Ricky Stuart is a fraud

[Alec]

Milford
Lee 1 and Lee 2
Wighton
Cornish
Vaughan
Papalii
Possibly others I dunno about

That's an embarrassment of riches of players under 22 years of age. You probably don't need a star coach to make the most of it in the next couple of years. Furner was one of the truly horrific coaches though.

 

[Morkel]

Okay, here's my Ricky Rant...

Firstly, his one positive, and that's that he runs teams hard. Very hard. It was his single contributing factor to the Rooster's GF win. It also went a big way to helping the performance of the Sharks. But that's as far as it goes. Every other aspect of his coaching that he gets credit for is BS. His 'passion'? No, he just can't control himself. His 'football brains?'. It's very clear that everything he did as a player was based on instinct, because I haven't seen a single half or 5/8 blossom under him. His worst attribute, though, and by a fair margin, is his hypocrisy. So what does Ricky have that makes people think that he's a good coach? An opportunistic nature, and a whole lot of fast talking. I'm sure he thinks that he's one of the smartest in the room, the way that he concocts stories and thinks people believe him.

So let's start at the Roosters, with a squad that was already there for him to exploit. Like I said, he worked them hard. He famously said that he had the entire squad, forwards included, running at X for the beep test. That they were the fittest squad by far. In a competition where limited interchange had only just been re-introduced, fitness was of course going to go a long way to ensuring a team remained competitive. It's no masterstroke. In fact, like I said, it's his only card to play. The problem was, he ran the players in to the ground. Over the coming seasons the side quickly deteriorated. Skills, and a certain Brag Fittler, got them to two subsequent Grand Finals, which they lost, the same way that they made 2 losing grand finals before Ricky came along. The moment Fittler retired, the Roosters weren't even close to the same team.

How about the Sharks. Again, one good season out of four. The bumper season again undoubtedly benefited from his hard regime, especially as players like Gallen, Bird, Douglas, etc, all thrive as workhorses. Their equal-minor-premiership was the result of excellent defence. Their points-against sat at 384, which was fourth best for the season. But for a coach who played as a halfback, he sure couldn't coach anything remotely decent in attack. Their points-for was the second worst, beating only the Bulldogs, who received the wooden spoon after their sensationally derailed season. Their next season was woeful. The Sharks finished equal last, only avoiding the spoon by +/-. They were burnt out. And let's not forget some trademark Sticky recruitment. Anthony Tupou, signed for more than $400,000 a year, was his prize player. The fact that he chose Tupou to play for Australia at the same time either shows that he is incredibly stupid, or is willing to offer rep games to players on top of massive overs in order to recruit.

Next we have him coaching Australia. A blind monkey could have coached that team. They've been everything you could ever want in an international side. Losing the World Cup was a shocker though. Blame the Kiwis who were finally hitting their straps. Or Wayne Bennett who successfully plotted the Kangaroos downfall. Or Billy Slater who' brain fart threw away their last chance. But if you're Ricky Stuart, you blame the refs. And confront them in the hotel afterwards to give them a spray. And accuse the tournament organisers of a conspiracy. You then get the sack, and a $20,000 fine, deservingly.

So on to the NSW, and here's where my real hate for him starts. Forget 2005. Andrew Johns won that series. Fast-forward to 2011 instead. Let's remember that after Qld success, he was one of the most vocal in advocating a stand-alone coach in order to match Mal's dominant maroons. Coincidentally (or maybe not so), Ricky himself was a stand-alone coach, after losing his club & country jobs. Conveniently so, he was also an ex-Blue, and a halfback, with NSW's most disappointing performances coming from the halves. The perfect position for him? He certainly thought so, and managed to convince a lot of others too. So this part of his career was an absolute doozy in terms of hypocrisy. Jarryd Hayne was not selected at fullback, because, in Stuart's words, he was a five-eighth, and Stuart would not pick players out of position for such crucial games. So Hayne was left out of Game 1. When NSW lost, he picked Hayne on the wing for Game 2. Then in the centres for game 3. He would also claim that Queensland were so dominant because they showed loyalty. So NSW should do the same. From game 1 to game 2, he made 12 positional changes, bringing in 6 new players. Loyalty, it seems, was only reserved for the halves, who he picked for all 3 games, with Pearce continuing to be picked for 2012 as well.

