Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:40 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

HKR x 2, Salford x 2, Saints x 2, Cas 1, Wire x 2, Catalan 1 . There maybe more, but the answer is clubs won't stick with British halves and give them time to develop.

I'm not sure we have the halves to develop. Williams possibly then I'm struggling. Smith, our current international SH has nothing to his locker but a very average kicking game. He tries to impress by frantically waving his arms about like a dervish at every PTB, something I never saw the Aussies do once. They didn't have to, they knew what they were doing at all stages & positions, even the rookies.

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:03 pm  

The Eagle wrote:

The poblems around youth come from the top I'm afraid.

At the basic level, the RFL has no cash. It hasn't for years. As a result, there is no money passed down to the grassroots clubs, who have no money to run a club on. If there's no money then you are relying on someones dad to do stuff. Based on the lack of knowledge about the game you hear on the terraces (wherever you go), its not surprising that kids end up underskilled.

At Outlaws we run a very decent youth section. We get players who are playing for our first team (and often the Uni teams to coach the juniors, and we pay for them to get coaching badges to improve the quality of coaching. we are now getting lads coming through and making it into our first team because they know and understand the game. Our main problems are that we are a non heartlands club, so recruitment is difficult, and finances. I don't think the RFL gives any support for the junior section. We pay for coaching courses and the like out of our own money because its important to us as a club. Many don't

I think being a non-heartland club may be more beneficial for you! Recruitment may be difficult and as a result you are having to use first teamers and uni teams as parents wont event pretend they know enough to coach and as a result choose not to be involved (or maybe actually learn the game in order to coach). As a result you will get more knowledgable and coaches making objective decisions regarding junior player development. As a parent I had to frequently pull up a 'coach' and explain rules such as why quick taps couldnt be taken and even when a tackle was considered complete.

You do have to wonder what it is about coaches in union which make them much better than their counterparts in league (in general) - these coaches are also parents but are much more profesionsal in their role as a coach. They appear to have a much better knowledge about the rules of the game! Is this because they have to take an on-line test regarding the rules of the game and also attend a rugby child welfare course before even start to coach? All coaches in union must also have a basic level of coaching qualification, the last time I was involved in junior league club, I was told that a qualified coach merely had to be present after I 'raised concerns' - one qualified coach for three age groups (60 children on two full sized pitches).

I dont think that money is the main problem either, its that the junior governing body is constantly turning a blind eye to what goes on. I have heard comments that they need complete amateurs running clubs because they make so much money out of fining clubs. Another financial difference between the codes is in league clubs spend many hundreds of pounds on referees but in union coaches from one team often take on the roll (and provide coaching to both teams throughout play) saving money for coaching courses and developing skills. Parents are happy with this and dont wear rose tinted glasses - they arent allowed to! Any abuse from parents and they are sent from the pitch - if they dont leave the game is called off.

I do however think your last line is the most telling though 'We pay for coaching courses and the like out of our own money because its important to us as a club. Many don't'. For many parents (coaches), it is just a good excuse to get together and have a drink or two (or five).

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 3:25 pm  

russianboris wrote:

You do have to wonder what it is about coaches in union which make them much better than their counterparts in league (in general) - these coaches are also parents but are much more profesionsal in their role as a coach. They appear to have a much better knowledge about the rules of the game! Is this because they have to take an on-line test regarding the rules of the game and also attend a rugby child welfare course before even start to coach? All coaches in union must also have a basic level of coaching qualification, the last time I was involved in junior league club, I was told that a qualified coach merely had to be present after I 'raised concerns' - one qualified coach for three age groups (60 children on two full sized pitches).

It's not all rosy in Union. You can coach kids with no qualifications, clubs do like head coaches at mini age group to be at least level 1 qualified but some of the teams we played against didn't have that. There were three of us at our age group, we were all level 1 and two of us could referee.
Frankly, anyone can pass level 1. Level 2 is a little harder but is only required when you move to junior rugby and you're coaching 15 a side on a full pitch.
The worst thing I dealt with was refereeing. I ran our clubs minis festival for 4 years, we had upwards of 600 kids over two weekends. Every year I would ask every club attending to provide one referee for each age group - to ref minis you need to be level 1 or have the basic reffing qualification. Every year we would end up with clubs turning up with nobody who could ref. Some who did were utterly clueless. I would end up spending the whole day refereeing non stop.
Coaches in Union will be exactly the same spectrum as league, you can be as good as you want to be, I did as many additional courses as I could get to (CPD's) and regularly met with our local RFU rep. Others just want to drink and others thought they knew everything anyway.
The big thing Union had done really brilliantly is to provide a safe, secure and welcoming environment for people to bring their kids to. Facilities are generally good, and clubs tow the line because the RFU tolerates very little. Clubs also generally value their reputations.
I also believe the guys at the mid level in the RFU, county/regional, have the right attitude and vision. I've represented our club at our regional committee meetings and it's progressive, pragmatic and there is a lot of common sense used.
Having said all that I packed in coaching last year because my son went into swimming full time. Now swimming is another story - total f*******g nightmare.

