: Tue Apr 07, 2009 8:32 am  

tvoc wrote:

Kirke appeared to have fairly limited game time

When he came on, he was on for a long stint. But by the end of it, he wasn't half blowing. He was out on his feet. Not 100% fit, no question.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:02 am  

If top class centres were available (forgetting about Gleeson), would saints be playing Gilmour at centre by choice?

Saints lost a number of their squad last year, in similar ways to Leeds, their only signing was Petula.

Its interesting that with both the top 2 having weaker squads on paper than last year, they are actually considered to be further ahead of their rivals than last year.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:12 am  

leicester_rhino wrote:

If top class centres were available (forgetting about Gleeson), would saints be playing Gilmour at centre by choice?

Saints lost a number of their squad last year, in similar ways to Leeds, their only signing was Petula.

Its interesting that with both the top 2 having weaker squads on paper than last year, they are actually considered to be further ahead of their rivals than last year.

But the Internet message board expert doesn't have to deal with such harsh realities.

All the Saints fans posting on here consider they have a weaker overall squad than us.

I am afraid Sunday had little to do with squad strength, lack of another prop or a right centre. In fact, chalking Sunday up to that is displaying the kind of arrogance Saints fans do when chalking off our GF wins to their bad performances.

Saints 17 played hungrier, harder and better than ours. They were also better coached on the day. Sadly this occurred in a cup game so we're out. There's time to remedy it before the GF and its' capable of being remedied without signings. If we make the right quality signing in the mean time then great. If we don't no need to slit the wrists or lambaste the board.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:39 am  

G1 wrote:

But the Internet message board expert doesn't have to deal with such harsh realities.

All the Saints fans posting on here consider they have a weaker overall squad than us.

I am afraid Sunday had little to do with squad strength, lack of another prop or a right centre. In fact, chalking Sunday up to that is displaying the kind of arrogance Saints fans do when chalking off our GF wins to their bad performances.

Saints 17 played hungrier, harder and better than ours. They were also better coached on the day. Sadly this occurred in a cup game so we're out. There's time to remedy it before the GF and its' capable of being remedied without signings. If we make the right quality signing in the mean time then great. If we don't no need to slit the wrists or lambaste the board.

I do agree, but why were they better coached? We're they out coached 2 weeks ago as well? what about the WCC as well ? Is Mclennan not good enough on a day to day week by week basis in your eyes ?

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:41 am  

rpw wrote:

I do agree, but why were they better coached? We're they out coached 2 weeks ago as well? what about the WCC as well ? Is Mclennan not good enough on a day to day week by week basis in your eyes ?

Who knows? He's had a good start. I seem to remember early last year we were white hot. the game against Hull was a particular high point, but in July we lost our way badly, turning a 6 point lead into a 1 point defecit. Maybe we are trying not to go full tilt early doors, as nothing is handed out now. However you could argue that we have blown it a bit no we're out of the cup.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:46 am  

leicester_rhino wrote:

Who knows? He's had a good start. I seem to remember early last year we were white hot. the game against Hull was a particular high point, but in July we lost our way badly, turning a 6 point lead into a 1 point defecit. Maybe we are trying not to go full tilt early doors, as nothing is handed out now. However you could argue that we have blown it a bit no we're out of the cup.

I suppose time will tell won't it. Yes agree, he could very well be holding them back with it being a long season and being a player down..

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:47 am  

rpw wrote:

I do agree, but why were they better coached? We're they out coached 2 weeks ago as well? what about the WCC as well ? Is Mclennan not good enough on a day to day week by week basis in your eyes ?

In order.

Because they had much better structure, a much better game=plan, much better discipline and generally looked more up for it than we did.

Yes.

No.

I think he's an excellent motivator. I think he's well liked. I think the team has become far too ill disciplined under his tutelage. I mentioned the discipline issues last year and was shot down. I have a nagging feeling that hi rah rah approach may wear off but there must be more to him than that. Overall, I am happy he's our coach but don't think he walks on water like some.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:03 am  

Bluey is a good coach..there cant be any disputing his winning record esp. compared to Potters but.....

His style seems to be very motivational as opposed to a structured (disciplined) one .....which appears to be Potters style.

Bluey can get teams up for the big one off occassions and the evidence has shown that this works ..the WCC apart that is....

The CC has become a side issue (sadly IMO) and a one off crucial (big) game at this time doesnt fit in with Blueys style at this early stage of the season but it was drawn out of the bag and there was no avoiding it.

The up side is we can concentrate again on the main objective without the distraction of extra games.

Get Buderus match fit. Sort out the injuries and some positional issues
and we are well placed to peak at the right time.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:09 am  

G1 wrote:

I have a nagging feeling that hi rah rah approach may wear off but there must be more to him than that. Overall, I am happy he's our coach but don't think he walks on water like some.

Yes In agree that the rah rah approach can wear off after a time and that is a big worry.

Personally I prefer a structured style and the current Saints one is as good as it gets IMHO.


but it relies on consistency both in performance and personel which is more difficult to maintain over a prolonged period.

Bluey seems to prefer building a performance slowly and peaking at the crucial time.

Both are strategies and both have their strengths and weaknesses.

BELIEVE......

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:50 am  

leicester_rhino wrote:

Its interesting that with both the top 2 having weaker squads on paper than last year, they are actually considered to be further ahead of their rivals than last year.

Further ahead of last years rivals - Yes

Further ahead of this years rivals - ?

No matter how good or how poor a coach, his job will be made easier when given a fully equipped (as defined by the regulations) squad to work with. The current three quarter line (in their selected positions), Senior apart, offers no threat going forward. The current pack are playing one man, unsupported, ball dying drives. The quality on show is pretty poor and that includes when they win.

Coaching is a concern but it isn't the only one.