Aaaand next we have the Eels. When Stuart spoke of passion about the Eels job it sounded very familiar. Like the sort of lines he was vomiting out to the media about the NSW job. Passion, passion, passion. To me, it looked as though Stuart's ultimate goal was always to get back in to club coaching. The NSW job was just a stepping stone, a way to get back in the public eye to advance your career. I mean, if he had that much passion for the NSW job, surely you wouldn't quit unless you'd succeeded, right? Nope. As soon as the ink was dry on the Eels contract, the NSW job was dropped. One could argue that if he'd continued in both jobs it would be hypocritical, as he originally took on the role as NSW coach because it needed a stand-alone coach. Yeah, Ricky, you'd hate to sound hypocritical. In dropping the NSW job, he lost arguably his only bargaining chip, and that was the ability to attract aspiring and up-and-coming NSW players to the Eels. With that lost, his only means of recruiting was how he'd always done it - and that's offering massive overs to players in the mistaken belief that you can coach them to be better. Just like Anthony Tupou, who Stuart turned in to an Australian representative (cough), he'd turn these players in to the best of the best, justifying their at-the-time massively inflated contracts. Like Darcy Lussick. Recruited to be a top prop, at close to $400,000 a season. He finished the season at lock for some reason. Or Corey Norman. $450k. Playing as fullback for the Broncos, Stuart saw him as the future Qld 5/8. Norman would see out the season in Qld cup. But how did Stuart go in terms of coaching? Well, surprise surprise, the Eels got the spoon. Throughout the year, the passion that Stuart so often told the media that he had for the eels, was overcome with the need to tell everyone who'd listen that the players weren't good enough. He even dragged the players in front of the members to answer questions on why they were going so shit. Oh, and once again blamed the refs. And got fined for doing so. Ricky's never to blame. After telling half his squad that they weren't good enough, he then jumps ship himself, leaving a tattered mess. There are probably 5 or 6 really decent young players that I'd be surprised if their confidence ever recovers enough for them to reach their potential, such is Ricky's poisonous blame game.

So now he's coaching the Raiders. And guess what. Passion, passion, passion. This time it is kind of believable because he made a name for himself playing for them. But that doesn't help the Eels fans who were told that all he wanted to do was pull the Eels name out of the mud. Or the Blues fans who were told the same. More hypocrisy. He escapes his Eels deal because he has a clause in his contract that stipulates if the Raiders job comes up, he can take it. For family reasons. His first job as Eels coach? Sit down with Anthony Milford to convince him that he shouldn't activate his clause that stipulated he can go home to Brisbane. For family reasons. He once again shows us how clever he is, by offering Milford one million dollars a year to stay, claiming that if he goes to Brisbane then they'd have to match that figure under the cap. He truly, seriously, undoubtedly believes that he's pulled a sharp one here. That he'll scare Brisbane in to offering him close to the same amount, therefore impacting our salary cap heavily, effectively sabotaging us. I truly believe that he thinks that he's some kind of genius, that he can play these games and manipulate players, clubs, and the media. Now that Milford looks like he's gone, he gets his big recruitment / retention 'win' by re-singing the next-best promising juniors. Undoubtedly to massive deals. I suspect that he believes that he'll be able to coach them in to being future representitive stars, justifying their price tags. Sound familiar?

How anyone can fall for his blatant bullshit, or look at his coaching record and consider it even remotely positive, just baffles me. He is a dead-set idiot. He tries to be a Todd Greenburg and spin any story to make himself smell like roses, but is in no way as convincing. He is a liar, he is a hypocrite, he is a fraud.

 

[Porthoz]

Morks, I reckon you should tell us what you really think about Sticky! :laugh:

 

[Morkel]

Morks, I reckon you should tell us what you really think about Sticky! :laugh:

I would, but the last thing these people want is a wall of text to read.

 

[Nashy]

Holy massive post Batman.

