Luke Brooks #167

pawsandclaws1 said:
Cleary was a coach who could sum up the strengths of his players and tailor a game plan to those strengths. Maguire had a one size fits all approach - my way or the highway.
Click to expand...
What ever style you perceive they have /had as coaches the fact remains, that neither had a roster capable of achieving any level of success. So to achieve his premiership Cleary did so at a club with a premiership squad already in place.
 
Telltails said:
What ever style you perceive they have /had as coaches the fact remains, that neither had a roster capable of achieving any level of success. So to achieve his premiership Cleary did so at a club with a premiership squad already in place.
Click to expand...
Cleary got the best from Brooks due to his ability to be able to identify his strengths and devise a game plan accordingly. It is a fundamental difference between Cleary and Maguire. You get the best from your roster by playing to its strengths regardless of how weak it may be.
 
pawsandclaws1 said:
Cleary got the best from Brooks due to his ability to be able to identify his strengths and devise a game plan accordingly. It is a fundamental difference between Cleary and Maguire. You get the best from your roster by playing to its strengths regardless of how weak it may be.
Click to expand...
Benji got the best out of Brooks on the field by taking the pressure off him. Hastings was brought in to do the same allowing Brooks to focus on his running game. The very reason Sheens was trying to get Moses to partner him now. Any good games Brooks had were on the back of the whole team performing well - a rare occurence for a team with a weaker roster than most. No players shine when they are getting smashed Brooks included.
Until the club assembles a roster capable of competing against opposition teams anything Brooks or the coach offers will have no impact because to achieve success it will take a lot more than those two alone.
 
Telltails said:
Benji got the best out of Brooks on the field by taking the pressure off him. Hastings was brought in to do the same allowing Brooks to focus on his running game. The very reason Sheens was trying to get Moses to partner him now. Any good games Brooks had were on the back of the whole team performing well - a rare occurence for a team with a weaker roster than most. No players shine when they are getting smashed Brooks included.
Until the club assembles a roster capable of competing against opposition teams anything Brooks or the coach offers will have no impact because to achieve success it will take a lot more than those two alone.
Click to expand...
Cleary was the conductor.
 
Interestingly Ive seen Zane Camroux make appearances in a lot of the clubs recent press footage...

@KingRobbie ... have you noticed this also?
 
pawsandclaws1 said:
Cleary got the best from Brooks due to his ability to be able to identify his strengths and devise a game plan accordingly. It is a fundamental difference between Cleary and Maguire. You get the best from your roster by playing to its strengths regardless of how weak it may be.
Click to expand...
While that may be true Paws, when the coach has a plan devised in accordance with the strengths of his boys, they’re still running out to play against men.
 
twentyforty said:
While that may be true Paws, when the coach has a plan devised in accordance with the strengths of his boys, they’re still running out to play against men.
Click to expand...
True. In a weak squad, playing to your strengths will get better performances, if not wins. Even in losing, your team can still perform well and demonstrate spirit and team-work. I look at the footage of Cleary in the dressing sheds sitting, relaxed with his players who are listening intently to what he has to say. That is what I would like to see in our dressing sheds - players engaged with the coaching team.
 
Demps said:
Interestingly Ive seen Zane Camroux make appearances in a lot of the clubs recent press footage...

@KingRobbie ... have you noticed this also?
Click to expand...
Yeah, he’s done the entire pre-season full-time with first grade, so they obviously see something.

Looks like he’ll start the year as the Flegg halfback again, so we’ll see how he goes.
 
pawsandclaws1 said:
True. In a weak squad, playing to your strengths will get better performances, if not wins. Even in losing, your team can still perform well and demonstrate spirit and team-work. I look at the footage of Cleary in the dressing sheds sitting, relaxed with his players who are listening intently to what he has to say. That is what I would like to see in our dressing sheds - players engaged with the coaching team.
Click to expand...
I agree to some extent, however the interpretation of what we see in the shed may not be as accurate or complete as what we may think? For that reason I like to judge the level of teamwork on things like discretionary effort and with this in mind our team were much worse after Maguire left.
I’m not saying there weren’t cracks in the morale, just responding to your continued criticism of Maguire.
 
pawsandclaws1 said:
Cleary got the best from Brooks due to his ability to be able to identify his strengths and devise a game plan accordingly. It is a fundamental difference between Cleary and Maguire. You get the best from your roster by playing to its strengths regardless of how weak it may be.
Click to expand...
Ivan or no Ivan?
To be honest I don’t think Brooks played that much better with Cleary at the helm than any other year.
The team wasn’t the best and he was fortunate in that respect to be noticed a little more.
His ‘award’ in 2018 was tainted by the fact that some of his quality opposition were injured for long periods and others played in strong teams where the points were distributed more evenly.
Let’s be honest, he’s not an elite halfback and never will be.
He goes pretty good at five eighth though, if he’s got a decent half directing the team, and that’s where he belongs.
 
cktiger said:
Ivan or no Ivan?
To be honest I don’t think Brooks played that much better with Cleary at the helm than any other year.
The team wasn’t the best and he was fortunate in that respect to be noticed a little more.
His ‘award’ in 2018 was tainted by the fact that some of his quality opposition were injured for long periods and others played in strong teams where the points were distributed more evenly.
Let’s be honest, he’s not an elite halfback and never will be.
He goes pretty good at five eighth though, if he’s got a decent half directing the team, and that’s where he belongs.
Click to expand...
Brooks' won the 2018 Dally M award. Well played to him.

Imo Brooks responded to the coaching style of Cleary. Cleary could sum up the skills of his squad, tailor the game plan to suit and possesses great interpersonal skills. All the good coaches have good interpersonal skills including Sheens and I believe Marshall has the same skill.

Brooks is a very good NRL quality half. He probably will not play SOO or for the Kangaroos but not many players do.

Brooks also had a vastly underrated prop in Matulino in the team who provided lots of second phase play. Matulino is a player I hold in high regard and it was a shame he had a chronic knee injury.
 
pawsandclaws1 said:
Brooks' won the 2018 Dally M award. Well played to him.

Imo Brooks responded to the coaching style of Cleary. Cleary could sum up the skills of his squad, tailor the game plan to suit and possesses great interpersonal skills. All the good coaches have good interpersonal skills including Sheens and I believe Marshall has the same skill.

Brooks is a very good NRL quality half. He probably will not play SOO or for the Kangaroos but not many players do.

Brooks also had a vastly underrated prop in Matulino in the team who provided lots of second phase play. Matulino is a player I hold in high regard and it was a shame he had a chronic knee injury.
Click to expand...


Mate people see what they want to see & often hate for something clouds the discussion.

Whatever had happened with Brooks has happened. Agree Ivan set things up to work off player’s strengths and Madge wanted players to work to his structured style regardless of the player’s capability.

Sheens is closer coaching style to Cleary than Madge but end of the day we need Brooks and the team to step up or they should be out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

... and 49 more.
Total: 811 (members: 99, guests: 712)
Back
Top