Re: Explanations. : Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:41 pm  

Metallicat. I make two post and you bum both. I have an opinion.
My opinion is that Miller is gash at the minute running too laterally.
If you don't like my opinion, tough sh*t.

[PopTart]

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 6:42 am  

TrinTrin wrote:

What trin77 wrote is 100% correct, but again sadly I say, what do you say or think of the coach can't see it ?? + yes, wakefield do now look un-coached ! In every department !!

I don't understand the uncoached thing.

Are you suggesting Chester tells Brough to pass it straight to the centre at training rather than in to touch? And should he coach them to not push a player to ground when they are trying to play the ball?
I'm pretty sure the players already know this. The fact they are doing it is not down to the coach.

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:11 am  

PopTart wrote:

I don't understand the uncoached thing.

Are you suggesting Chester tells Brough to pass it straight to the centre at training rather than in to touch? And should he coach them to not push a player to ground when they are trying to play the ball?
I'm pretty sure the players already know this. The fact they are doing it is not down to the coach.

I get what you are saying. But the coach sees everything that goes on on the pitch and I do think Chester has to be accountable for the performance. We didn't play to the conditions and to most it was glaringly obvious that what we tried didn't work. He can get a message on the pitch and ask the team to go back to basics. I said on another thread I think if John Kear is in the box with Chester we would have won that game tonight. Expansive rugby is great on a dry track. If the conditions don't suit, play to them

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:29 am  

Hi pop tart, yes I agree no one purposely coaches a team to be bad or tells players to pass badly. He does however coach tactics which may work or not work. The trick is to coach correct good methods & practices so he can get them back to positivity & or have various tactics in his trained locker to change tactics, we are at present a single tactics trained team - easy reads to defend against, last night was there for all to see, a single line side wards passing when shifting the ball, no angled runners, then when going forward one up rugby by a forward, no support for a possible off load, resulting in easy reads for a poor team that Leeds are at present, they were not good but had better speed, we gave them that game.

[PopTart]

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:30 am  

marc271841 wrote:

I get what you are saying. But the coach sees everything that goes on on the pitch and I do think Chester has to be accountable for the performance. We didn't play to the conditions and to most it was glaringly obvious that what we tried didn't work. He can get a message on the pitch and ask the team to go back to basics. I said on another thread I think if John Kear is in the box with Chester we would have won that game tonight. Expansive rugby is great on a dry track. If the conditions don't suit, play to them

But actually, the parts of the game where we were partly successful were out wide.
We struggled down the middle as they contracted their defense and rushed our playmakers.

I get what you are saying and the coach does have to take criticism for the ractics but the game was won and lost on the interception which was a 12 point swing and in my view was more to do with Hampshire than Tanginoa and BJB trying to slide instead of diving like he normally does.

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:41 am  

PopTart wrote:

But actually, the parts of the game where we were partly successful were out wide.
We struggled down the middle as they contracted their defense and rushed our playmakers.

I get what you are saying and the coach does have to take criticism for the ractics but the game was won and lost on the interception which was a 12 point swing and in my view was more to do with Hampshire than Tanginoa and BJB trying to slide instead of diving like he normally does.

You see I see it differently. I thought when we did go route 1 we matched them. I saw enough to suggest that if we reverted to 5 drives and a kick we could have success on the back of it. Far too often we utilised Brough, Miller and Hampshire in plays praying something would come off, and simply put it didn't. We played stupid and didnt try anything different for the full 80. How many times did we waste opportunities by trying to fling the ball around or kicking on the first tackle. We really did beat ourselves last night.

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:50 am  

Our ' reserves' have been found out and are not, after all, good enough to maintain the high level of play to keep us in the top three. What did we expect really, when the team on the park for the last few games bears absolutely no resemblance to the team we all want to see there.
That said, I'm as puzzled as anybody by the fact we camped on the Leeds line for an eternity but couldn't find a way through.

Credit to the Leeds' defence for some of that, but the lack of creaivity is a bit concerning.

Perhaps the Captains armband is affecting Miller, something is because he needs resting for me.
Broughie tried but he was behind a beaten pack.

Our passing was 'netball' style with no urgency and nobody running onto the ball.

As for 'Chester out' rubbish, what other coach in SL would have coped better with the situation we've had this season, which is the worst I can remember.

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 8:26 am  

PopTart wrote:

But actually, the parts of the game where we were partly successful were out wide.
We struggled down the middle as they contracted their defense and rushed our playmakers.

I get what you are saying and the coach does have to take criticism for the ractics but the game was won and lost on the interception which was a 12 point swing and in my view was more to do with Hampshire than Tanginoa and BJB trying to slide instead of diving like he normally does.

it could be something like Ryan actually made the effort and ran 60 yards to get at the side of him, there was cover both sides from Leeds and it’s the ball carrier completely at fault for the pass. Can’t get a good pass then don’t pass or maybe turn the defender towards you when your carrying it to turn him away from the support runner. Pass, timing and execution all down to the ball carrier.

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 9:04 am  

There are things that can be improved regardless of personnel and that is being able to run onto a ball at pace, winning collisions and line speed. That doesn't require any individual brilliance, it requires physicality and mentality. The frustrating thing is seeing players not being able to better their opponents in these departments. I don't expect flash rugby league and offloads galore what I do expect is a bit of intent and intensity and recently we look slow and weak. Leeds apparently had 7 less sets than us last night and made 300 more metres. That is some statistic.

Chris Chester and Michael Carter have done a good job and have built a decent squad. Yes, there has been injuries - but Chris Chester has said this is not an excuse. If this is not an excuse then surely the players should not be getting nilled at home by arguably the second worst team in the comp? It was the same against St Helens and London recently. We are getting rolled down the pitch with ease which implies a general problem in terms of the teams physicality and/or mentality around the collision/ruck aspect of the game. Also, if we are losing the game down the middle, are the players that play down the middle as good as is thought by some? The pack on paper has had a lot of credit for being one of the biggest in Super League last season and at the start of this season yet does not win the wrestle in most games. You can go as far back as the Huddersfield away game that we pinched from nowhere. The pack got mullered in that second half and we couldn't even get out of our own half. The line speed in defence is so poor - compare that with Leeds' defence. That was down to attitude pure and simple. That is a worry.

Re: Explanations. : Sat Jun 08, 2019 9:19 am  

I don’t see how Miller got a long contract. He is a classic example of everything that is wrong with British RL and SL
Average at best and would struggle to make most of the other SL teams
Sadly he is untouchable Chester and Co love him I see nothing Ben Jeffries was probably better and that says it all.
23 seasons of SL and very few quality British half backs produced why?
Yet far too many poor quality Aussie and NZ half backs signed because they aren’t good enough at home.

As for the team in general huge progress in 4 seasons far too many injuries and in fairness half the current starting line up is coming back from injury too early due to the injury situation and its showing in the performance

Also not in the CC out gang expectation levels why too high with the salary cap we have available