: Mon Aug 03, 2009 5:50 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

In which case, the question won't have been answered.

A bit like the forum then. Going back to the forum I do wish that I had been probing but like most people I got suckered with the building for the future spin that was been pedaled.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 7:50 pm  

redeverready wrote:

A bit like the forum then. Going back to the forum I do wish that I had been probing but like most people I got suckered with the building for the future spin that was been pedaled.

I don't think we were suckered, I think that part's true.

But we have had (the first example of it I can remember anywhere) this year players actually going public and more than one saying specifically or else strongly implying that some of their team mates were not putting it all in on the field.

I know in many games in many sports it can look that way but you like to think that appearances are being deceptive and in fact they're doing their best. But on so many occasions - and again on Sunday - we saw what looked suspiciously like a lack of appplication, effort, dog, call it what you want. That, taken with the admissions made publicly, convinces me that in the Bulls case, what you see is in fact what you're getting. And that is: not all the players putting it all in all the time.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:05 pm  

redeverready wrote:

A bit like the forum then. Going back to the forum I do wish that I had been probing but like most people I got suckered with the building for the future spin that was been pedaled.

I really don't think that building for the future line will work again. The board have played their joker with that one and I doubt that IF they have another forum that there'll be alot more angry fans next time and no rousing speach will save them from the hard questions

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:50 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

I don't think we were suckered, I think that part's true.

But we have had (the first example of it I can remember anywhere) this year players actually going public and more than one saying specifically or else strongly implying that some of their team mates were not putting it all in on the field.

I know in many games in many sports it can look that way but you like to think that appearances are being deceptive and in fact they're doing their best. But on so many occasions - and again on Sunday - we saw what looked suspiciously like a lack of appplication, effort, dog, call it what you want. That, taken with the admissions made publicly, convinces me that in the Bulls case, what you see is in fact what you're getting. And that is: not all the players putting it all in all the time.

Sorry but you weren't ther.

: Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:10 pm  

redeverready wrote:

Sorry but you weren't ther.

Not at the last one, no. But I reckon the stuff about the time and effort rebuilding and improving the youth setup is on the money. I'm not saying it mitigates the woeful stuff some first team players have turned out much of the time, it hasn't been the youth players serving this up.

[Bullseye]

: Tue Aug 04, 2009 9:27 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Not at the last one, no. But I reckon the stuff about the time and effort rebuilding and improving the youth setup is on the money. I'm not saying it mitigates the woeful stuff some first team players have turned out much of the time, it hasn't been the youth players serving this up.

I think the problem is that the balance is all wrong. It's ok putting plenty into the long term but that shouldn't mean sacrificing the current first team fortunes to the extent where we're 12th in the table and showing no sign of any improvement.

When we do bring in the young lads do we really think they're going into the best first team environment? A team that seeemingly has problems with some players not pulling their weight and a coach who doesn't know how to address it? What example are the kids going to be set? We risk them picking up bad habits. It's ok having Steve Menzies in the side for his professional example but what about the other blokes?

Thing is we need more quality in the first team and that means a more balanced investment by the club. Recruitment should be tightened up to ensure we sign more quality players who will improve the side. The likes of Hall and L'Strange may come from a good side but it's backs and halfbacks we need and quality ones. If we have to run a smaller squad with a sprinkling of quality made up mainly of academy players I think that would play better rugby and be a better platform for the kids. At the moment we have too many average players who are seemingly content to be average.

: Tue Aug 04, 2009 10:53 am  

Bullseye wrote:

At the moment we have too many average players who are seemingly content to be average.

More than content. One of the most dispiriting comments I read this year was when Jeffries stated how pleased he had been with his first season at the club and how he had proved people wrong.

: Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:05 pm  

redeverready wrote:

A bit like the forum then. Going back to the forum I do wish that I had been probing but like most people I got suckered with the building for the future spin that was been pedaled.

Why don't we arrange to see stuart as a group before the last home game of the season?
There's probably, what 10? of us that could go up and have a serious discussion with him.

He's said to me befre, he'd be more than happy to do this.

We can get all the questions we want to ask ready on the sticky above and go from there!?

[Bullseye]

: Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:14 pm  

Wigan Bull wrote:

Why don't we arrange to see stuart as a group before the last home game of the season?
There's probably, what 10? of us that could go up and have a serious discussion with him.

He's said to me befre, he'd be more than happy to do this.

We can get all the questions we want to ask ready on the sticky above and go from there!?

I'm certainly up for it Wigsy!

: Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:50 pm  

Twelve angry men...