jirskyr
Well-known member
@Geo said in [Why Maguire is the man the Wests Tigers need](/post/1164807) said:@jirskyr said in [Why Maguire is the man the Wests Tigers need](/post/1164806) said:@Telltails said in [Why Maguire is the man the Wests Tigers need](/post/1164719) said:@fibrodreaming said in [Why Maguire is the man the Wests Tigers need](/post/1164614) said:@jirskyr said in [Why Maguire is the man the Wests Tigers need](/post/1164573) said:That’s such BS, to assume that we (you) understand the heart of the issue at Souths, that the players were right and the coach was not, or that the coach was specifically too hard and they gave up.
I seem to recall that one of our colleagues who is related to a current Souths player who played under Madge, said that stories that Madge lost the dressing room were garbage. In fact, Madge was well liked by the players.
If my memory serves, his Souths relative said that Seibold was white-anting Madge and that it was Seibold who was disliked by the players, not Madge.
Have been told the same - but people will always form their own opinions.
It's also ultimately irrelevant. There's no point anyone spending time worrying about whether or not the players "like" the coach, because he is the coach and it's the results that matter.
If Madge gets the results, I really don't care who likes him or not. And if he doesn't get the results, all the friendly players in the world won't save him.
It's relevant if they don't put in to get the results for the coach..easier to punt 1 bloke than 17-20..
The results are relevant, the method not so much.
Like I said, players with no spine and no mental toughness hasn't worked for the first 20 seasons, why not a bit of Commando-style coaching for a few seasons. Yet to be seen whether it's a better strategy or not.