Tim Sheens Returns to Tigers

[cochise]

What is it about 2021 professional rugby league, that the return of a soon-to-be 71yo former NRL coach is greeted with such entusiasm?

What does he have to offer a more contemporary (with players and many fans) coaching team other than extended experience in the game?

So, the answer to building a future powerhouse club of the NRL is to seek the input of a relic of the past?

Huh?? I wonder what he is being paid??

If the topic was about signing Ben Gardiner (he's the Magpies' NSW Cup coach) to a senior role of "football performance", I'd be much more enthused.

But, good on Sheensy for adding to his superannuation portfolio. Let's hope that his impact is as significant in the immediate future of the Wests Tigers.

Maybe you should watch the Clint Eastwood movie "Trouble with the Curve" - it may give you an insight into the reasoning behind the appointment.

I don't think that is the case.

What does that mean?

Well the movie you referenced is basically an anti moneyball film. We will continue to use data in recruitment so I don't see that as an insight into the reasoning.

I'm talking about spotting young talent (even though the spotter could be in their 70's. Just because you are young doesn't mean you know more or because you are old - it has passed you. (basic under lying theme of the movie). Tiger-Tragic was saying that he thought Sheens was too old. Quote - "So, the answer to building a future powerhouse club of the NRL is to seek the input of a relic of the past?"

Cochise the point I was trying to make, was age doesn't matter if you have the right experience and talent for the task.

Lol, I thought you were looking at the different philosophy to scouting in the film which is another theme. I.e data driven verses more traditional methods. All good I get your point now.

 

[hammertime]

“Tim can also be a sounding board for Madge if Madge wants that,” Pascoe said.


Strange comment to make, as though your trying not to offend Madge.

Side note

- Badger and Tahu were appointed via the Wests Tigers Foundation (Mentioned by General Lee last night)

I think it's to make publically clear that Sheens isn't in charge of madge. Gotta do that or the telegraph "articles" the next day will twist it.

 

[cochise]

“Tim can also be a sounding board for Madge if Madge wants that,” Pascoe said.


Strange comment to make, as though your trying not to offend Madge.

Side note

- Badger and Tahu were appointed via the Wests Tigers Foundation (Mentioned by General Lee last night)

I think it's to make publically clear that Sheens isn't in charge of madge. Gotta do that or the telegraph "articles" the next day will twist it.

I'd be very interested to see the new Hierarchical structure, I have a pretty good understanding of how it stood before today.

 

[happy_tiger]

“Tim can also be a sounding board for Madge if Madge wants that,” Pascoe said.


Strange comment to make, as though your trying not to offend Madge.

Side note

- Badger and Tahu were appointed via the Wests Tigers Foundation (Mentioned by General Lee last night)

I think it's to make publically clear that Sheens isn't in charge of madge. Gotta do that or the telegraph "articles" the next day will twist it.

Madge would be a fool if he didn't ask Tim a question or two

why 95 kgs props that were formerly centres

Wingers on the bench for 77 minutes

Why excuses aren't reasons

How many dressing rooms will we need

Should we get Roycie back for the Feng Shui of the COE

Will he get invited to the bingo nights

Power cord for the Fax machine for teams

Should he call Tim Sheenius or the Fonz

What are Tim's KPI's ??

Covers everything

 

[watersider]

I'm not keen on this move. I liked how everything was working and I'm not sure it needed a shake up. I like that our lower grade clubs are going well, I like the players we're buying. I think the NRL side has been poor but I can see it changing too. I'm just not sure why you bring someone with the baggage of Sheens. I don't say this against Sheens, I thought he was a terrific coach for us and I was one of the few arguing that we should give him another year when he got sacked. But I don't like that they're bringing someone in who may undermine the definite vision of Madge. Not saying Madge is a definite to succeed, but I think you have to give him the chance. Hiring of coaching directors always feels like a coaching change is not far away and it often leads to tension and disagreement over the way to improve. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't like it. Only thing redeeming it for me is that Gould is positive about it. Many are down on him, but I respect his opinions and what he did at Penrith.

 

[BZN]

Welcome back Mr Sheens . A big focus on the great financial position the club is in. We need to congratulate those for getting us to this position as there is no sustained success without a healthy financial position.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[BZN]

I don't mind it as long as it doesn't lessen Hartigan's infliuence.

Hopefully they form a wonderful partnership

That is my hope, Hartigan is key for us.

Hartigan Is a key for Us Cochise, but the Master Key is the **Team**:+1:
Sheens, Pascoe, Madge and Hartigan.

 

[cochise]

I don't mind it as long as it doesn't lessen Hartigan's infliuence.

Hopefully they form a wonderful partnership

That is my hope, Hartigan is key for us.

Hartigan Is a key for Us Cochise, but the Master Key is the **Team**:+1:
Sheens, Pascoe, Madge and Hartigan.

Yes as long as they are all working together.

