: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:32 am  

G1 wrote:

I'll ask again, in what way is Watkins "struggling"?

In the same way the rest of the side is G1, poor ball control, poor option taking in both attack and defence, silly individual errors.

I suggest loaning the entire first team squad out to a Championship side to gain some confidence and replacing them with our all-conquering, confidence filled reserve side.

[Ex-Swarcliffe Rhino]

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am  

Andy Gilder wrote:

In the same way the rest of the side is G1, poor ball control, poor option taking in both attack and defence, silly individual errors.

I suggest loaning the entire first team squad out to a Championship side to gain some confidence and replacing them with our all-conquering, confidence filled reserve side.

Now your talking

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:43 am  

Andy Gilder wrote:

In the same way the rest of the side is G1, poor ball control, poor option taking in both attack and defence, silly individual errors.

I suggest loaning the entire first team squad out to a Championship side to gain some confidence and replacing them with our all-conquering, confidence filled reserve side.

I see.

Because I've seen the lad, like the rest of the outside backs, starved of quality ball in space. I've seen the lad in and out of the team given no chance to build any form, momentum and confidence and I've seen the lad force a couple of balls and make a couple of errors, just like the rest of the team.

As you say, if his "struggles" merit dropping him and loaning him out to a Championship side then which championship side will be getting Donald, Senior, McGuire, Burrow, Diskin, Kylie, JJB, Ablett, Sinfield, Kirke, Peacock, Ali etc etc?

I am all for scape-goating and there e a a couple of prime candidates to carry the can for recent results but a young talented centre like Watkins should only be in the sights of fekkwitt scapegoaters.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:35 pm  

Gareth i totally agree.

I think the main thing here is consistency with selection.

From what i have seen its seems to be one week in for Gibson then one week for Watkins. This seems to be the way regardless of performance.

I seem to remember a similar situation with Smith and Hall last season during which period there were endless debates about which one of those two were the weak link when neither of them could seem to get an consistency due to playing well one week then been mysteriously replaced the week after.

Surely it would be beneficial for all to choose one and give them an extended run.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:37 pm  

AL Rhino wrote:

Gareth i totally agree.

I think the main thing here is consistency with selection.

From what i have seen its seems to be one week in for Gibson then one week for Watkins. This seems to be the way regardless of performance.

I seem to remember a similar situation with Smith and Hall last season during which period there were endless debates about which one of those two were the weak link when neither of them could seem to get an consistency due to playing well one week then been mysteriously replaced the week after.

Surely it would be beneficial for all to choose one and give them an extended run.

We should give gibson an extended run.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:52 pm  

I would agree with that. He has more experience, and is a more stable player at this stage. Watkins should get a chance on the wing/centre when there is a case to rest someone or an injury crops up.

When smith comes back, depending on when it is we'll see if anyone has staked a claim by that stage

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:57 pm  

leicester_rhino wrote:

I would agree with that. He has more experience, and is a more stable player at this stage. Watkins should get a chance on the wing/centre when there is a case to rest someone or an injury crops up.

When smith comes back, depending on when it is we'll see if anyone has staked a claim by that stage

I don't think gibsons done a bad job so far, he's just been solid. But what can he do? it's not like he's getting put into any space or being given one on one opportunities with his opposite number.

You can't just float passes outwide and expect people to sh*t miracles you need to create some indecision in the opposition defence and provide your players with multiple options.

We aren't doing that, but then we aren't getting much opportunity either because most of the time we are bringing the ball out of our own half.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:01 pm  

Snake Eater wrote:

You can't just float passes outwide and expect people to sh*t miracles you need to create some indecision in the opposition defence and provide your players with multiple options.

Wasn't that the 2006 gameplan?

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:04 pm  

Andy Gilder wrote:

Wasn't that the 2006 gameplan?

Yes it was. The situation is similar IMO. We have a weakened pack or at least a pack who arent playing well enough for whatever reason and our backs are attempting to produce try scoring plays on every set to try and miracle our way out of trouble.
The pack need to run it in harder, the halves and Sinfield need to be more organised.

: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:09 pm  

BigRob wrote:

Yes it was. The situation is similar IMO. We have a weakened pack or at least a pack who arent playing well enough for whatever reason and our backs are attempting to produce try scoring plays on every set to try and miracle our way out of trouble.
The pack need to run it in harder, the halves and Sinfield need to be more organised.

I don't see the situation as similiar. In 2006 we scored points for fun early on. We pushed saints all the way in 2 league games as well, we threatened for top spot but then a shock defeat at cas seemed to be the catalyst for a run of form which destroyed our season, didn't we lost 5 or 6 games on the trot, including a cc semi. We lost 2nd spot to hull, the run of form was too damaging and we just couldn't pick it up in the playoffs.