Re: Looks like : Fri Aug 26, 2011 10:13 pm  

I'm not part of any gang Big Dog, you just seem a little bitter that Ben looks like he's leaving, plays with his heart on his sleeve but sometimes you need a little more than that. Hope he goes well wherever he's playing but for me he's a bit slight for a prop and not fast enough for second two

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:07 am  

Not bitter with Ben inparticular, it's more the situation that we have a lad from Wakefield who IMO could be a class player if trained/conditioned right and he is losing (his choice or clubs I am not sure) place to an Aussie who everyone thinks is pretty shab. If we think back to Peacock, coley etc some people can take a while to develop, all I was saying was we should support the lads and bring them through.

All this aside let's just hope we get the right coach and hopefully a change will bring out the best in all the players

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 7:52 am  

feline wrote:

Good post, yes we do pick up top juniors and the new head coach needs to ensure those juniors develop and progress and realise their early potential. Shame if we lose the likes of Gledhill and Trout and end up paying over the odds for ageing alternatives

Unlike John Kear eh! Tony Drury brings them up to readiness for the first team and can do no more with them, and instead of them kicking on from there Mr Kear lets them stagnate simply because he does not have a scooby what to do with them, which is why we have these situations with these young players wanting to leave.

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:40 am  

bren2k wrote:

Mr Kear, take a bow.

Just when I think your getting it you do it again and point fingers at people who are not to blame - why the need.

There may be players at BV with a legitimate issue with Kear but Gledhill isn't one IMHO and this situationl isn't either. Kear is no longer in charge of player recruitment FACT. Gledhill has had plenty of chances under Kear FACT. I don't know if Kear rates Gledhill or not but what has happened here has little to do with him as he is out of the loop FACT.
Gledhill is not so special that Kear was obliged to pick him, he had more chances than most FACT.
Unless AG and JE are messing with us they are picking who stays, joins and goes so this is a situation of their making FACT. I don't care if that bursts the AG/JE love in because it's true as far as I can tell.

No wish to start feuding again but that was a cheap comment and in this case undeserved - do we really need another Richardson style pogrom or shall we allow Kear a potential future ally to leave head held high. Can Trinity fans just be grown up for once and not make another public enemy, it's not as if we are short of them is it.

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 9:48 am  

chissitt wrote:

Unlike John Kear eh! Tony Drury brings them up to readiness for the first team and can do no more with them, and instead of them kicking on from there Mr Kear lets them stagnate simply because he does not have a scooby what to do with them, which is why we have these situations with these young players wanting to leave.

But Kears not in charge any more and hasn't been for a while. Yes he picks the team but that's his job, if the club don't like it then get rid. It's too easy just to blame Kear. Why haen't the club stepped in and convinced Gledhill to stay - answer money. Why isn't Gledhill willing to stay and take his chances under a new coach - answer money. Unlike Trout and Spiers I think Gledhill has had plenty of chances to impress and hasn't, can't really fault Kear with this one as I wouldn't have picked him either on performances.

There are a number of players who have been allowed to stagnate I agree but Gledhill is a poor example to use as a proving point - Anekin is a far better example, now that one is criminal when you think Smith, Hickey and Lee get a game.

Come on Chissitt, you've been around and you know how it works.

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 10:37 am  

vastman wrote:

Just when I think your getting it you do it again and point fingers at people who are not to blame - why the need.

There may be players at BV with a legitimate issue with Kear but Gledhill isn't one IMHO and this situationl isn't either. Kear is no longer in charge of player recruitment FACT. Gledhill has had plenty of chances under Kear FACT. I don't know if Kear rates Gledhill or not but what has happened here has little to do with him as he is out of the loop FACT.
Gledhill is not so special that Kear was obliged to pick him, he had more chances than most FACT.
Unless AG and JE are messing with us they are picking who stays, joins and goes so this is a situation of their making FACT. I don't care if that bursts the AG/JE love in because it's true as far as I can tell.

No wish to start feuding again but that was a cheap comment and in this case undeserved - do we really need another Richardson style pogrom or shall we allow Kear a potential future ally to leave head held high. Can Trinity fans just be grown up for once and not make another public enemy, it's not as if we are short of them is it.

