Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Wed Mar 07, 2012 8:51 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

It depends who you are and what you're used to. For us winning two Challenge Cups and a minor premiership in three years is a glory period because we've won nothing for ages - before that under Alex Murphy we won a minor premiership and a Challenge Cup and lost a CC final, and that counted as a period of relative 'glory' for us for the next three decades.

I expect for Leeds fans, the Graham Murray era, which delivered a Grand Final and a Challenge Cup win, seemed like a period of relative success at the time, after a long spell without major honours, but now the Murray era probably doesn't seem anything special. But Hull fans probably still view the Kear/Sharp era of 2005-06, which delivered the same as Murray for Leeds, as a period of success.

You are right,but you really do know what I was getting at dont you?

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Wed Mar 07, 2012 9:11 pm  

lionarmour87 wrote:

You are right,but you really do know what I was getting at dont you?

yes but I was defending my right to regard this as a 'glory era' for Warrington

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Wed Mar 07, 2012 9:15 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

I expect for Leeds fans, the Graham Murray era, which delivered a Grand Final and a Challenge Cup win, seemed like a period of relative success at the time, after a long spell without major honours, but now the Murray era probably doesn't seem anything special. But Hull fans probably still view the Kear/Sharp era of 2005-06, which delivered the same as Murray for Leeds, as a period of success.

Graham Murray's Leeds side being competitive and only losing to a last minute Andrew Schick try V Castleford at Headingley felt like a successful period following on as it did from the Dean Bell years.

(Edit: Although that sounds like a dig at Dean Bell it wasn't intended to be. Just a victim of circumstance.)

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Wed Mar 07, 2012 10:47 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

yes but I was defending my right to regard this as a 'glory era' for Warrington

You are entitled to it and it is .my favourite glory era with Leeds only lasted one season,1961

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Wed Mar 07, 2012 10:51 pm  

tvoc wrote:

Graham Murray's Leeds side being competitive and only losing to a last minute Andrew Schick try V Castleford at Headingley felt like a successful period following on as it did from the Dean Bell years.

(Edit: Although that sounds like a dig at Dean Bell it wasn't intended to be. Just a victim of circumstance.)

That Graham Murray period gave us an indication we were going places,apart from the Dean Lance stutter

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Fri Mar 09, 2012 12:26 am  

lionarmour87 wrote:

That Graham Murray period gave us an indication we were going places,apart from the Dean Lance stutter

The Dean Lance era was an odd one. Take out the run of losses at the start of his first season and Leeds win-loss record under Lance was not bad at all especially when you counter that bad start with the fact Leeds knocked out Saints and Hull on the way to a Challenge Cup final.

As far as I can see it the big difference between Leeds early struggles under Lance and their early struggles under McDermott last year is McDermott seemed to keep the dressing room with him where Lance seemed to never have the dressing room with him, even when Leeds went on a long winning run it seemed like he was a coach distant from his players.

If Leeds could play good rugby like that with a coach that had lost the dressing room it suggests Graham Murray left a very strong squad. But Daryl Powell decided that squad needed significant overhaul and with hindsight he was right.

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Fri Mar 09, 2012 12:42 am  

If you ignore all the games we lost under Peter Fox he was our greatest ever coach. Nice logic Sally.

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Fri Mar 09, 2012 9:21 am  

Playing Sinfield at 6 should prolong his top level playing career and so allow the time for his sucessor to become established.

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Fri Mar 09, 2012 9:28 am  

sally cinnamon wrote:

Are you kidding yourself putting Hanley in that list?

Wigan got rid of Hanley in 1991, he was still the best player in England in his final season in 1995. Losing Hanley meant Wigan could afford Offiah and of course Offiah did well but to imply Hanley was moved on before he declined is nonsense, Hanley never declined significantly, he retired at the top.

Also I like the fact you count the era of Wigan's greatness as going up to 2006. Between 1996 and 2006 Wigan one one Super League title and one Challenge Cup. Does this count as a decade of greatness in Wigan's great history?

Sorry , typo.
I meant 1985 - 1996.
On the Hanley point, yes he was a still a great player, but the fact is that very few players were retained over the age of 30 in that period at Wigan.

Re: If success is cyclical, where are Leeds currently? : Fri Mar 09, 2012 10:28 am  

As a fan of the club that took most of Wigan's cast offs I can confirm the only one they may have got wrong was Hanley who remained class for Leeds, even though Wigan got his best years.

The rest of the Wigan legends that ended up at Leeds ranged from average to a disaster