 

[BZN]

I didn’t follow rugby league very much when sheens was around what was the craziest thing he did in playing players out of position? Seems to come up all the time

Truth is that it’s a bit of a myth. Just like all coaches he had to manage within a salary cap and that meant when he had a lot of injuries, players would be played out of their natural position.

Happens all the time in the game. Look at some of Bellamy’s selections

Why did you have to go and spoil the myth @southerntiger
It had me fooled :hugging_face: :laughing:

 

[Milky]

Regarding the appointment, I think Sheens has some of the highest highs and lowest lows in NRL history.

I loved him for 5 years (2004, 5, 6 for the high of being premiers, 10 and 11). Outside of WT he created the green machine and was too awful for the last placed Cowboys.

I wanted him gone at the end, and also for a couple of years before 2010. I have to let hindsight judge this one a few years from now, and I hope the job descriptions are very clear.

He tended to build us up in waves, we had the 1st one in 2004,05. he built us up again for that 09-11 tilt that collapsed in a heap in 2012. I don't think it is impossible to believe that he wouldn't have got us to another peak around 2015 mark with the young players he had coming through the lower grades.

You may be right but 2012.... imagine WT as premiership favourites.

I think in the end it was recruitment and retention that lost me, not necessarily just the on-field performance.

Who are the players? Just curious

 

[twentyforty]

I'm not keen on this move. I liked how everything was working and I'm not sure it needed a shake up. I like that our lower grade clubs are going well, I like the players we're buying. I think the NRL side has been poor but I can see it changing too. I'm just not sure why you bring someone with the baggage of Sheens. I don't say this against Sheens, I thought he was a terrific coach for us and I was one of the few arguing that we should give him another year when he got sacked. But I don't like that they're bringing someone in who may undermine the definite vision of Madge. Not saying Madge is a definite to succeed, but I think you have to give him the chance. Hiring of coaching directors always feels like a coaching change is not far away and it often leads to tension and disagreement over the way to improve. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't like it. Only thing redeeming it for me is that Gould is positive about it. Many are down on him, but I respect his opinions and what he did at Penrith.

Watersider, I see Tim’s appointment and the creation of the new position as a positive move for the club. Tim is experienced enough to fit in and understand his role even if we don’t. I think our ceo could have been more clinical in his announcement rather than leaving it open to interpretation? What did he mean by “floating role”? Let’s see the position on the OC and talk about expected outcomes. I can only imagine that internally their discussions are more direct and everyone is clear on the vision, if not then your concerns may very well be realised?

 

[mike]

“Tim can also be a sounding board for Madge if Madge wants that,” Pascoe said.


Strange comment to make, as though your trying not to offend Madge.

Side note

- Badger and Tahu were appointed via the Wests Tigers Foundation (Mentioned by General Lee last night)

I think it's to make publically clear that Sheens isn't in charge of madge. Gotta do that or the telegraph "articles" the next day will twist it.

Madge would be a fool if he didn't ask Tim a question or two

why 95 kgs props that were formerly centres

Wingers on the bench for 77 minutes

Why excuses aren't reasons

How many dressing rooms will we need

Should we get Roycie back for the Feng Shui of the COE

Will he get invited to the bingo nights

Power cord for the Fax machine for teams

Should he call Tim Sheenius or the Fonz

What are Tim's KPI's ??

Covers everything

More importantly, what colour should we paint the COE?

 

[mike]

I'm not keen on this move. I liked how everything was working and I'm not sure it needed a shake up. I like that our lower grade clubs are going well, I like the players we're buying. I think the NRL side has been poor but I can see it changing too. I'm just not sure why you bring someone with the baggage of Sheens. I don't say this against Sheens, I thought he was a terrific coach for us and I was one of the few arguing that we should give him another year when he got sacked. But I don't like that they're bringing someone in who may undermine the definite vision of Madge. Not saying Madge is a definite to succeed, but I think you have to give him the chance. Hiring of coaching directors always feels like a coaching change is not far away and it often leads to tension and disagreement over the way to improve. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't like it. Only thing redeeming it for me is that Gould is positive about it. Many are down on him, but I respect his opinions and what he did at Penrith.


Watersider, I see Tim’s appointment and the creation of the new position as a positive move for the club. Tim is experienced enough to fit in and understand his role even if we don’t. I think our ceo could have been more clinical in his announcement rather than leaving it open to interpretation? What did he mean by “floating role”? Let’s see the position on the OC and talk about expected outcomes. I can only imagine that internally their discussions are more direct and everyone is clear on the vision, if not then your concerns may very well be realised?

I'm not from the world of business so is the OC the Operational Chart? Like, a document that lists people in positions and their roles and responsibilities? And, importantly, who they "report to", are supervised by?

Does this exist at WT or other clubs? I'd love to see it, if it does.

In my early days of teaching at a large secondary school, the principal proudly published such a chart. He wasn't all that happy when it was pointed out to him that, according to his chart, all the major educational, leadership and planning decisions needed approval from Shirley, the manager of the canteen.

It didn't last long, nor did he. But, Shirley was still there when I left after 11 years!

