Steve Deane: Questions over Cleary have no logic

Ivan Cleary has been dogged by stories that his job is in jeopardy. Photo / Richard Robinson

All this talk about Ivan Cleary clinging to his job is baffling.

Since when did league become soccer, where coaches have either just been sacked or are waiting to be sacked?

For a good six months now Cleary has been dogged by stories about his imminent axing. It started pre-season with a newspaper report that he had five games to save his job, and has just rolled on since then. Just last week Cleary again fielded questions about his job security, with a newspaper story suggesting he will be sacked if his side doesn't make the top eight.

Given the usual proximity of smoke to fire, these are fairly alarming reports. Not because Cleary is irreplaceable, but because of the absence of logic attached to them.

If sacking Cleary really was on the agenda, surely the end of last season - which the Warriors began as strong title contenders and ended in 14th - was the time to pull the trigger?

Why give a guy a whole off season to rectify his mistakes and then just five games to put those changes into effect? And why sack a coach if his side comes up a point or two out of the top eight?

Drawing arbitrary lines in the sand is a pretty unsophisticated way of going about your hiring and firing. If that's the way the Warriors really are operating then Cleary isn't the only one who should be feeling a touch nervous right now.

Anyone with an interest in the club's future should feel exactly the same way.

The difference between the Warriors coming eighth or ninth this year could be the bounce of a ball, a dodgy video ref call or a missed conversion. A swing of fortune either way does not make Cleary a better or worse coach.

He should be judged on performance. In terms of results, he has to be judged fairly favourably. In his previous four years in charge the club has made the playoffs twice and missed out a third time because of a points deduction. At a club that has made the post-season just five times in 15 seasons, that record stacks up pretty well. Last year was the first and only real bad season under Cleary.

So far this year a team that Phil Gould picked to come "LAST LAST LAST" has bounced back well.

But performance is measured in more than just wins and losses. A good judge of a coach is whether or not players improve under their coaching. Cleary has had his share of failures, but he has also enjoyed notable successes. Surely Cleary must get a good portion of the credit for Manu Vatuvei's staggering turnaround? And what about the steadily improving Sam Rapira, Ukuma Ta'ai and Lewis Brown?

The Warriors want to be a development club. Are they really considering sacking the man in charge of that development - and a coach they invested plenty of time and effort in developing - if a coin toss doesn't go his way?

There are plenty of good reasons to sack coaches: unacceptable results; poor methods; a loss of confidence from senior players; behavioural issues. And, of course, the most compelling - that there is someone better available to do the job.

So far I've heard nothing that would suggest any of those factors apply to Cleary. He should be resting easy enough right now. If he's not then it's the club that needs to take a good look at itself, not the coach.