Sack Marshall

[Tom Shines]

When the club has been in rebuild mode since Sheen's first sacking but we constantly change the coach before they can fully put their rebuild into place- it's hard to blame the coach.

Sheens had time to build a squad, a development system & a second generation, nearly a 3rd generation of squad players.

Potter, Taylor, Cleary, Maguire & now Benji have had less than enough time to remove pre-existing commitments to other coaches players then build their own vision before being moved on.

As a club (society really, but that's a different conversation) we are simply not patient enough to allow for change. Every coach has been moved on carrying deadwood that the previous coach lumbered them with & we blame that current coach for not fixing what they were left with.

Benji is in a lucky position, IF HE had much say in the Sheens recruitment of players prior to taking over. At least he is in a position to bring through these juniors & build his own squad, instead of trying to move on Mbye, Packer etc eating up his salary cap.

Richo moving on Bateman, Papali'i etc is giving Benji more opportunity again to actually put his imprint on the team.

If you think I'm wrong, Robinson, Bellamy, Cleary, Bennett, Stuart, Brad Arthur...all have been part of longer tenures, through good & bad results, and had opportunity to build the squad in their vision. Other than the ridiculous decision to move Brad Arthur on after he lost all his star players- these coaches are 'safe'. And results follow them. Even when they have down years- they are safe. The longer they are there, the more success tends to follow them.

Conversely, clubs like the Titans, Tigers, Warriors, Dragons, Knights & Bulldogs have had less stable coaching security over the last 10 years, and the results are comparable for each.

Richo did not choose Benj for the coaching job …. He inherited him …

I doubt he would have chosen a rookie coach otherwise …

Benji will have Richo’s complete support until he doesn’t and the axe will come down …

If they are still at the bottom next year … Benji won’t be there in 2026 …

Richo hasn’t got time for a Souths 10 year plan anymore ..

 

[The Chad]

Yet we are the exception here?

We had Sheens for over a decade... did not do much after 2005 bar one year when the Juniors were good.
Then we swapped Potter/Taylor/Cleary/etc. Yes huge turn around and we did better then, then now.

WE then stuck with Madge for 4 years. We did the right thing by him and really backed him up.

Parra punt Arthur after making the finals, and maybe rightly so... But they punt a far more successful coach.


The failure of the last board was backing Sheenius of Sheens + Marshall. It was an awful plan. They had good coaches available, Flanagan, etc but knocked on stupidity.

No, not the exception at all.

"Titans, Tigers, Warriors, Dragons, Knights & Bulldogs"

I mentioned these teams. Since Sheens' FIRST sacking, how much more success have any of these teams had compared to the Tigers?

We are in a perpetual rebuild, like these clubs mentioned, that has spikes & troughs but very little consistancy due to the changing of ideas every couple of years.

 

[Tom Shines]

No, not the exception at all.

"Titans, Tigers, Warriors, Dragons, Knights & Bulldogs"

I mentioned these teams. Since Sheens' FIRST sacking, how much more success have any of these teams had compared to the Tigers?

We are in a perpetual rebuild, like these clubs mentioned, that has spikes & troughs but very little consistancy due to the changing of ideas every couple of years.

Souths got rid of Maguire three years after s premiership

 

[king_sirro]

A change wasn't necessarily the best option imo.
Maguire had just got on top of the problems with the cap in very difficult circumstances. He was also facing pressure from the board and CEO. Despite this, he succeeded in signing new players who would not have the opportunity to play under his coaching.
In seasons 2021 and 2022 Maguire coached his last 36 games for 11 wins, 30.5% wins.
We've had 46 games since losing Maguire for only 9 wins, 19.5% wins.
Conveniently, this trajectory gets ignored when justifying yet another unnecessary sacking?

I know you can't let players run the ship, but when the Tigers extended Madges contract, a player said to my mate, "no one can believe they extended him, he is that intense you can never has a conversation with him". This was from a player who plays intense himself. They playing group were never going to respond to him.

 

[The Chad]

Richo did not choose Benj for the coaching job …. He inherited him …

I doubt he would have chosen a rookie coach otherwise …

Benji will have Richo’s complete support until he doesn’t and the axe will come down …

If they are still at the bottom next year … Benji won’t be there in 2026 …

Richo hasn’t got time for a Souths 10 year plan this time ..

Richo was hired with Benji in place. If anything- that makes Richo happy to work with what was offered. If he was hired while Sheens was there & then had Marshall thrust onto him- fair enough.

