Stephen Kearney

[Berkeley_Eagle]

**** coach
Average player

 

[BOZO]

Incorrect, he is kiwis head coach for the World Cup and 4 nations wins

He is over rated though

Stand corrected but the assistant coach was Wayne Bennett.

Wayne Bennett wont be there to hold his hand in the World Cup this time he will be on his own just like he was with the Eels this year. Overrated coach. The results speak for them selves .

 

[jjai]

I never seen Foran spill the ball(for us ) like he did 15 out from the kiwis line 1st tackle 😀
when it happend , i didnt know whether to cheer his mistake or feel for him lol..

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

Wayne Bennett wasn't there last year either

To write him off after 1 Eels season is ridiculous, fits in with most player assessments on here as well though I suppose

Incorrect, he is kiwis head coach for the World Cup and 4 nations wins

He is over rated though

Stand corrected but the assistant coach was Wayne Bennett.

Wayne Bennett wont be there to hold his hand in the World Cup this time he will be on his own just like he was with the Eels this year. Overrated coach. The results speak for them selves .

 

[master blaster]

In one of Hoppa jr's articles he said that being coached by Kearney was also a factor in signing for the eels. The bloke has won nothing. He's been assistant coach for all major achievements od and team he was involved in. Good luck Hoppa.

swoop,Im betting that he,ll end up at the dogs with Des,dont know why,but I reckon he will

 

[lismore_fan]

2. You only need one referee. That English ref did a good job, and proved that our system of two-refs is wrong.

You have got to be kidding!

The ruck was so under-scruitinised the players could get away with anything.
The blatant forward pass to our left-side wing was missed by the one referee (and linesman).
The amount of roughness in tackles was brought a return to old-fashion 70s football.
The play the ball was so slow because the tacklers wouldn't get off the tackled player. One penalty in the entire match for this infringement.

Perhaps it wasn't the two-ref system that needed to be looked at but a current NRL ref to referee players from the NRL system.

Neutral referees in international games don't work.

Only IMO, of course.

 

[Cameron]

Can't say I was surprised by packers dog shot. Kearney was nothing but a thug when he played so would expect the players he coaches to be the same. 🙂

 

[eagles2win]

Two things the match showed:
1. You get a better standard of football during daylight. It was action-packed.
2. You only need one referee. That English ref did a good job, and proved that our system of two-refs is wrong.

Two ref. system is hopeless. More contentious decisions than ever since it was brought in. The NRL need to bite the bullet and admit it's been a failure. (Can't see that happening though).

Love to make people think about this around Origin time

The ARL (Carr) says that the players must make themselves available for Australia. But for it to recognised as a genuine selection trial for the Kangaroos (he's argument) it should have to be played under International Rules i.e 1 referee.
So it could take one player to do a Dennis Tutty (for the youngsters made it possible for players to switch teams, the players use to have to reside in the area. Something that should have been picked up prior to this was that Johnny Raper lived in Newtown yet played for St George!) or a Terry Hill (Rugby League was set down to have a draft system and Tezza took it to court and it was deemed illegal) to allow the likes of Foran, McGuire etc to play Origin

 

[The Who]

2. You only need one referee. That English ref did a good job, and proved that our system of two-refs is wrong.

You have got to be kidding!

The ruck was so under-scruitinised the players could get away with anything.
The blatant forward pass to our left-side wing was missed by the one referee (and linesman).
The amount of roughness in tackles was brought a return to old-fashion 70s football.
The play the ball was so slow because the tacklers wouldn't get off the tackled player. One penalty in the entire match for this infringement.

Perhaps it wasn't the two-ref system that needed to be looked at but a current NRL ref to referee players from the NRL system.

Neutral referees in international games don't work.
Only IMO, of course.

I'm very surprised at your comments. As per my original post I thought the game was terrific. There was a minimum of penalties, the ref seem to use common sense and, despite you believing there were slow play-the-balls there were NINE tries scored in what was a very open, entertaining match.
It seems to me that you want more penalties and greater scrutiny.
I don't have a problem with the on field ref missing the occasional forward pass or indiscretion. No-one is ever going to be perfect. I liked the way he made quick decisions, and rarely consulted the video ref.
If I want to see penalties I'll watch rugby union.
I believe the two-ref system has been a failure, along with the video ref, and it has simply added to the cost of administration.
But that is only my opinion.

 

[The Eagle]

2. You only need one referee. That English ref did a good job, and proved that our system of two-refs is wrong.

You have got to be kidding!

The ruck was so under-scruitinised the players could get away with anything.
The blatant forward pass to our left-side wing was missed by the one referee (and linesman).
The amount of roughness in tackles was brought a return to old-fashion 70s football.
The play the ball was so slow because the tacklers wouldn't get off the tackled player. One penalty in the entire match for this infringement.

Perhaps it wasn't the two-ref system that needed to be looked at but a current NRL ref to referee players from the NRL system.

Neutral referees in international games don't work.
Only IMO, of course.

I'm very surprised at your comments. As per my original post I thought the game was terrific. There was a minimum of penalties, the ref seem to use common sense and, despite you believing there were slow play-the-balls there were NINE tries scored in what was a very open, entertaining match.
It seems to me that you want more penalties and greater scrutiny.
I don't have a problem with the on field ref missing the occasional forward pass or indiscretion. No-one is ever going to be perfect. I liked the way he made quick decisions, and rarely consulted the video ref.
If I want to see penalties I'll watch rugby union.
I believe the two-ref system has been a failure, along with the video ref, and it has simply added to the cost of administration.
But that is only my opinion.

Agree with everything but video ref,must stay

 

[Jethro]

2. You only need one referee. That English ref did a good job, and proved that our system of two-refs is wrong.

You have got to be kidding!

The ruck was so under-scruitinised the players could get away with anything.
The blatant forward pass to our left-side wing was missed by the one referee (and linesman).
The amount of roughness in tackles was brought a return to old-fashion 70s football.
The play the ball was so slow because the tacklers wouldn't get off the tackled player. One penalty in the entire match for this infringement.

Perhaps it wasn't the two-ref system that needed to be looked at but a current NRL ref to referee players from the NRL system.

Neutral referees in international games don't work.
Only IMO, of course.

I'm very surprised at your comments. As per my original post I thought the game was terrific. There was a minimum of penalties, the ref seem to use common sense and, despite you believing there were slow play-the-balls there were NINE tries scored in what was a very open, entertaining match.
It seems to me that you want more penalties and greater scrutiny.
I don't have a problem with the on field ref missing the occasional forward pass or indiscretion. No-one is ever going to be perfect. I liked the way he made quick decisions, and rarely consulted the video ref.
If I want to see penalties I'll watch rugby union.
I believe the two-ref system has been a failure, along with the video ref, and it has simply added to the cost of administration.
But that is only my opinion.

I'm with you and your opinion The Who. I would like to see the video ref replaced with someone to run the video footage on the big screen for the referee on the ground to view the video footage himself and make the decisions himself.