: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:34 am  

boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[Bulliac]

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 11:04 am  

redeverready wrote:

10 wins from the last 26 games is more of a reason. Also he's inability to cure the fundamental problems which have been effecting us now for over 12 months weak defence, fundamental handling errors, lack of fitness. It's more than just this season that is the problem.

The only fundamental problem is the financial one Red and curing that doesn`t fall in the job description of head coach. All the others, or at least the ones that ARE problems, are transitory.

Weak defence, well yes it has been on occasion it`s also been very good on other occasions. If it`s good sometimes then it can be good most of the time and is hardly fundamental. Our start to the season baffled me to be honest. We started defending very well but couldn`t score tries and then we went the other way and started scoring but then couldn`t defend. Clearly they do know how to do both.

Handling errors, this might be fundamental in some respects (like how they were taught as kids) but you would expect pro rugby players to be competent handlers of the ball. It isn`t entirely up to coaches at SL clubs to teach players to suck eggs. It is, in any case, largely a confidence matter and that must be very low at the moment.

Lack of fitness, I don`t recognise that in the team to be fair. Being somewhat dispirited I can see (and yes, that is the coaches responsibility, though the boo boys also carry some blame) also as previously mentioned a total lack of confidence( as above). Our biggest problem with fitness is the current injury situation, imo.

As for a new coach (which the financial position probably precludes anyway) it may bring benefits, who knows; a new broom and all that it may temporarily galvanise the team but ultimately we`d still be left with the same squad and the same money worries. It really is no answer.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 11:20 am  

Bulliac wrote:

The only fundamental problem is the financial one Red and curing that doesn`t fall in the job description of head coach. All the others, or at least the ones that ARE problems, are transitory.

Weak defence, well yes it has been on occasion it`s also been very good on other occasions. If it`s good sometimes then it can be good most of the time and is hardly fundamental. Our start to the season baffled me to be honest. We started defending very well but couldn`t score tries and then we went the other way and started scoring but then couldn`t defend. Clearly they do know how to do both.

Handling errors, this might be fundamental in some respects (like how they were taught as kids) but you would expect pro rugby players to be competent handlers of the ball. It isn`t entirely up to coaches at SL clubs to teach players to suck eggs. It is, in any case, largely a confidence matter and that must be very low at the moment.

Lack of fitness, I don`t recognise that in the team to be fair. Being somewhat dispirited I can see (and yes, that is the coaches responsibility, though the boo boys also carry some blame) also as previously mentioned a total lack of confidence( as above). Our biggest problem with fitness is the current injury situation, imo.

As for a new coach (which the financial position probably precludes anyway) it may bring benefits, who knows; a new broom and all that it may temporarily galvanise the team but ultimately we`d still be left with the same squad and the same money worries. It really is no answer.

So the real issue why we're playing so badly is money? If that is the case then you believe the team is playing to it's full potential? I'm sorry but i don't agree, tactics, motivation e.t.c are the responsibility of the coach and have nothing to do with money. We have looked clueless at times and our attack is dire, we play one out rugby and it stinks, another reason why fans are staying away is it's just not attractive.

You try to go through the individual issues and explain it isn't the coaches fault, again i disagree. The coach is responsible for how the team perform and the results they get, to say there not just doesn't make sense. People seem to falling back on the money issue as a reason for our predicament, I believe the team has more potential than it's showing and I remember the posts on this board saying how we were all looking forward to the new season.

The coach IS responsible for results and where we are, he is there to get the best out of what he's got, from where I'm sat he's clearly not doing that.

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:35 pm  

Bulliac wrote:

The only fundamental problem is the financial one .

Come on how can that be ?? Brad Met supply everything you want - screw the Cougars , Park A ,Bradford League Cricket ,even City...... and all those Council Tax payers who support em.

The Dulls have had it all at the expense of every other sporting organisation in the district... dont even attempt to plead poverty as a reason for your current plight

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:37 pm  

Rach wrote:

Come on how can that be ?? Brad Met supply everything you want - screw the Cougars , Park A ,Bradford League Cricket ,even City...... and all those Council Tax payers who support em.

The Dulls have had it all ... dont even attempt to plead poverty as a reason for your curernt plight

Please list these things out, for those of us who missed something somewhere?

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:47 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Please list these things out, for those of us who missed something somewhere?

Seconded?!?

: Sun Apr 19, 2009 11:35 pm  

My two penneth, is that to boo the coach and yet applaud the players off the field is bizarre, which is what was happening where I was stood.

Yes, McNamara is at fault, and is making poor decisions etc, but to shirk all the responsibilities onto him alone is bang out of order.

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:07 am  

Bulliac wrote:

As for a new coach (which the financial position probably precludes anyway) it may bring benefits, who knows; a new broom and all that it may temporarily galvanise the team but ultimately we`d still be left with the same squad and the same money worries. It really is no answer.

The financial position should not preclude bringing in a new coach, if that is the right decision. It would be expensive to bring in a new coach but that has to be measured against the loss of income we are suffering from our dwindling gates. Paying out £100k (if that is the figure) is a lot of dosh but what is the lost income from a reduction in gates of 2,000 over the course of a season? £200-300k?

A new coach would inherit the same squad but that would change as contracts come to an end. The real question is whether a new coach would bring in better players than the existing coach.

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:06 am  

Cibaman wrote:

The financial position should not preclude bringing in a new coach, if that is the right decision. It would be expensive to bring in a new coach but that has to be measured against the loss of income we are suffering from our dwindling gates. Paying out £100k (if that is the figure) is a lot of dosh but what is the lost income from a reduction in gates of 2,000 over the course of a season? £200-300k?

The exact same point I have been making. It may get tom a point where the club can not simply afford not to sack him.

: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:41 am  

Cibaman wrote:

The financial position should not preclude bringing in a new coach, if that is the right decision. It would be expensive to bring in a new coach but that has to be measured against the loss of income we are suffering from our dwindling gates. Paying out £100k (if that is the figure) is a lot of dosh but what is the lost income from a reduction in gates of 2,000 over the course of a season? £200-300k?

A new coach would inherit the same squad but that would change as contracts come to an end. The real question is whether a new coach would bring in better players than the existing coach.

I am not advocating keeping or getting rid of Mac, but I cannot ever recollect any leading (?) sporting club sticking with a failing coach solely because it might cost them £100k to get rid. TBH I am not sure I have even heard it discussed.