Regardless- the point is that IMO the club needs to not only support Benji but go ALL IN, ride out the plan before changing once again. Is it ugly now? Yes.

Guess what? It was ugly in 2003 too.

 

[tonza]

In hindsight maybe it wasn't. It was evident over the last 2 years of Maguire coaching that very few players had improved, if any. How could anybody know that the management would be influenced by some stupid journos suggestion, ingest, at some luncheon. When experienced coaches were available. Stupidity at its best.

 

[The Chad]

Souths got rid of Maguire three years after s premiership

Why are you arguing that? I'm arguing against CONTINUAL change, not one off change. Who replaced Madge at Souths? How long did he get?

 

[Tom Shines]

Why are you arguing that? I'm arguing against CONTINUAL change, not one off change. Who replaced Madge at Souths? How long did he get?

I’m making a point that even teams that have had success will move on from their coach relatively quickly if need be …

you are arguing that it’s the change of coaching that brings the failure ..Im saying that the failure brings the decision to change the coach

 

[The Chad]

I’m making a point that even teams that have had success will move on from their coach relatively quickly if need be …

you are arguing that it’s the change of coaching that brings the failure ..Im saying that the failure brings the decision to change the coach

There is always coaching change. I get what you are saying.

With salary caps & 10 year plans & contracts to contend with, giving a coach 2 years to revamp an already failing squad is futile.

The Tigers, other than in 2003, have never really committed to an actual plan. Sheens put one in place, and won us 2005 and kept the club, arguably, as competitive as anyone has ever kept the club.

When they sacked Sheens, that was fair enough.

The next guy, Potter, wasn't given the time to remove the Sheens players & was expected to create wins where Tim hadn't been able to.

When that didn't work right away, we punt him & bring in Taylor, who inherits the remains of Sheens failing squad plus a few poor choices from Potter.

Then Taylor gets booted after a couple of seasons before he's cleared the dross.

Cleary comes in, changes a few things & then bails, putting us back further. He probably came in & made the most moves toward a 'plan' as we have seen.

Then Madge comes in & has to basically work with Cleary's leftovers.

Just as Madge secures Papali'i & Api, he's removed for Sheens/Marshall.

When that didn't immediately work- Sheens is gone & it's just Marshall.

I know this is revisionist history & you're well aware of it. The point is- until a coach has a chance to implement THEIR footprint, your sacking them for previous coaches mistakes.

I'm not convinced we should have moved on from Madge. I'm less sure we should have moved on from Potter & Taylor.

The club has never properly invested in the coaching philosophy other than in 2003, where they gave the keys to the kingdom to Sheens & co.

Marshall might be a terrible coach. But sacking him this year or next year is blaming him for the mistakes of others.

 

[tig_prmz]

Wonder how much Luai likes working with Gardiner this year? I'd love him to come home

Moses, Cleary and Luai have had nothing but positive things to say about Barrett.. quite risky but worth thinking.

 

[Telltails]

There is always coaching change. I get what you are saying.

With salary caps & 10 year plans & contracts to contend with, giving a coach 2 years to revamp an already failing squad is futile.

The Tigers, other than in 2003, have never really committed to an actual plan. Sheens put one in place, and won us 2005 and kept the club, arguably, as competitive as anyone has ever kept the club.

When they sacked Sheens, that was fair enough.

The next guy, Potter, wasn't given the time to remove the Sheens players & was expected to create wins where Tim hadn't been able to.

When that didn't work right away, we punt him & bring in Taylor, who inherits the remains of Sheens failing squad plus a few poor choices from Potter.

Then Taylor gets booted after a couple of seasons before he's cleared the dross.

Cleary comes in, changes a few things & then bails, putting us back further. He probably came in & made the most moves toward a 'plan' as we have seen.

Then Madge comes in & has to basically work with Cleary's leftovers.

Just as Madge secures Papali'i & Api, he's removed for Sheens/Marshall.

When that didn't immediately work- Sheens is gone & it's just Marshall.

I know this is revisionist history & you're well aware of it. The point is- until a coach has a chance to implement THEIR footprint, your sacking them for previous coaches mistakes.

I'm not convinced we should have moved on from Madge. I'm less sure we should have moved on from Potter & Taylor.

The club has never properly invested in the coaching philosophy other than in 2003, where they gave the keys to the kingdom to Sheens & co.

Marshall might be a terrible coach. But sacking him this year or next year is blaming him for the mistakes of others.

