: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:48 pm  

G1 wrote:

I read that and immediately thought that the chairman was sending a thinly veiled message to his coach that he is simply not doing a good enough job in coaching his teams attack.

why would he not just tell him in person?

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:51 pm  

Should he really complain about tactics from down under when the last two coaches have been aussies

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:55 pm  

rhinos12497 wrote:

Should he really complain about tactics from down under when the last two coaches have been aussies/kiwis

Edited for accuracy

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:58 pm  

I think his comments are completely accurate.
The play the balls have gone from being far to fast to very slow.

When we played Hull KR at Craven Park this year I thought the play the balls were much to fast, I thought it was a joke!, now they are ridiculously slow.

This cannot be used as an excuse thought for our inconsistency and poor displays.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:58 pm  

It seems a comment on the nature of the sport.
Barely a reference to us specifically, and certainly not written as an "excuse"

Sports often have these phases. We've had rugby league go through periods where it was seemingly dominated by rush defence, or by grubber kicks in goal, or by high bombs to fullbacks, or high kicks to the corners. Some of these have been cut back by tactical or player technique changes, and some by rule changes.
The current big thing is control of the tackle and PTB.
What's become especially prevalent this year is defenders wanting to hold attackers up - not get them to ground - hold them up because refs are slower to call "held" than to allow a PTB.
It will change, as attackers get better at their "getting tackled" technique.

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:01 pm  

"last week leeds weren't able to unlock that defence often enough, and it was the same a couple of week earlier, when we played Bradford"

Right garry, is that bradford who's conceded 88 points in 2 weeks since.???? (Prick)

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:18 pm  

GH certainly knows his target audience.

This dominance of the defence (robbers) over the attack (cops) would be best evidenced by?

Presumably a reduction in points being scored in the average SL match?

Well he's right, just about.

1 ….. 1996 ….. 32 _ 24 ….. 7363 ….. ( 56 )
2 ….. 1997 ….. 26 _ 21 ….. 6165 ….. ( 47 )
3 ….. 1998 ….. 25 _ 19 ….. 6048 ….. ( 44 )
4 ….. 1999 ….. 26 _ 20 ….. 9659 ….. ( 46 )
5 ….. 2000 ….. 27 _ 23 ….. 8315 ….. ( 49 )
6 ….. 2001 ….. 30 _ 23 ….. 8842 ….. ( 53 )
7 ….. 2002 ….. 27 _ 22 ….. 8345 ….. ( 50 )
8 ….. 2003 ….. 26 _ 23 ….. 8099 ….. ( 48 )
9 ….. 2004 ….. 28 _ 22 ….. 8410 ….. ( 50 )
10 ….. 2005 ….. 30 _ 25 ….. 9314 ….. ( 55 )
11 ….. 2006 ….. 27 _ 22 ….. 8251 ….. ( 49 )
12 ….. 2007 ….. 25 _ 21 ….. 7460 ….. ( 46 )
13 ….. 2008 ….. 27 _ 22 ….. 8014 ….. ( 49 )
14 ….. 2009 ….. 23 _ 22 ….. 3403 ….. ( 45 )

Does a four point reduction in the average aggregate from last season to this fully justify the whinge?

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:21 pm  

Hetherington talks garbage, its why I dont bother listening to him.

That article is further proof!!

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:35 pm  

I think we've maybe been caught out by this change in emphasis over the PTB.

Bluey stated in an article pre season that they were going to do a lot of work in trimming the forwards down in order to increase speed and agility for the fast PTB (A bit like Saints admitted they'd done for last season)

Only now we find the PTB seems to be much slower like the NRL used to be only for theirs to have speeded up this season!

Maybe the fact we are no longer getting quick(er) PTB added to the fact we've shed weight off the forwards means that we are lacking the size/punch to be able to try and force quicker slow play the balls if you know what I mean. Maybe because we've seemingley downsized in the forwards the opposition are finding it easier to manhandle our forwards and control the ruck?

: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:47 pm  

G1 wrote:

I read that and immediately thought that the chairman was sending a thinly veiled message to his coach that he is simply not doing a good enough job in coaching his teams attack.

But why would he do it directly, and not go through El Presidente...?