northey didnt hold the club for ransom at all.
all he wanted was some job security, and he had earned it.
Mal brown was heading a very public campaign to have him replaced.
With that going on and the club refusing to extend his contract, how could you blame him for taking a 3 year contract elsewhere. Who needs constant undermining from wanna be powerbrokers while trying to do their job
The only way to prove mal brown wrong was to win a premiership. What coach in the history of the game has had winning the premiership as a condition of keeping the job.
"Give me a 3 year contract or I'm walking" isn't holding the club to ransom?
I know it was a few years later but Paul Roos proved that boards can be won over in the right circumstances.
The whole must win a premiership or he won't get a contract extension is just opinion - we will never really know but it is highly unlikely he would've been sacked had we delivered a strong 1996.
Anyway, Mal Brown - let's not give him the credit, imagine the smug look of content on his ginormous, pumpkin shaped melon head if he read these posts!
brown's argument was that northey was a good coach, but not good enough to take out the big dance, and pointed to the fact that he got clubs to the grand final but couldn't win them.
So the only way to to curtail this undermining would have been to have won a premiership, even a runner up would have led to a "see, thats what im saying"
It's not a case of giving Brown credit, but if he hadn't been fronting a movement to have Northey replaced, i doubt northey would have asked for the contract extension when he did.
By RFC not giving any security, even a 1 year year extension, would have done nothing to alleviate any fears that John had over keeping his job.
Brisbane jumped in and offered him a three year contract so he took the secirity. I for one can't blame him.
Brown? I wouldnt pee on the fat stuff if he was on fire.