Top players make top teams not coaches. Managers make top players into great teams. Far too much gets made of the coaches’ effect on a team’s performance.
I know I am going to get hammered for this but I just want to be heard.
I am going to rattle off a list of players that very rarely did what the coach wants.
Cliffy Lyons, Andrew Johns, Wally Lewis, Alfie Langer, Bob Fulton going back.
Currently the master is Thurston from the backs, Glenn Stewart in the forwards. Daly Cherry Evans (Second Year Apprentice), Johnson (Second Year Apprentice Despite a slow season), Reynolds (Souths) First Year Apprentice), Sandow (Has been an apprentice; went to work for himself to early).
These players are not really coached/managed.
When these players are on song, their teams thrive. They play what is in front of them and take educated risks.
You can coach out stupid errors like Ryles at Melbourne. The man was good for 2 to 4 penalties a game. You can’t coach that play from Glenn Stewart in last year’s Grand Final.
You can coach scrum plays and sweeping movements with 12 dummy runners (I know there is only 13 on the field). Coaches can watch days of tape, but no one can really coach against that run by Thurston in State of Origin 3.
No coach makes players like Balin and Luck tackle 50 blokes a game.
Players make teams.
The top coaches are inspiration leaders and managers of men. Their job title should be changed to team Managers.
Every team has specialist coaches. Andrew Johns is a specialist coach on most team’s books. That is coaching.
What Bellamy, Bennett, Hasler, and others do is man management, leadership and strategic thinking not coaching. What Barba said about Hasler is the key at the Dally M Awards.
“He is the first one there and the last to leave.”
He is as fit as all of them in his team and just has to pull out the tapes and show his team that he never ever stopped having a go. He is an inspiration.
He played for Australia but he really was not that good.
Top managers in my mind out the current crop were players in past who did the very BEST out of what talents they had. They had to strive to get every piece of success on the field. They are the types that are still working the hardest as managers.
They know no other way.
So it helps if you have a good coach/manager, but without one of those GREAT players, he has no hope.
planko
Guest
The front rowers running ball and playing in halves is hardly revolutionary. In hindsight neither of those side that Dessie coached sides would have won against Melbourne on the weekend. Coaches like Hasler and Bellamy push the envelope to the edge and wonder why people don't like their style of football. If you are a bulldogs fan I hope I am wrong but I see Manly and Bulldogs going down hard in their next games unless they pick up their act.
Meesta Cool
Guest
Geez Matt, which games have you seen where Manly haven't 'pushed the Boundaries'... this is Good coaching. knowing how far to push... Des is not a good coach, He is on his way to being one of the best seen. Good assessment Clyde you obviously watch the finer points of the game and appreciate what is happening to get these results!.
Meesta Cool
Guest
Some players can also destroy any coach.. have a look at Parra for last five years!..'Nuff Said'! It is going to be interesting seeing how 'sticky' can become 'liked and not destroyed by this bunch!.
Matt
Guest
With a million decoy runners and shepherds it's not hard to score. At least at manly he wasn't pushing the boundaries of the rules
Clyde
Guest
What a ridiculous article, and poorly timed considering the Des Hasler coached Bulldogs play his former team the Eagles tonight. All those players you listed are great individual talents, no doubt about it, however their individual skill is allowed to flourish because of the system the coach installs not in spite of it. Take the 'dogs for instance, this year Hasler has installed a revolutionary attacking system where his front-rowers get the ball at first receiver and are given the option of going themselves and trying to offload at the line or of passing the ball on to one of their halves. The halves then have the option of giving the ball to a hard running second-rower or letting him to go through as a decoy and flicking the ball out the back to Ben Barba who has run, pass, quick options galore (obviously there's a myriad of variations to this play) . It really is option football at it's finest and poses such a dilemma to the defence because they don't know which man to take. This attacking system has allowed the likes of Barba to play to such a level he was was crowned best player in the comp. That is the effect of a great coach, they plan their system around their best individual talents and allow them to express themselves. When Hasler was at Manly he had more of an edge orientated attack with Cherry-Evans and Foran at first receiver feeding the likes of the Stewart's and T-Rex. Coaches like Hasler should be applauded for bringing us wonderful free flowing attacking football, not have to put up with cheap shots like this.
Andy
Guest
I think it is the players that can make the coach sometimes, instead of the other way around. I also think that certain players that have a natural talent for coaching themselves, can make a team great too.
planko
Guest
No problem. The bottom line is look at the 5 teams I reckon that are in the race are a mixed bag. Melbourne/Canterbury Very good teams have some great players but guys like cronk and smith really thrive in that structured enviroment. But they look very coached. Whereas NQLD and SOUTH are go to rely on some freakish stuff from their guns. SOUTHS were really average against Manly without Inglis and to be blunt MANLY played a fairly average game yet still looked like they were in control. NQLD well Thurston Thurston Thurston and throw in a BOWEN. Many articles have been written about NQLD reliance on Thurston very similar to JOHNS NEWCASTLE era . MANLY takes a bit of both there is some structure and some freaks. All this weeks games will be interesting.
Haz
Guest
Planko, Great article. Am I allowed to agree and disagree at the same time? No doubt the champion players with the inspirational flashes of brilliance win games. But to steal someone else's words, a team with 13 Andrew Johns wouldn't win anything. Rugby league is a team game, and for every brilliant maestro, you need another 12 guys who get their job done; and the game plan, the defensive structure, the intelligent use of substitutes is where you win and lose. The saying goes, genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration. You need the coach and the rest of the team to provide the other 99%. So for every Andrew Johns, you need players like Paul Harrogan and a Tony Butterfield. For every Cliff Lyons, you need a sensible, stable halfback like Des Hasler, or Geoff Toovey and a forward pack that contains Marty Bella, Ian Roberts, Owen Cunningham. (see also the genius pairing of Jeff Robson and Todd Carney). Wally and Alfie had a massive Broncos pack, with the Gillmeisters and Mattersons of the world. The success of the Melbourne Storm is a combination of Bellamy's structures, a well-coached, no-nonsense, no-frills forward pack, and the genius of Messrs Cronk, Smith, and Slater. So, it's a both-and, dude.
Mals
Roar Rookie
Well said Planko. Some current players with uncoachable skills you haven't mentioned which I would put in the same category are Inglis, Barba & Hayne. In terms of uncoachable work rate some players that stand out for me are backrowers like Gallen, Watmough & Myles. Coaches lead the "horses" (players) to the water but they can't make them drink. In football around the world the coach is usually called the manager.