Equally those that say Ivan can win us a premiership haven't made an argument for him either. The problem is how do you imperically quantify it? The only imperical proof that can be brought in is that he hasn't lead a team to an NRL title as a coach yet.
Jesbass, your associations that those that say Cleary can't win a title do so because if they repeat it offen enough it becomes true could also be true of those that say he can.
At the end of the day the whole argument is conjecture and people can only go by past results and what they percieve as correct in there own minds.
I agree. 100% conjecture on both sides. But the absolute self validity made on the 'Cleary can't win a premiership' side of the lecture is amazing.
IMO, a few things give you a massive leg up in the premiership, from what I've seen in the past 10 years.
-Luck with injuries
-Your coaches name is Wayne Bennett
-You systematically rort the salary cap
-Luck with refereeing decisions
-One or two key players catch on fire late in the season
-The spine of the team is at least very good if not outstanding
I think you have to be consistent to stand that chance of catching fire at the end of the year. I think Ivan Cleary provides that.
The second point is one that interests me. The only coach I would absolutely gag for if he came available is Bennett. He's a proven culture-builder. He sustains success. No other coach in the post-Gibson era rivals Bennett. Some have had periodic or intermittent success like Sheens or Stuart, but even they have woeful periods. Bennett consistently achieves. To me, if you sign Wayne Bennett you have enormous confidence that in his tenure he'll get his teams to the finals, and that he knows what to do next. To me, he is the only coach that you can tick and flick and say he is a guaranteed premiership winner. No one else comes close in my book, so therefore, unless they understand our culture and our innate way of doing things, I'm not overtly interested.
I hear comments that Ivan isn't adventurous enough. IMO, Wayne Bennett coached sides are methodical and disciplined, and follow a simple, rigid structure with one or two gamebreakers to execute key plays. The most adventurous coach IMO in the comp is Daniel Anderson, and he's been sacked. I don't think any of Wayne's stuff on field is ground breaking stuff. I think Wayne is just a past master of psychological preparation and being half a step ahead of the rest in what the game is trending. And he has enormous respect for it. My heart bleeds Warriors through and through, but if I were a player, in the back of my mind despite my enormous love for this club I would have this erring to go to a Bennett coached club because I think as a human being you'd learn a lot from his leadership. That's the mantra of the man.
That's some of my reasoning behind my comments. Much like Jesbass, I don't have a great deal of confidence either way to say my opinion is assertively correct. But unless the guy he's being compared to is W Bennett, frankly, IMO the guy deserves every opportunity. And beyond that, if he somehow fails from here, John Ackland or Tony Iro deserve their chance. I'd hate to think from a Warriors fans perspective that we underestimate the talents of those two operators. They add a lot of substance to this club.
Last edited by a moderator: