Leeds Restructure Rugby Department

[whatmichaelsays]

36 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think you might have hit the nail on the head that he is a bit out of touch tbh, and perhaps he is a bit delusional about it all at the moment. Since the stadium rebuild the club seems to have been really directionless yet the message from the top hasn't reflected reality.

Agreed. When it comes to Hetherington generally, I do think it's time for Leeds to turn a new page. There's no questioning his achievements over his tenure, but there seems to be a recurring theme of issues at the club that, eventually, do have to take you up to the boardroom. 

We've heard a couple of times about the culture at Leeds being an issue. It was remarked on after McDermott left, some "bad eggs" were moved on last year and there are signs / suggestions that despite some positive talk about having a "good group", the same issues are still there. Ultimately the culture of any business is set by its leadership.

Recruitment has been a long-term issue, and Leeds seem to be in a perpetual "team in transition" phase. Again, how many coaches and players do you churn through before concluding that the issue may lie with leadership?

And then there have been certain remarks that just don't quite sit right with me - the "I don't want to hear complaints about player welfare" remarks that came after COVID were very tone deaf in my view and despite being proven right on a number of key issues (eg, the Elstone breakaway), I think he has probably been a little bit short-sighted in his loyalty to Red Hall at times. 

There are some great achievements  on his CV - the success for Leeds on the field, the redevelopment of the club, being the first club to pay female players and the work that the Leeds Rugby Foundation does stand out, but it's time for some new ideas. 

Edited May 29 by whatmichaelsays

[Griff]

16 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I think finances may have played a part in not replacing Sinfield, it was in 2021 which was still being affected by Covid.

All the strengths that Leeds had became massive millstones in 2020 and 2021. They made huge losses.

[Griff]

14 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Hetherington is 70 ....

Not yet he isn't.

[whatmichaelsays]

4 minutes ago, Griff said:

Not yet he isn't.

In which case, don't believe everything you read on Google, kids. 

Anyway.... speaking of bad eggs.... Blake Austin makes Rohan Smith accusations amid Leeds Rhinos exit revelations - Leeds Live (leeds-live.co.uk)

[Tommygilf]

10 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I can understand GH maybe being sceptical about replacing Sinfield when that didn't work, but it's clear that this appointment should have been made way before now.

But at least he's recognised that now.

I'm glad it has been recognised. The context is just making it look a bit desperate sadly because it clearly is the right decision. 

I hope it doesn't end up being a jobs for the boys appointment though.

[Tommygilf]

11 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Agreed. When it comes to Hetherington generally, I do think it's time for Leeds to turn a new page. There's no questioning his achievements over his tenure, but there seems to be a recurring theme of issues at the club that, eventually, do have to take you up to the boardroom. 

We've heard a couple of times about the culture at Leeds being an issue. It was remarked on after McDermott left, some "bad eggs" were moved on last year and there are signs / suggestions that despite some positive talk about having a "good group", the same issues are still there. Ultimately the culture of any business is set by its leadership.

Recruitment has been a long-term issue, and Leeds seem to be in a perpetual "team in transition" phase. Again, how many coaches and players do you churn through before concluding that the issue may lie with leadership?

And then there have been certain remarks that just don't quite sit right with me - the "I don't want to hear complaints about player welfare" remarks that came after COVID were very tone deaf in my view and despite being proven right on a number of key issues (eg, the Elstone breakaway), I think he has probably been a little bit short-sighted in his loyalty to Red Hall at times. 

There are some great achievements  on his CV - the success for Leeds on the field, the redevelopment of the club, being the first club to pay female players and the work that the Leeds Rugby Foundation does stand out, but it's time for some new ideas. 

110%.

I think he was ready to step back significantly and had to come back because Sinfield was leaving and there was no replacement prepared. That lack of a plan B seems to be a common recurring theme across recent times - that has made other decisions seem quite knee jerk. Indeed this decision seems quite knee jerk.

I hope the new person is given the scope to work. I would have ideally liked to have seen a bit longer recruitment process than we're going to get, but we are where we are. 

I do worry that this leaves the rugby side in limbo however.

[Chrispmartha]

13 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

In which case, don't believe everything you read on Google, kids. 

Anyway.... speaking of bad eggs.... Blake Austin makes Rohan Smith accusations amid Leeds Rhinos exit revelations - Leeds Live (leeds-live.co.uk)

Even if some of what he says is 100% correct (bearing in mind we're only hearing his side of it here) Austin does come across as a bit of a dick. 

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Even if some of what he says is 100% correct (bearing in mind we're only hearing his side of it here) Austin does come across as a bit of a dick. 

A dick we recruited [as a marquee player?]...

Edited May 29 by Tommygilf

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

A dick we recruited [as a marquee player?]...

He was no where near a marquee player, he even says in his video he was paid poorly for someone of his stature or something like that.

Sezer however was a marquee player - in salary terms anyway!

[fieldofclothofgold]

16 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Even if some of what he says is 100% correct (bearing in mind we're only hearing his side of it here) Austin does come across as a bit of a dick. 

He's still angry isn't he ? 

[Tommygilf]

5 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

He was no where near a marquee player, he even says in his video he was paid poorly for someone of his stature or something like that.

Sezer however was a marquee player - in salary terms anyway!

This is the point I suppose! Recruitment has been dire for a long time.

[Tommygilf]

Where does Ryan Hall fit into all this?

[M j M]

Austin famously was being paid a low wage at Leeds. We discussed it here often enough.

Hetherington has tried twice to get rid of the football side of things, it shouldn't be a surprise that he is trying again. Hopefully it will work out this time, they have structured the position it seems to be a bit more senior than it was when Sinfield had the role. The fact that Hetherington specifically says they are looking for experience in a similar role suggests that the way things went with Sinfield when he was learning from GH on the job isn't something they want to repeat.

I wonder if Ian Blease is interested.

[Tommygilf]

Another point of order, perhaps some may consider it minor, but GH was always one to wear a suit and club tie for public appearances. Always looked professional. 

The jumper and unbuttoned shirt look gives Grandpa vibes... unless he has suddenly gone all Gen Z?

Edited May 29 by Tommygilf

[fieldofclothofgold]

49 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Where does Ryan Hall fit into all this?

Interesting point Hall coming back next season one of the reasons is staying on in a staff appointment 

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, fieldofclothofgold said:

Interesting point Hall coming back next season one of the reasons is staying on in a staff appointment 

Quite. Whilst of course any DOR coming in mid season might expect 1 or 2 signings to have been agreed perhaps, to have a promised off field role included too?

How must Hall think? Was this planned before or after his signing?

[Chrispmartha]

I think Halls job will be within the commercial department which isn’t covered by the DOR rugby roll?

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Chrispmartha said:

I think Halls job will be within the commercial department which isn’t covered by the DOR rugby roll?

Is it? I didn't know if it had been said specifically. With the comments around educating and mentoring young players I assumed it was Rugby related!

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Is it? I didn't know if it had been said specifically. With the comments around educating and mentoring young players I assumed it was Rugby related!

Just mutterings ive heard, i could be totally wrong. He’ll be an asset whatever role he does

[Tommygilf]

Thinking about the "money problem" argument for why we've not gone for a sporting director before this, I don't buy it. The club has had money, we've paid 6 figure transfer fees for 2 players last off season.

This has been forced to the fore because of how the club is performing at present, and an unwillingness/inability for the CEO to sack the coach. Its a good move overall, but the context is inescapable.

[Superb Chops]

23 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Gary Hetherington stepping back from the Rugby Department (ie recruitment and retention). Someone to be appointed towards end of June iirc.

When you are repeating the word 'department' to explain anything you can assume the action lacks substance.

Leeds RL support deserves better than this current on-field malaise, while whoever signed off on the communication materials should consider a different career. 

[Griff]

On 30/05/2024 at 10:04, Tommygilf said:

Thinking about the "money problem" argument for why we've not gone for a sporting director before this, I don't buy it. The club has had money, we've paid 6 figure transfer fees for 2 players last off season.

This has been forced to the fore because of how the club is performing at present, and an unwillingness/inability for the CEO to sack the coach. Its a good move overall, but the context is inescapable.

It's true that, despite the club having lost millions in the Covid era, they were still pretty well placed financially.

[redjonn]

On 30/05/2024 at 10:04, Tommygilf said:

Thinking about the "money problem" argument for why we've not gone for a sporting director before this, I don't buy it. The club has had money, we've paid 6 figure transfer fees for 2 players last off season.

This has been forced to the fore because of how the club is performing at present, and an unwillingness/inability for the CEO to sack the coach. Its a good move overall, but the context is inescapable.

Don't see that the club/GH has any unwillingness to sack coaches, as shown with previous. He or Caddick don't shy from discussing performances with coaches.   I think GH just disagree 's with the clamour by many to sack Smith.  He may come to that conclusion in his own time frame but that isn't now and his record shows he ain't shy to sack a coach when he thinks it appropriate. 

As far as I can see GH has been putting in place a number of directors for different parts of the business with a view of building the structure that enables him to take a step back.  I would look at the Sporting Director as that next or final step of providing a structure and people in position to sustain the business with both Caddock and GH both getting into their 70's, well GH's the next few weeks.

 

Edited June 4 by redjonn

[super major]

On 29/05/2024 at 16:09, Chrispmartha said:

We've needed an appointment like this ever since Sinfield left the similar role.

Doesn't matter what they do now the fans will just say sack smith anyway without doing any critical thinking of whether this is a good move or not (it is).

 

the new guy might come in and give the fans what they want anyway.

 

Ive got zero clue who this person will be though, of course people are already just saying Sinfield, but it seems they've forgotten he quit the role a couple of years ago.

Do you think Sinfield did any good?

He seems to be a very intelligent bloke but surely many of the problems from the last 4 years or so result from his tenure?

[Chrispmartha]

1 hour ago, super major said:

Do you think Sinfield did any good?

He seems to be a very intelligent bloke but surely many of the problems from the last 4 years or so result from his tenure?

He simply wasn't ready for that role IMO and he admits himself in his book that he just didn't enjoy it.