Mosh said:
btw Iafeta, what do you think of Hohaia's dropping, and Ivan as a coach thus far?
Hohaia's dropping: Surprising. Certainly the coach has to reward and punish good form and bad form respectively, to try and set a benchmark for what is expected. The problem is, I didn't think Lance's form was that. He was getting out of dummy half, and providing reasonable ball for the halves to work with. Bewildering giving Fien retained his spot after a complete and utter Barry Crocker, and Ropati stays at five eighth after a game similar to what he produces at centre - hit it up, step, hit someone's shoulder.
Ivan: Hard to judge. I've got faith in the man though. He was like Kevin Campion, did the hard yards and earnt respect for it. Not the prettiest of players, but damn effective and safe. He would have earnt a lot of mana during his time as a player at the Warriors. Obviously he has a lot of pedigree with his premier league success, much like Daniel Anderson, I think we need to give Ivan time, more than this season. This season will be hard for any coach, due to the salary cap pressures and what that will do to the player's attitudes - its human nature to get some sort of resistance, 'why bother, we're doomed', its human psychology really.
What he should be judged on, in my opinion is finding set increases in the game of the Warriors, not the final result. My thinking is its a bit difficult to make a judgement on the NRL ladder positioning because no one can be certain what impact the salary cap scandal has had on the club - the only previous experience is with Canterbury, who proceeded to lose their remaining three games and then bounce back hard the next year.
Hence, the types of things I think he should be appraised on are;
1. Increasing line breaks per game gained by 1 per game in comparison to 2005
2. Decrease line breaks conceeded per game by 1 per game in comparison to 2005
3. 60% of general field (not attacking) kicks to find grass and have a net gain of at least XX (probably 30-40m) from the position of the kick and the position the returning player is tackled at.
4. 50% of kicks within the attacking 30 to yield a positive result - either a turnover, a goal line drop out, a try.
5. Reduce errors by 3 errors per game in comparison to 2005.
6. Reduce missed tackles by 3 tackles per game in comparison to 2005
7. (This one is more in line with the thought we will lose players at the end of this year) - Blood 4 juniors with at least seven games in their first season, in 2006.
I think a lot of those goals are simple, attainable, yet challenging. Those goals will lend to a good end result as well. IE increasing line breaks/decreasing line breaks conceeded will improve for/against and ultimately wins/losses, a lot of those small factors will change 2-10 point losses into 2-10 point wins. It then comes down to the coaches technical skills to ascertain how to gain those goals - IE is the attacking structure right, is our defensive set up right, what do I need to work on mentally and technically with our general field kickers, do I need to make sure a secondary kicker is available at all times, how hard do I need to emphasise the basics of handling, good kick and chase etc...