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 4:50 pm  

Coaching is so good in RU that England have just had to appoint an Aussie deemed not good enough to coach his own country.
Scotland have a Kiwi as do Ireland & Wales. I think Italy's coach is South African. The French is the only side coached by one of their own.
It's the same in cricket, why can't we produce our own world class coaches?

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 4:59 pm  

I walk past my local yawnion club with the dogs every weekend & look on in envy at its facilities & the numbers of players participating. But the coaching seems to consist of endless line out & scrummage practice. I think there are a good number of yawnion forwards who have never actually touched a ball in their careers. Which is apparent when forwards get the ball & look completely lost. Compare to NZ players & league players who seem to have grown up with a ball in their hands.

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 6:23 pm  

son of headingley wrote:

Yeah, & Joel Tomkins spilled a bomb from Tony Clubb last October - he must be a world beater!

The three incidents you mentioned:
1) Handley drops bomb with no pressure on him (albeit chasers about 2/3m away). Most, I am sure, would say that a winger/full back should be taking those. But, to be fair, a decent kick.
2) Handley knocks on a grubber kick with no oppostion player anywhere near him - surely you can't be claiming that was as a result of a brilliant kick?
3) Morgan scores try after grubber ricochets off Sutcliffe's leg into Morgan path - did Thurston magically foresee Sutcliffe's leg intervening & play accordingly?

You ever noticed just how many 'lucky' tries the Aussies seem to score? Perhaps at some point we can accept it isnt luck.

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 7:15 pm  

RHINO-MARK wrote:

I thought we were excellent in the first half barring creating more chances from the field position we gained far too often it was an easy read or when we called a move Burrow (mainly) or another in possession ignored the call and went the other way.
It's obvious but those basics they and ALL NRL teams do so well lay the platform for that 2nd half yes we were busted and down on personnel but once JT had that base to work from he put us to the sword albeit with a couple of lucky kicks thrown in.
Their 9 Granville also showed what we are missing around the ptb.
I don't think we disgraced ourselves overall but for 1 or 2 poor errors and hopefully we learn from it going forward but again as a sport over here the RFL/SL Clubs and the game as a whole HAS TO have a structural and financial re-think imo.

Would agree with most of that but I thought Burrow was one of our better players. The problem was a lack of creativity at halfback, centre and fullback where Hardaker once more died with the ball far too often.

Given that the fully fit Cowboys prepared on a sunny Queensland beach while our lads were running around in wellies after the tide came in at Kirkstall we started with a bit of a handicap. Then followed yet more injuries resulting in a much depleted squad so it was no surprise to start as huge underdogs. We gave a good account of ourselves in the first half and shaded it on points IMO despite never being smart enough on attack.

The early errors at the start of the second half from our two wingers gave them the momentum of which they took full advantage. The score line was disappointing and not a true reflection of the overall match IMO

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 7:36 pm  

The lack of creativity is a major problem atm. I don't remember us breaking them down last night at all . Scoring tries against the cowboys was always going to be difficult but we struggled to score in the 2 previous games too. Having Mcguire out hasn't helped but he is going to be missing for a few weeks yet.

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 7:38 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

You ever noticed just how many 'lucky' tries the Aussies seem to score? Perhaps at some point we can accept it isnt luck.

point is that Coote had run just in case it rickashayed back in his direction whilst none of the defenders on the open side bothered to push across, little 1 percenters cost you against top teams, I think the end of the game showed that NQC were just fitter than Leeds

Re: WCC : Mon Feb 22, 2016 7:39 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

You ever noticed just how many 'lucky' tries the Aussies seem to score? Perhaps at some point we can accept it isnt luck.

I think people see tries from kicks as lucky, but when you look at a well executed kick with a committed chase you can see its more than that. On the training paddock Handley doesn't drop that. Put 5 Aussies charging toward him and is a different picture