He tried hard enough and his running game might have been great in the lower grades, but being a good defender and having an occasional game where dummy half runs work didn't make up for his lack of passing ability. He constantly compressed where our first receiver was going to be because a long pass for him was about 2 metres. And those passes weren't fast.
He got an extension when Pay signed on and has a handful of good games for the three games after Hasler was sacked. The following season he was back to being average. His glory days were all in the lower grades much like Flanagan. Overall I'm not a big Flanagan fan, but I'd still prefer Flanagan in the team over Lichaa.
We're all entitled to our opinion. No offence but I just disagree with yours. The first thing a hooker needs is a good or better passing game and I never saw that from Lichaa.
thats fully understandable and i can see your perspective, however a lot of players were changed and effected by des and his mind games, hence the reason liccha went hard in the last few games because the chain was off and he could do his thing, and truthfully it wasnt his playing that lead to him not continuing further in the nrl it was personal stuff outside that made clubs find it difficult to want to take him on with the dramas he had going on,
if he was that bad we wouldnt have considered re-signing him before the adam elliot situation took place a few years back.
some of these coaches dont care how good you are, they want you to play and land the ball in a specific patch of grass which limits some peoples playing style, especially an attacking one as things need to be over calculated, and little do people know that des would scorn players deeply by abandoning his game plan even if they won the game or scored points from the on field teams "decisions", it didnt matter to des if it wasnt done his way and over time this type of coaching burns players out and ruins them mentally which effects them overall in future especially confidence wise