 

[Harry Sack]

I would, but the last thing these people want is a wall of text to read.

FMD, I'll read the rest later. I got to the eels and went crosseyed.

 

[KingWebcke]

Firstly, his one positive, and that's that he runs teams hard. Very hard. It was his single contributing factor to the Rooster's GF win. It also went a big way to helping the performance of the Sharks. But that's as far as it goes. Every other aspect of his coaching that he gets credit for is BS. His 'passion'? No, he just can't control himself. His 'football brains?'. It's very clear that everything he did as a player was based on instinct, because I haven't seen a single half or 5/8 blossom under him.

I don't think that is a fair criticisim of him at all. getting a half to blossom under a coach requires good coaching and it requires a decent prospect to work with. When did Stuart ever really have that?

at the Roosters he had Josh Lewis for one year. but Lewis turned out to be a massive waste of space and no coach ever got him working properly, so you'd be a hard man to pin that failure on Stuart. And he also had Jamie Soward but the only coach who ever got Soward playing well was Bennett and even that only lasted for a year or two.

at Cronulla he didn't have any young halves to work with either ... except for Brett Seymour. Who (as we found out) was one of those tremendous junior players who waltzed into first grade with a self-entitled attitude and never got it going. Seymour was bad at the Broncos, the Sharks, the Warriors ... Stuart failed with Seymour but so did every other coach he played under.

and there was no one at Parra.

Stuart hasn't helped any young halves blossom but he never had much opportunity to try.

 

[Harry Sack]

Seymour was fired from the Broncos because they didn't want any players better than D Lockyer because he was a media darling...

True story, someone close to him physically told me this.....and was being serious. Words failed me.

 

[KingWebcke]

I should probably put a disclaimer here that I'm the anti-Morkel of this debate. I don't have much time for Stuart's complaining and I don't think he is a supercoach but I loved him as a player and I think is probably showing through here

How about the Sharks. Again, one good season out of four. The bumper season again undoubtedly benefited from his hard regime, especially as players like Gallen, Bird, Douglas, etc, all thrive as workhorses. Their equal-minor-premiership was the result of excellent defence. Their points-against sat at 384, which was fourth best for the season. But for a coach who played as a halfback, he sure couldn't coach anything remotely decent in attack. Their points-for was the second worst, beating only the Bulldogs, who received the wooden spoon after their sensationally derailed season.

I remember the Sharks team from 2008 and their backline was horrendous. they had Noddy and that was it ... it was filled with fringe players and spuds. it doesn't surprise me at all that a backline with Mitch Brown, Kearney (where is that guy now?), Luke Covell, Dave Simmons (in the centres), Ben Pomeroy etc couldn't put up any points.

I don't think Wayne Bennett could have got the 2008 Sharks scoring points. I think the fact that Stuart managed to work around that is a massive credit to him. he took a team with rubbish backs and good forwards and capitalised on their strengths.

say what you want about the rest of Stuart's career but 2008 was an astounding success and nothing can really take away from that.

 

[Morkel]

I don't think that is a fair criticisim of him at all. getting a half to blossom under a coach requires good coaching and it requires a decent prospect to work with. When did Stuart ever really have that?

at the Roosters he had Josh Lewis for one year. but Lewis turned out to be a massive waste of space and no coach ever got him working properly, so you'd be a hard man to pin that failure on Stuart. And he also had Jamie Soward but the only coach who ever got Soward playing well was Bennett and even that only lasted for a year or two.

at Cronulla he didn't have any young halves to work with either ... except for Brett Seymour. Who (as we found out) was one of those tremendous junior players who waltzed into first grade with a self-entitled attitude and never got it going. Seymour was bad at the Broncos, the Sharks, the Warriors ... Stuart failed with Seymour but so did every other coach he played under.

and there was no one at Parra.

Stuart hasn't helped any young halves blossom but he never had much opportunity to try.

9 seasons of first grade, and never had a decent opportunity? Please. I could maybe forgive that at the Roosters because Fittler & Finch (for the most part) had the positions sewn up. But besides Kimmorley, who did he have at the sharks that demanded selection & therefore was preventing him from trialling / blooding / developing halves?

 

[KingWebcke]

He would also claim that Queensland were so dominant because they showed loyalty. So NSW should do the same. From game 1 to game 2, he made 12 positional changes, bringing in 6 new players. Loyalty, it seems, was only reserved for the halves, who he picked for all 3 games, with Pearce continuing to be picked for 2012 as well.

Of all the criticisms you've made, I think this is just 100% wrong. I thought Stuart did stay very loyal to his players.

looking at the changes from Game 1 to 2, he brought in 6 new players but 4 of those changes were due to injuries .The only players he actually dropped were Jason King and Dean Young, which was a smart move because those guys were fucking hopeless. I think Stuart was trying to be loyal but he has to make changes when players go down injured.

for the rest of the series he made very few changes and in 2012 he barely made any at all. In his entire time as NSW coach he only made a couple of changes that weren't due to injury. After Game 1 in his first year I don't think he made many more changes than Mal.

You could argue that he made some really dumb selections (like staying loyal to Pearce for 6 consecutive games) but I think you're wrong to criticise him for being disloyal. He saw that our Origin side benefits from familiarity and continuity and he tried to copy that ... I think that is part of the reason why NSW did play a lot better under Stuart.

I certainly think keeping the same spine worked a lot better than the endless mish-mash of players that came before

 

[KingWebcke]

9 seasons of first grade, and never had a decent opportunity? Please.

Name a good young prospective half who Stuart should have worked on but failed to

 

[Morkel]

I should probably put a disclaimer here that I'm the anti-Morkel of this debate. I don't have much time for Stuart's complaining and I don't think he is a supercoach but I loved him as a player and I think is probably showing through here



I remember the Sharks team from 2008 and their backline was horrendous. they had Noddy and that was it ... it was filled with fringe players and spuds. it doesn't surprise me at all that a backline with Mitch Brown, Kearney (where is that guy now?), Luke Covell, Dave Simmons (in the centres), Ben Pomeroy etc couldn't put up any points.

I don't think Wayne Bennett could have got the 2008 Sharks scoring points. I think the fact that Stuart managed to work around that is a massive credit to him. he took a team with rubbish backs and good forwards and capitalised on their strengths.

say what you want about the rest of Stuart's career but 2008 was an astounding success and nothing can really take away from that.

Whose fault was that? Stuart had been there since 2006, and part of his job was recruitment & retention. I'm sure Stuart would blame the fact that the Sharks were financially struggling so couldn't compete with the other teams. Nothing to do with the fact that he'd spent massive money on mediocre players and therefore had little room to sign any quality? Sounds like a re-occuring theme to me.

 

[KingWebcke]

Whose fault was that? Stuart had been there since 2006, and part of his job was recruitment & retention. I'm sure Stuart would blame the fact that the Sharks were financially struggling so couldn't compete with the other teams. Nothing to do with the fact that he'd spent massive money on mediocre players and therefore had little room to sign any quality? Sounds like a re-occuring theme to me.

I really don't think the poor quality of the backline in 2008 was Stuart's fault at all. Firstly, he was only there from 2007 not 2006 and secondly, (as you say) the Sharks were a cash-strapped club and they had a poor feeder system.

Stuart would have been partially responsible for recruitment and retention but he isn't a miracle worker. The Sharks had a poor backline when he arrived but they never had the cash to throw at big name players. He just have to work with what he had and he did that very well in 2008.

Stuart's poor recruiting didn't really start until 2009 when he let Noddy go and brought in Tupou and Maitua.

you can criticise Stuart for his work at the Sharks in 2009 because it was very poor. I think Stuart has got enough stuff on his resume that you can target but criticising his work with the Sharks in 2008. I think trying to find negatives from 2008 is grasping at straws. Every dog has his day and 2008 was an excellent year for Sticky

 

[Broncoman]

Okay, here's my Ricky Rant...

Firstly, his one positive, and that's that he runs teams hard. Very hard. It was his single contributing factor to the Rooster's GF win. It also went a big way to helping the performance of the Sharks. But that's as far as it goes. Every other aspect of his coaching that he gets credit for is BS.

