Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:28 am  

casman2 wrote:

How many home games have we won under TM compared to how many away.

In all competitions? Including outside the top flight?

Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:01 am  

Just went to work this out and notice that TM is currently @ 62 wins and 62 losses from his 126 games. Points difference of +197.

(Obviously that includes a year in the National Leagues)

Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:10 am  

That's quite astonishing, especially the points difference, considering the couple of big losses against Saints in the past few years.

And yes Stu I did mean all competitions including NL1

Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:23 am  

Interestingly over the course of his tenure he has fared marginally better at home, regardless of whether you include/exclude NL1. http://thecastlefordtigers.co.uk/coachp ... coach&id=1 He averages a 31-25 win at home; a 24-27 defeat away.

Interestingly over the course of his tenure he has fared marginally better at home, regardless of whether you include/exclude NL1. http://thecastlefordtigers.co.uk/coachp ... coach&id=1 He averages a 31-25 win at home; a 24-27 defeat away.

Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:27 am  

The PD doesn't really surprise, we blasted some teams to hell in National League. Not to mention in the final V Widnes too!

Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:01 pm  

Fully wrote:

...with rugby union they do a lot of kicking and catching so that would be playing into Thomas' hands IMO.

There's a big difference taking a 'mark' in the 22 or a long punt downfield and fielded a cross-fieldbomb in the face of an onrushing attack.

Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:08 pm  

deeman forever Cas wrote:

I agree totally, while thomas is on the field we need to throw everything we have at him attack and defence.

Crusaders are a very good team with some real quality players but we can beat them with the right game plan and right attitude.

Knowing Cas though, they will throw in the high bomb to Thomas, who as a Union player should be used to this week in week out, because thats pretty much all they ever seem to do in the game.

Re: Cas v Crusaders : Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:58 pm  

picasso1 wrote:

Knowing Cas though, they will throw in the high bomb to Thomas, who as a Union player should be used to this week in week out, because thats pretty much all they ever seem to do in the game.

Yes, but they also never had two or three players challenging for the same ball

The Match (v Crusaders) : Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:07 pm  

I might be missing something but as far as I can see there's no thread discussing the game itself! If indeed I've missed a glaring obvious thread, feel free to ridicule at will!

I went to the game much more nervous than I did 5 days ago for the Wigan game, the obvious reason being that this was a game we really should be looking to win but equally I was well aware that Crusaders have proved themselves to be no easybeats this year.

Anyway, the good news - we won and have moved above Crusaders into 10th position on the table, level on points with last years champions, the not so mighty Rhinos!

Apart from that I'm struggling to find a great deal to be positive about. I accept that Crusaders are a solid side but on last nights performance I can't fathom how they ran Saints so close a few weeks ago!

The thing I find most disappointing is the lack of spark we seem to have in attack. When we played Hull KR we showed lots of attacking verve and created numerous scoring opportunities. Had we taken only a small fraction of them we'd have had the game sown up before Mr Ganson's ludicrous decision gifted Hull KR the game.

However, in the last 2 home games we've shown no creativity whatsoever and are a really dull side to watch.

Whilst I came away from the game relieved of the win the overall feeling was "that's 90 mins of my life I'll never get back"! I'm just relieved a TV audience wasn't subjected to seeing how dull we've become...

Re: The Match (v Crusaders) : Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:32 pm  

I thought we were very poor. We lacked idea's at times, as a result we looked flat in attack. One plus is we looked good when defending our line. But other than that there was little to take from the game.

I think Shifty isn't a fraction of the player he was when he signed for us. I have put my thoughts on Clayton on another thread.

The best player on the field by a country mile was Rangi, so naturally we gave the MOM to Westerman.

McGoldrick didn't play too badly either.