Only a fool would blame Benji for anything but if we can't move forward with him then something has got to give. Those closer to what is going on must know have some knowledge as to why players like Stef and IPap want out instead of buying in and any further decisions made need to take that into consideration.

 

[The Chad]

Only a fool would blame Benji for anything but if we can't move forward with him then something has got to give. Those closer to what is going on must know have some knowledge as to why players like Stef and IPap want out instead of buying in and any further decisions made need to take that into consideration.

Those same people would have to also factor in why Luai & Turuva want to come in.

Papali'i did not force a move. The Tigers told him he can look elsewhere. The only player that has moved because they 'forced it' is Utoikamanu.

 

[bptiger 0]

Talk about sacking benji , did anyone watch the NRLW game , they were woeful, and no wonder, how the hell Kimberley kept his job, I doubt they will win a game . So sack both I say

 

[Telltails]

Those same people would have to also factor in why Luai & Turuva want to come in.

Papali'i did not force a move. The Tigers told him he can look elsewhere. The only player that has moved because they 'forced it' is Utoikamanu.

You can't build a squad if other clubs keep picking off your best players to strengthen their own teams. Luai was a great get but he is not a one man team and if Papalli wanted to stay you can't tell me his manager wouldnt have approached the club - he couldnt get out of here quick enough.

 

[Tom Shines]

There is always coaching change. I get what you are saying.

With salary caps & 10 year plans & contracts to contend with, giving a coach 2 years to revamp an already failing squad is futile.

The Tigers, other than in 2003, have never really committed to an actual plan. Sheens put one in place, and won us 2005 and kept the club, arguably, as competitive as anyone has ever kept the club.

When they sacked Sheens, that was fair enough.

The next guy, Potter, wasn't given the time to remove the Sheens players & was expected to create wins where Tim hadn't been able to.

When that didn't work right away, we punt him & bring in Taylor, who inherits the remains of Sheens failing squad plus a few poor choices from Potter.

Then Taylor gets booted after a couple of seasons before he's cleared the dross.

Cleary comes in, changes a few things & then bails, putting us back further. He probably came in & made the most moves toward a 'plan' as we have seen.

Then Madge comes in & has to basically work with Cleary's leftovers.

Just as Madge secures Papali'i & Api, he's removed for Sheens/Marshall.

When that didn't immediately work- Sheens is gone & it's just Marshall.

I know this is revisionist history & you're well aware of it. The point is- until a coach has a chance to implement THEIR footprint, your sacking them for previous coaches mistakes.

I'm not convinced we should have moved on from Madge. I'm less sure we should have moved on from Potter & Taylor.

The club has never properly invested in the coaching philosophy other than in 2003, where they gave the keys to the kingdom to Sheens & co.

Marshall might be a terrible coach. But sacking him this year or next year is blaming him for the mistakes of others.

you make some reasonable points…some of these decisions are going back a while now ..so perhaps things are getting a little hazy in my mind ..

I think there are specific reasons that contributed to the demise of each of them ..the senior players have had a hand in some of the coaching changes as well ..

Potter wasn’t given enough time … but from memory…didn’t the senior players move against him? In any sport that’s a death sentence…

we need to remove Cleary from any coaching analysis .. HE decided to move on …not vice versa …

I am an advocate for coaching change when the team has had a lack of success … even over a period that may be considered short … like three years or even 2 if the results are particularly bad ..

I thought Madge was given adequate time here …3 and a half years … and worsening results through that period … he is a good coach …but not the right coach here ..as the results proved over time ..

I can’t remember the Taylor days too well to be honest …probably chosen to forget them … certainly success wasn’t evident and again ..he lost the senior players…

In respect of Benji …. Nothing would make me happier than him finding even modest success as WT coach …he is the closest thing to a legend the club has …. I think most everyone is on board with him having this year to do his time to learn on the job …unfortunately you would have to say that whilst expectations have been modest … results and other behaviours have not even met those …

I think he will be given another year … but if we are looking at similar results and the same uninspiring play .. I think he will be gone ….his lack of experience will mean that he is on a shorter leash than say a Maguire who was given three years …

 

[The Chad]

You can't build a squad if other clubs keep picking off your best players to strengthen their own teams. Luai was a great get but he is not a one man team and if Papalli wanted to stay you can't tell me his manager wouldnt have approached the club - he couldnt get out of here quick enough.

You can build a squad. Ask Penrith who are continually pilfered.

Of the players lost, Utoikamanu is the most significant due to the position he plays. Strong middles are required for clubs to succeed. There are clubs winning games with Luke Garner starting, so the influence of Papali'i might be overstated.