His tactic of using a rushing defensive line played a big part in the Roosters success in 2002 as the Roosters had the best defensive stats in the competition that year and conceded the least points that year with 405 (16 per game).

 

[Big Pete]

I just think 2008 was it was and that fans shouldn't get too caught up in it. That year had been building for awhile for that Cronulla outfit and Sticky just had them playing high percentage football and with the exception of the Greg Bird drama, he didn't have that many distractions to contend with.

Like KW alluded to, pretty much anything Stuart achieved in 08 was defecated on by 09 when he made a list of bizarre recruiting decisions that just killed the team.

For example, De Gois was right up there as one of the most important players for the Sharks in 08, what does Sticky do? Let's him walk straight to Newcastle so he can pick up Corey Hughes.

The decision to replace Kimmorley for Barrett was another head scratcher. Not only because of Kimmorley, but it also exposed his lack of insight into why he was able to get a decent (if not good) year out of Seymour in 2008. By pushing him towards that first receiver role, Seymour lost the necessary space to play his natural game and it really stilted him. Of course, maybe Brett was a ticking time bomb anyways and he would have been made to walk due to his off-field behaviour but I'd like to think if he was enjoying his footy he wouldn't have been such an easy target.

----------------------------------------------------------------
As for his backline recruitment in 2007, two words, Karlos Filiga.

 

[KingWebcke]

I forgot about him picking up Corey Hughes. that was just odd.

Stuart went from really good to utterly bizarre in one summer. I wonder whether he actually had a stroke in between 2008 and 2009

 

[Morkel]

Of all the criticisms you've made, I think this is just 100% wrong. I thought Stuart did stay very loyal to his players.

looking at the changes from Game 1 to 2, he brought in 6 new players but 4 of those changes were due to injuries .The only players he actually dropped were Jason King and Dean Young, which was a smart move because those guys were fucking hopeless. I think Stuart was trying to be loyal but he has to make changes when players go down injured.

for the rest of the series he made very few changes and in 2012 he barely made any at all. In his entire time as NSW coach he only made a couple of changes that weren't due to injury. After Game 1 in his first year I don't think he made many more changes than Mal.

You could argue that he made some really dumb selections (like staying loyal to Pearce for 6 consecutive games) but I think you're wrong to criticise him for being disloyal. He saw that our Origin side benefits from familiarity and continuity and he tried to copy that ... I think that is part of the reason why NSW did play a lot better under Stuart.

I certainly think keeping the same spine worked a lot better than the endless mish-mash of players that came before

Fair enough, looking at the teams, despite the endless miss-mash of bench->starting->bench again, most of the players were chosen consistently. I do remember at the time most of us Qlders were absolutely ripping in to Stuart because of his stance on loyalty. Maybe it was more because at the time he publicly claimed that he was determined to stick to the same team and give them a chance to see it through for the entire series. But the moment they lose, their starting prop & hooker gets the boot, along with the backflip on Hayne (again, after publicly defending his reason for selecting Dugan). It was also compounded by the fact that he'd painted himself in to a corner - when Dugan went down with injury, Hayne was the logical choice. But again Ricky cut off his nose to spite his face, selecting an ageing Miniciello at fullback (who was, in the end, quite solid), and Hayne ending up on the wing, and then the centres. More hypocrisy, and more face-saving, all coated in some very flimsy excuses.

Name a good young prospective half who Stuart should have worked on but failed to

I can't. Because all he ever did was bring in existing 1st grade halves from elsewhere, chew them up, and spit them out. Who knows if he even recruited or promoted young halves, for all I could tell his only depth/cover was throwing a back-rower in.

His tactic of using a rushing defensive line played a big part in the Roosters success in 2002 as the Roosters had the best defensive stats in the competition that year and conceded the least points that year with 405 (16 per game).

Again, that was an advantage given to them by the uber-fitness regime. And full credit that it worked for 2002. But it was not sustainable, as we were all to find out. They all just got burnt out, physically & mentally. In fact the mental exhaustion is probably more a Sticky hangover for teams than the physical torture.