Organisational Chart or Org Chart

 

[twentyforty]

I'm not keen on this move. I liked how everything was working and I'm not sure it needed a shake up. I like that our lower grade clubs are going well, I like the players we're buying. I think the NRL side has been poor but I can see it changing too. I'm just not sure why you bring someone with the baggage of Sheens. I don't say this against Sheens, I thought he was a terrific coach for us and I was one of the few arguing that we should give him another year when he got sacked. But I don't like that they're bringing someone in who may undermine the definite vision of Madge. Not saying Madge is a definite to succeed, but I think you have to give him the chance. Hiring of coaching directors always feels like a coaching change is not far away and it often leads to tension and disagreement over the way to improve. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't like it. Only thing redeeming it for me is that Gould is positive about it. Many are down on him, but I respect his opinions and what he did at Penrith.


Watersider, I see Tim’s appointment and the creation of the new position as a positive move for the club. Tim is experienced enough to fit in and understand his role even if we don’t. I think our ceo could have been more clinical in his announcement rather than leaving it open to interpretation? What did he mean by “floating role”? Let’s see the position on the OC and talk about expected outcomes. I can only imagine that internally their discussions are more direct and everyone is clear on the vision, if not then your concerns may very well be realised?

I'm not from the world of business so is the OC the Operational Chart? Like, a document that lists people in positions and their roles and responsibilities? And, importantly, who they "report to", are supervised by?

Does this exist at WT or other clubs? I'd love to see it, if it does.

In my early days of teaching at a large secondary school, the principal proudly published such a chart. He wasn't all that happy when it was pointed out to him that, according to his chart, all the major educational, leadership and planning decisions needed approval from Shirley, the manager of the canteen.

It didn't last long, nor did he. But, Shirley was still there when I left after 11 years!

The organisational chart importantly also lays out lines of communication. I don’t understand Pascoe’s reference to Tim being a “sounding board” for players and Madge can use him as a “sounding board” too if he wants? Pascoe needs to be clear . Maybe I’m reading too much into it ? Just seems to me to be an adhock approach based on Tim Sheens saying he wanted to come back to oz? They either have lines of communication or they don’t.

 

[Wildcat777]

Great to see Tim join the team. Really pleased about that, just another key ingredient that will bring success. Loved the comments made by the forum. But please lets refer to him as a floater. I refer to someone as a floater as a person that is useless, like a no 2 that wont flush! Lol 😂

 

[pawsandclaws1]

I'm not keen on this move. I liked how everything was working and I'm not sure it needed a shake up. I like that our lower grade clubs are going well, I like the players we're buying. I think the NRL side has been poor but I can see it changing too. I'm just not sure why you bring someone with the baggage of Sheens. I don't say this against Sheens, I thought he was a terrific coach for us and I was one of the few arguing that we should give him another year when he got sacked. But I don't like that they're bringing someone in who may undermine the definite vision of Madge. Not saying Madge is a definite to succeed, but I think you have to give him the chance. Hiring of coaching directors always feels like a coaching change is not far away and it often leads to tension and disagreement over the way to improve. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't like it. Only thing redeeming it for me is that Gould is positive about it. Many are down on him, but I respect his opinions and what he did at Penrith.


Watersider, I see Tim’s appointment and the creation of the new position as a positive move for the club. Tim is experienced enough to fit in and understand his role even if we don’t. I think our ceo could have been more clinical in his announcement rather than leaving it open to interpretation? What did he mean by “floating role”? Let’s see the position on the OC and talk about expected outcomes. I can only imagine that internally their discussions are more direct and everyone is clear on the vision, if not then your concerns may very well be realised?

I'm not from the world of business so is the OC the Operational Chart? Like, a document that lists people in positions and their roles and responsibilities? And, importantly, who they "report to", are supervised by?

Does this exist at WT or other clubs? I'd love to see it, if it does.

In my early days of teaching at a large secondary school, the principal proudly published such a chart. He wasn't all that happy when it was pointed out to him that, according to his chart, all the major educational, leadership and planning decisions needed approval from Shirley, the manager of the canteen.

It didn't last long, nor did he. But, Shirley was still there when I left after 11 years!

The organisational chart importantly also lays out lines of communication. I don’t understand Pascoe’s reference to Tim being a “sounding board” for players and Madge can use him as a “sounding board” too if he wants? Pascoe needs to be clear . Maybe I’m reading too much into it ? Just seems to me to be an adhock approach based on Tim Sheens saying he wanted to come back to oz? They either have lines of communication or they don’t.

I view his appointment as a overseer of Maguire, his tactics and training methods.

 

[tony soprano]

Is it similar to a frank ponesi role


I think it’s a mix of what frank and Gould does he will have his hands in development


People firing off sheenius and naming their team list is sad and inaccurate the bloke managed this football club at its darkest days operationally and in terms of money was running on empty fumes and did a fine job and gave us all great memories.

Show some respect.

 

[mikey]

ATM the system sems to be building fine. If it in't broke why are we fixing it? I'm not against Sheens coming back but..........