Tigers have 9, 7, 1 sorted & 6 has a couple of options.

Middles & wingers are the next priority. Guys that generate the most yardage per game.

The club CHOSE to let Papali'i move & Bateman. Either the club is tanking, or putting the dollar values of those positions into other areas of significance.

 

[tigermate]

There is always coaching change. I get what you are saying.

With salary caps & 10 year plans & contracts to contend with, giving a coach 2 years to revamp an already failing squad is futile.

The Tigers, other than in 2003, have never really committed to an actual plan. Sheens put one in place, and won us 2005 and kept the club, arguably, as competitive as anyone has ever kept the club.

When they sacked Sheens, that was fair enough.

The next guy, Potter, wasn't given the time to remove the Sheens players & was expected to create wins where Tim hadn't been able to.

When that didn't work right away, we punt him & bring in Taylor, who inherits the remains of Sheens failing squad plus a few poor choices from Potter.

Then Taylor gets booted after a couple of seasons before he's cleared the dross.

Cleary comes in, changes a few things & then bails, putting us back further. He probably came in & made the most moves toward a 'plan' as we have seen.

Then Madge comes in & has to basically work with Cleary's leftovers.

Just as Madge secures Papali'i & Api, he's removed for Sheens/Marshall.

When that didn't immediately work- Sheens is gone & it's just Marshall.

I know this is revisionist history & you're well aware of it. The point is- until a coach has a chance to implement THEIR footprint, your sacking them for previous coaches mistakes.

I'm not convinced we should have moved on from Madge. I'm less sure we should have moved on from Potter & Taylor.

The club has never properly invested in the coaching philosophy other than in 2003, where they gave the keys to the kingdom to Sheens & co.

Marshall might be a terrible coach. But sacking him this year or next year is blaming him for the mistakes of others.

lol keep Marshall

 

[jirskyr]

No, not the exception at all.

"Titans, Tigers, Warriors, Dragons, Knights & Bulldogs"

I mentioned these teams. Since Sheens' FIRST sacking, how much more success have any of these teams had compared to the Tigers?

We are in a perpetual rebuild, like these clubs mentioned, that has spikes & troughs but very little consistancy due to the changing of ideas every couple of years.

I agree and I've made this argument before - my belief is that the NRL is basically a 3-tier competition, with ~6 teams always near the top, ~6 always near the bottom and 5 teams that float between the top and bottom in any given year.

I don't even have to tell you who those teams are, you can immediately picture who I mean, though you've named the "have nots" already.

At best, some teams perform well for a few seasons before falling back down. Everyone is fully aware that since 2012 (N = 12) there have only been 3 Premiers from outside of Melbourne, Easts and Penrith.

Tigers are an aberration in that our "better" seasons top out at 9th, as opposed to a team like Newcastle who have only finished better than 7th once since 2009 (5th in 2023), but that seems to give you a pass-mark so long as you make the finals every now and then (in the last 17 years Knights have made the finals 6 times, 5 of those were 7th or 8th position, finals record of 3W 6L, 3 wooden spoons).

There is something about the modern player who is willing to forego on-books salary for other benefits, of either the illicit or intangible kind, so it remains easier for "better" teams to sign and/or retain the best talent. And that's what is killing the talent cycling that the salary cap is supposed to create, because players are already paid well enough to forgo extra salary, and it becomes as much about their personal brand and personal success as actual cash-in-hand. That, and the flow-on that lower-placed teams then need to take recruitment risks on unproven or junior players, risks that can cause long-term damage if the recruitment does not work out.

Hence why Luai could potentially be a circuit breaker for Tigers, because he's willing to take the money and publicly appears to relish the challenge of lifting the Tigers. But he's also a proven performer arguably at his peak in 2024; we are not hiring someone on future potential or old form.

 

[twentyforty]

I know you can't let players run the ship, but when the Tigers extended Madges contract, a player said to my mate, "no one can believe they extended him, he is that intense you can never has a conversation with him". This was from a player who plays intense himself. They playing group were never going to respond to him.

Thats another thing Maguire and Sheens have in common. They’ve both been sacked soon after they got an extension.
I realise the boards want to extract the best out of key personnel but to ride someone with excessive use of the whip rarely produces the desired outcome. Madge is no longer intense and Ricky loved having him at Raiders.

 

[Bird is the Word]

Pretty sure Stefano wouldn’t be leaving if we had a decent experienced coach… Time to make the tough decision Richo…