Re: A lot of kids out there : Mon Sep 18, 2023 5:02 pm  

KaeruJim wrote:

I think I’d go:

Hooley
Fus, Newman, J Smith, Handley
F McCormack, Sinfield
Mik, Johnson, Holroyd
McDonnell, Martin
C Smith

Walters, Lisone, O’Connor, Donaldson

Depending on who is fit. If we were a car tyre we would be illegal. I would run with everyone in their favoured positions as much as possible.

Swap hooley for edgell and Walters for Gannon as he isn’t here next year

Re: A lot of kids out there : Mon Sep 18, 2023 7:16 pm  

KaeruJim wrote:

Thing is if the club is rotten top to bottom a) then how do you explain the good results this year e.g. the Saints and Wigan games earlier season? Was everyone amazing then because we were winning? b) if there is a problem then the only common denominator is Hetherington I’m afraid.

Lost the dressing room? I don’t think so although these hammerings drive people apart obviously.

I’m not sure anyone on this forum really has an inside angle on the camp to know what we’re talking about.

Also as we’re discussing youth matts, who are you thinking we could see break through over the next year or two? I’ve given up predicting I usually can’t pick them.

I mentioned the Academy back line in another thread, i like them all, there are no cant miss prospects in the Watkins/Ward bracket, but theres plenty of Size, skill and athletic potential in the whole group

Lumb
Tchembembe
Smith
N McCormack
Frater
F McCormack
Sinfield

Im also a big fan of hooker Mason Corbett

Max Simpson is the obvious one, fingers crossed he can fully recover and have an injury free run.

I have been consistent on one particular intake since they first joined the Scholarship, and thats the bunch that have recently moved up to the Academy, Excellent bunch with some absolute quality 6 or 7 players deep, and really good players even deeper into the group. Thats where i think we have our real potential stars.

Re: A lot of kids out there : Mon Sep 18, 2023 7:26 pm  

How far off are each of those kids Matts? 2-3 years at least?

Re: A lot of kids out there : Mon Sep 18, 2023 7:59 pm  

batleyrhino wrote:

How far off are each of those kids Matts? 2-3 years at least?

Yeah most likely pal, the group with the star potential is 2 groups behind Sinfield, Smith, Lumb, N McCormack, Tchembembe etc so a while off yet

Re: A lot of kids out there : Mon Sep 18, 2023 10:23 pm  

mattsrhinos1978 wrote:

No excuses

Smiths had an absolute shocker this season, not the only issue with the club at present, far from it, but most definitely one of them. Dating back to pre-season, he's got just about everything wrong.

The bull poop that a section of the fanbase keep lapping up is astounding:

We're a young team - are we? and even if we are, Most of our younger players have actually regressed from where they were a year ago

We've been in a lot of close games - Is that meant to be a positive? If we were a remotely decent team, we'd of won a lot of them close games by double digits, not losing them. Hull KR at home, they had all the excuses we currently use to lose that game, but they came, showed a bit of desire and intelligence, and got the win, in the same situation, we down tools and play like brain dead idiots with zero pride in themselves.

Playing structure - We havnt got one, its not that its bad, its worse than that, we just havnt got one. Thats why when squad players step in, we fall off a ciff, the throw the ball around and hope for a bit of magic, dosnt work, because they arnt capable of it, everyone then loses composure and gets frustrated and we fall apart. Well coached teams have a structure that squad players can fit into, they're not as good as the starters, but can still be a cog in the system.

The seasons been an absolute shitshow from everyone within the club, Smith included.

It all comes back to if Rohan got the boot in the off season who do we try and get to replace him? Who's actually available with experience to fill the role?

Re: A lot of kids out there : Tue Sep 19, 2023 7:26 am  

Rowley.

Re: A lot of kids out there : Tue Sep 19, 2023 11:36 am  

Once were Loiners wrote:

Zoo Zoo, I hope you're not an accountant! The spine had 25% of its first choice lineup. Only one player, O'Connor out of four would be first choice. In any event the "%" is less important than the experience/ability of those we had. That was Hooley's 7th SL game. Sinfield's 10th and he clearly isn't ready for SL. Martin isn't even a halfback.

Even that doesn't really tell the story. Put any one of them in Sts team for one of Welsby/Dodd/Lomax and they'd probably look above average. Put all three in Sts team and I'm pretty sure Sts would look bang average on attack, regardless of what "structure" Sts are coached to, because as a unit they aren't even Championship standard if we're honest. They did OK against a Hull team that is probably as keen for the season to be over as we are, but Wigan and Cats are gearing up for the play offs. I suspect we'll get beaten quite easily by Cas as well, as even if our forwards put in a shift (which they clearly did not against Cats) we just don't have many points in us if they defend with determination.

The only way we can compete with the spine we have is by being as physical as possible and trying to keep errors low. There won't be much in the way of flowing moves because we don't have the players to do it. Sadly the forwards haven't been willing to get stuck in as a unit, and our threequarters tend to make bad decisions as well.

Of the spine 1,6,7,9,13 we had O'Connor and Smith i.e. 9 and 13 so that is 2 out of 5 I would suggest that is 40%. Perhaps your abacus wasn't working or you need to return to school for upgraded maths lessons.

On the forwards I agree with you - poor players with no heart for the battle or are trying to send a message to the coach?

Re: A lot of kids out there : Tue Sep 19, 2023 11:44 am  

FGB wrote:

Rowley.

Good call - he wouldn't take any crap from the likes of Newman

Re: A lot of kids out there : Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:07 pm  

13 isn't in the spine. The spine is 1,6,7 and 9.

As an aside, years ago I remember listening to a discussion about why British halfbacks are generally useless, and one of the reasons they suggested was the British obsession with ball handling 13s. At the time I thought that was OTT, having been brought up watching Norton, Heron, Crane, Hanley etc, but I do think its part of the problem. Cleary, DCE, Reynolds etc do not need any 'help' setting up plays from a lumbering forward with the odd pass. Some Aussie forwards can pass really well (Wade Graham for example), but generally the 13 is a mobile prop in the NRL, and its been that way for decades.

Re: A lot of kids out there : Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:31 pm  

Once were Loiners wrote:

13 isn't in the spine. The spine is 1,6,7 and 9.

As an aside, years ago I remember listening to a discussion about why British halfbacks are generally useless, and one of the reasons they suggested was the British obsession with ball handling 13s. At the time I thought that was OTT, having been brought up watching Norton, Heron, Crane, Hanley etc, but I do think its part of the problem. Cleary, DCE, Reynolds etc do not need any 'help' setting up plays from a lumbering forward with the odd pass. Some Aussie forwards can pass really well (Wade Graham for example), but generally the 13 is a mobile prop in the NRL, and its been that way for decades.

If you asked all the people on here what is the spine everyone apart from yourself they would say 1,6,7,9 &13. We must agree to differ on that. Most on here would see Cameron Smith as ball playing forward.

The NRL is a different game to here far more evolved - the back row is 3 players most of the 13's in the NRL are closer to a second row forward than a prop i.e. fast running forward that has footwork and passing skills not just another battering ram. How best describes Carrigan at the Broncos who plays Lock as they call the 13 - a prop or a second row forward?