: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:32 am  

loinertillidie wrote:

What I don't quite understand is people's inconsistency in their approach to the competitive nature of SL.

IMO in 2005 the competition just wasn't as strong as it is now.

The salary cap, some good business dealings, some new coaches, some young blood, some forward thinking in terms of franchises and such like and all of a sudden, we have the Dragons in third spot pushing Leeds and Saints. You have Castleford who are capable of beating anyone on their day, Wakefield the same. Hull KR who have been a banana skin for a lot of teams. A resurgent Quins side and Huddersfield , Wigan and Warrington fluctuating from the sublime to the ridiculous, so you never know which team you're facing. Add an "odd"Bradford side into the mix with Hull and you have a league where no one team can take ANY result for granted.

Isn't this what we wanted? An exciting, unpredictable league with a higher standard of overall play.

Given that that's what we wanted, it seems odd that we're then surprised that we are not seeing one side dominate.

Is it possible that it's not Leeds underperforming, or even other teams punching above their weight to beat leeds. But just that other teams are a lot better than they were 3 years ago?

An excellent post. i agree wholeheartedly.

Just one question. What does it have to do wit hthe thread?

Re: Understanding of thread : Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:34 am  

G1 wrote:

Your first statement contradicts your second. I agree with the second. The fact that Smith delivered two championships in four seasons at Leeds means that he delivered far, far more than he failed.

Wouldn't two championships in four seasons suggest that he delivered as often as he failed

G1 wrote:

It was how far he had them playing above their abilities that prompted Hetherington to go for him.

Weren't Huddersfield the only fully-pro side in the NL the year he coached them in that comp?

Re: Understanding of thread : Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:37 am  

McClennan wrote:

Wouldn't two championships in four seasons suggest that he delivered as often as he failed

If he were coach of Wigan, Saints or even Bradford then maybe. Maybe he'd be considered a failure full stop.

As coach of the "mighty" Leeds RLFC those four years were a golden period of success by anyone's standards, despite the mathematics.

Besdies, there was a WCC in there tipping the balance in his favour

: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:39 am  

bluey lost against cas, a result most expected because of the WCC the week before. most sensible fans also expected a dip mid season,we couldn't go on in the form we have had. if it carries on over 7 or 8 games i've no doubt he will get stick. to hammer him after 3 poor displays in 4 games is stupid.
smith never got stick in 04 or 05, apart from the stupid selection decisions in the CC cup final. picking senior who was clearly unfit and not having a prop on the bench against a massive hull pack was stupid and negligent even.
2006 was awful, we were shocking all the way through and smith rightly got stick as any coach would. 3/4 of 07 was pretty dismal too, only the end of the season was top class.

therefore IMO smith deserved the stick he got at the time although i do recognise his achievments. i just wonder what else could we have won had he had a more sensible approach to selection and tactics at times.

: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:40 am  

G1 wrote:

An excellent post. i agree wholeheartedly.

Just one question. What does it have to do wit hthe thread?

Both thoughts had occured to me.

: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:45 am  

G1 wrote:

An excellent post. i agree wholeheartedly.

Just one question. What does it have to do wit hthe thread?

The thread starter asked: Why are people cutting Bluey some slack whereas they haven't done so in the past?

Perhaps some are recognising that the standard of SL now is such that for a team to dominate and or sustain a run of form would require superhuman effort that is almost impossible.

The remainder IMO either have an inconsistent view, are blinkered, or are unable to see the reasons for the increased parity or standards of play.

: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:49 am  

I see.

Has the standard really improved that much since last year?

Have our fans really become so more sophisticated in that one year and taking the (correct) view that your post advocates?

I think not.

I think an earlier poster hit the nail on the head. Bluey is liked because he seems personable. Just like Graham Murray. Smith porrtayed a cold, calculating image and therefore fans didn't really warm to him. This is evidenced by the fact that negative comment remains about him despite him being unarguably our greatest ever coach.

This, I think, speaks volumes about how dumb and un-sophistaced our supporter base is (myself excluded, of course).

: Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:08 pm  

G1 wrote:

I see.

Has the standard really improved that much since last year?

Have our fans really become so more sophisticated in that one year and taking the (correct) view that your post advocates?

I think not.

I think an earlier poster hit the nail on the head. Bluey is liked because he seems personable. Just like Graham Murray. Smith porrtayed a cold, calculating image and therefore fans didn't really warm to him. This is evidenced by the fact that negative comment remains about him despite him being unarguably our greatest ever coach.

This, I think, speaks volumes about how dumb and un-sophistaced our supporter base is (myself excluded, of course).

You don't know how close I was to adding "Or alternatively are knownowt feckwits of the highest order" onto the end of my last post. I almost wish i had now, but I was trying to be dignified.

I think you're probably right in parts.

For the record I always liked Smith, I don't know where I got it from but I heard tell that when he had his psychometric testing for the Huddersfield job back when, he astounded a lot of people.

: Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:14 pm  

loinertillidie wrote:

You don't know how close I was to adding "Or alternatively are knownowt feckwits of the highest order" onto the end of my last post. I almost wish i had now, but I was trying to be dignified.

I think you're probably right in parts.

For the record I always liked Smith, I don't know where I got it from but I heard tell that when he had his psychometric testing for the Huddersfield job back when, he astounded a lot of people.

Being able to complete set of great psychometric tests doesn't make you a great manager - Smith had high and lows in equal measure IMO - was he a great manager he won two GF's but he presided over 2006 one of the Rhinos worst seasons in SL?

: Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:19 pm  

Eccleshill Rhino wrote:

he presided over 2006 one of the Rhinos worst seasons in SL?

I'd say there were quite a few SL seasons worse than 2006 for the Rhinos. 96 was far, far worse (OK, we weren't the Rhinos then) and 2001 wasn't exactly a barrell of laughs either.