Re: Furner sacked : Tue May 07, 2019 9:40 pm  

Leeds only put up with winning, they do not tolerate losing. However if you have watched rugby league for 50 yrs + as I have you need to understand ; - a) good players come along regularly however, b). An exceptional player usually comes along every 10yrs approx, however c). Sometimes in that 10yrs more than one exceptional player comes along, anything from two to 4 or 5.
With a,b,& c. They may well play for one or two teams at the same time in that 10yr cycle giving a club halcyon days & a new learning curve to their team mates.
Finally, & more rarely, a near whole team of exceptional players comes along at the same time in that 10yr period & this only usually happens each 30 or 40 yrs.
One of these occurrences happened for leeds hence their golden era as they call it. They hanker after this & believe it can always be done , this is the problem finding exceptional players ??? It is a natural talent to be exceptional or call it a gift. There is nothing wrong in trying to find these individuals but it rarely happens by persons or people controlling this occurance/phenomenon.
Wakeys great team & board did not understand this as many other clubs have done the same & fallen foul to this when players eventually move on or cease to play.
The real trick is to recognize this element & constantly blend a side even if small dips happen in achievement rather than spectacular collapses. As a club side Saints are very good at constantly blending whilst adding the right player at the right time, wigan are probably next, then to a lesser scale, Leeds & warrington.
With regard to this phenomenon, and international sides, the Aussies invincibles were a team of exceptionals & WAKEY had one of them play for them called Wally Lewis. Good luck to Leeds trying to pursue this phenomenon but it can bring hart ache when you realize those players you think are going to be exceptional are only good or average players & don't match up to your exceptional players, as per now !

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 7:05 am  

It would depend in whether ir not hes allowed to pick the squad or not without interference from his CEO

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 7:28 am  

It seems to have been a mutual decision from what I've heard. Doesn't sound like Furner has settled that well and given the bang average performances then it seems like a good decision for both parties.
I'm seeing a lot of similarities between the Rhinos and Man Utd at the minute though. A golden generation has moved on and not been adequately replaced and there is a structure at the top level of the club that is not working that well and probably it is that that needs addressing before anything else will change.

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 8:59 am  

Fordy wrote:

It seems to have been a mutual decision from what I've heard. Doesn't sound like Furner has settled that well and given the bang average performances then it seems like a good decision for both parties.

Furner is going for an unfair dismissal claim? 3 year contract to pay up having moved to the other side of the world with no job to go to back home

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 9:29 am  

Fordy wrote:

It seems to have been a mutual decision from what I've heard. Doesn't sound like Furner has settled that well and given the bang average performances then it seems like a good decision for both parties.
I'm seeing a lot of similarities between the Rhinos and Man Utd at the minute though. A golden generation has moved on and not been adequately replaced and there is a structure at the top level of the club that is not working that well and probably it is that that needs addressing before anything else will change.

Mutual decision ??
Furner is threatening legal action for "unfair dismissal".

I've no idea whether his family have settled but, there is an article on the VT which suggests that this was far from "mutual" and that Furner believes that he hasn't had chance to carry out the remit that he was hired to introduce and on the face of it, he's right.

Leeds have been poor since Sinfield and Peacock left which is clearly not Furner's fault

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 11:16 am  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Mutual decision ??
Furner is threatening legal action for "unfair dismissal".

I've no idea whether his family have settled but, there is an article on the VT which suggests that this was far from "mutual" and that Furner believes that he hasn't had chance to carry out the remit that he was hired to introduce and on the face of it, he's right.

Leeds have been poor since Sinfield and Peacock left which is clearly not Furner's fault

Fair enough, was just mentioning what I had been told - clearly the person that told me is not as close to this situation as he thought.

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 11:32 am  

PopTart wrote:

I still don't get the difference.
He identified them but they didn't leave. So they played at the level they could and the team ended where they should be.
Why not wait until he could do what he wanted and judge him on those results.

If he identified them at the end of the year they still end up in the same position they are now surely?

They didn’t leave but it wasn’t for lack of trying to get them out of the door. The treatment of Ash Golding is the worst as he refused to pick him at all even when Walker was injured and instead pick unfit Lolohea who he’d already deemed not good enough for HB, all in an effort to force Golding to give up his fight of staying and free up cap space. Ash Golding is a well liked member of the squad and you’d be hard pressed to find a lad who is more passionate about their club so can’t imagine that sort of treatment sits too well with his teammates. Also you can’t sell if you can’t get guys in, rumours of offers made to the likes of Connor and Trueman to no avail and good knows who else....clubs don’t sell their better players in the first few months of the season. That’s why he needed to work with the guys he had this season regardless of quality but sounds like their was already a clear split of his favourites and the ones he didn’t want, that’s poor man management.

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 11:43 am  

Have to admit I found the exclusion of Golding from covering the full back berth bizarre especially given the performances of turnstile Tui.

[PopTart]

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 12:05 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

They didn’t leave but it wasn’t for lack of trying to get them out of the door. The treatment of Ash Golding is the worst as he refused to pick him at all even when Walker was injured and instead pick unfit Lolohea who he’d already deemed not good enough for HB, all in an effort to force Golding to give up his fight of staying and free up cap space. Ash Golding is a well liked member of the squad and you’d be hard pressed to find a lad who is more passionate about their club so can’t imagine that sort of treatment sits too well with his teammates. Also you can’t sell if you can’t get guys in, rumours of offers made to the likes of Connor and Trueman to no avail and good knows who else....clubs don’t sell their better players in the first few months of the season. That’s why he needed to work with the guys he had this season regardless of quality but sounds like their was already a clear split of his favourites and the ones he didn’t want, that’s poor man management.

None of that explains the league position or the sacking.

All you have said is that he wanted to reduce the number of fullbacks as he had 3 if not 4 options if you include Sutty because (I assume) he wanted better forwards.
That seems sensible.
Until that happened he played his second choice when his first choice was injured.
If the players don't like it because they wanted their mate who is the coaches 3rd choice to be picked...... And that affects performance...... Then that is a player issue not a coaches issue.

Re: Furner sacked : Wed May 08, 2019 2:48 pm  

PopTart wrote:

None of that explains the league position or the sacking.

All you have said is that he wanted to reduce the number of fullbacks as he had 3 if not 4 options if you include Sutty because (I assume) he wanted better forwards.
That seems sensible.
Until that happened he played his second choice when his first choice was injured.
If the players don't like it because they wanted their mate who is the coaches 3rd choice to be picked...... And that affects performance...... Then that is a player issue not a coaches issue.

One thing to reduce your number of FB’s, another thing to flat out refuse to pick him even when you have injuries in hope he gives up and moves on. Against you lot at Headingley when Walker was missing he moved his starting HB in Lolohea to FB and started Cam Smith - a 2nd row - in the halves. You don’t ask your starting HB’s to go cover other positions. Lolohea was dropped for poor form and fitness from the HB role but again when a Walker was injured they brought him back in and he’s still been bad instead of giving Golding a go because he didn’t want to give him any slight hope he’d still have a future there. Shocking treatment of the lad.

The Garbutt issue again a mess. Needed one of the Aussies out to create cap space for Merrin who Furner was insistent on having and told all 3 of Garbutt, Cuthbertson and Parcell to go and look for a new club just as preseason is about to start. Thing is they only needed one to leave so as soon as Garbutt got an offer and deal the other two were told they’re now staying. How do you run a dressing room and get everybody behind if that’s how Furner wanted to run things. When people start mentioning player power forced a coach out the sympathy goes to the coach and often is correct, but in some cases the coach brought it all on himself with rubbish handling of players.