good for us, the rest I agree with

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[Finchy]

I also don't think attributing 'good' attack years (points scored) to Ricky's good coaching is entirely objective either. Looks how we scored most of those points - was it structured attack based on a targetted game plan to exploit opposition weaknesses, or lucky crash-ball plays coupled with sheer individual brilliance (Leipana/Austin) that papered over other issues?

Maybe it's both. Like almost every NRL team.

I'm not saying Stuart is the best attacking coach in the world, but to suggest when we are good in attack it's just a couple of players, and when we are bad it's just poor coaching is a pretty naive way of looking at how professional sport generally works.

It's not unique to the NRL or to the Raiders. The same discussion happens in every sport forum on the planet.

Ivan Cleary was getting hammered when he was coaching the Tigers. They had the second worst attack in the NRL in 2018 before leaving. When he got sacked by Penrith in 2016 they had the worst attack in the NRL.

He therefore must be a **** attacking coach, as demonstrated at two clubs no less.

Well Penrith's attacking coaches (Barrett, Ciraldo, Webster) keep getting poached so maybe Cleary isn't the best attacking coach. He now also has the game's best halfback at his disposal, so there is that.

Keep in mind too that in 2018 the Tigers had their second best defensive season ever, and had more wins that year since the last time they made the finals in 2011. Cleary wasn't that bad for them, he just jumped ship early back to a better organisation.

[Bluesbrother]

Which players have gone backwards since joining the raiders? That's the way you judge coaches/the impact of anything. Take a snapshot before, baseline. Then measure the improvement, the affect.

Let's be reasonable here. Ricky haters, tell us, who's gone backwards?

I'm not a "Ricky hater", but I also don't think his **** doesn't stink.

I don't think what you've listed above is the only way to judge coaching. Plenty of players left the Raiders and played better footy elsewhere.

I would say the below list of players played worse footy since joining the Raiders (Ricky-era only). But I'm not silly enough to attribute all of that to "poor coaching". Some of it is age/off-field dramas/injury/development/etc.

Just like the plenty of players that have come here and performed well isn't all down to "good coaching". Most of it is individual talent and self-driven determination or opportunity (like Tapine, Papa, Austin, Rapa, etc).

Sisa Waqa
Frank-Paul Nuuausala
Junior Paulo
Scott Sorensen
Dave Taylor
Charlie Gubb
Liam Knight
Curtis Scott
Corey Harawira-Naera
Ryan James
Caleb Aekins

I'm not saying Ricky's **** doesn't stink. He's got plenty of flaws and plenty to work on.

As you have just highlighted though, there are very few players who have come here and not gone well/better than they did at their previous clubs. For that reason alone, the chat around poor coaching is incorrect.