Lots of FACTS there Vasty - has Fully hacked your account?

My personal view is that JK is generally poor at managing the transition of young players from academy to first team; his comfort zone appears to be with older, more experienced players, especially those who have served him well in the past, and he seems to have a strong belief that he can coax decent performances out of people who are over the hill.

I'll give you that Ben has had more chances than most and I'd also agree that after a barnstorming start, hasn't really lived up to that potential, so he probably wasn't the best player with which to illustrate the point; I think my (admittedly glib) point remains valid though - our youth development process has historically hit a bit of a brick wall when it comes time to blood youngsters in the first team. We've got to get better at that and hopefully, under our new coach, we will.

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:02 am  

bren2k wrote:

Lots of FACTS there Vasty - has Fully hacked your account?

My personal view is that JK is generally poor at managing the transition of young players from academy to first team; his comfort zone appears to be with older, more experienced players, especially those who have served him well in the past, and he seems to have a strong belief that he can coax decent performances out of people who are over the hill.

I'll give you that Ben has had more chances than most and I'd also agree that after a barnstorming start, hasn't really lived up to that potential, so he probably wasn't the best player with which to illustrate the point; I think my (admittedly glib) point remains valid though - our youth development process has historically hit a bit of a brick wall when it comes time to blood youngsters in the first team. We've got to get better at that and hopefully, under our new coach, we will.

I agree but in this case it's not really down to Kear.

Slightly off topic but Kear may net be everyones cup of tea but the reality is he won't disappear like most previous coaches have. He is fairly well liked and well respected in the game, especially the media. His opinions matter and he may well end up in a position where he could either help us or hurt us, we simply don't need the latter. Kear for me is a man who we should keep on the right side of if at all possible.
I know for a FACT (Fully mode) that Solomona was very unhappy with his treatment when he left. To his credit I don't think he ever bad mouthed us to other NZ based players but he didn't recommend us either. It would be much better for us if a respected player actively pushed the club in NZ as it would be if Kear did here. Not saying they would, just suggesting we make it harder for them not to - it may go against peoples emotions but it's good business.

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:17 am  

vastman wrote:

I agree but in this case it's not really down to Kear.

Slightly off topic but Kear may net be everyones cup of tea but the reality is he won't disappear like most previous coaches have. He is fairly well liked and well respected in the game, especially the media. His opinions matter and he may well end up in a position where he could either help us or hurt us, we simply don't need the latter. Kear for me is a man who we should keep on the right side of if at all possible.
I know for a FACT (Fully mode) that Solomona was very unhappy with his treatment when he left. To his credit I don't think he ever bad mouthed us to other NZ based players but he didn't recommend us either. It would be much better for us if a respected player actively pushed the club in NZ as it would be if Kear did here. Not saying they would, just suggesting we make it harder for them not to - it may go against peoples emotions but it's good business.

I'm a great believer in not burning ones bridges so I certainly wouldn't advocate an acrimonious parting with JK; in all honesty though, I don't think a few people posting their opinions of his policy towards using young players in the first team is likely to stay with him forever.

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:19 am  

vastman wrote:

But Kears not in charge any more and hasn't been for a while. Yes he picks the team but that's his job, if the club don't like it then get rid. It's too easy just to blame Kear. Why haen't the club stepped in and convinced Gledhill to stay - answer money. Why isn't Gledhill willing to stay and take his chances under a new coach - answer money. Unlike Trout and Spiers I think Gledhill has had plenty of chances to impress and hasn't, can't really fault Kear with this one as I wouldn't have picked him either on performances.

There are a number of players who have been allowed to stagnate I agree but Gledhill is a poor example to use as a proving point - Anekin is a far better example, now that one is criminal when you think Smith, Hickey and Lee get a game.

Come on Chissitt, you've been around and you know how it works.

On this I agree, AG or JE said as much at the ST meeting regarding JK picking players that weren't interested.

Re: Looks like : Sat Aug 27, 2011 12:40 pm  

vastman wrote:

But Kears not in charge any more and hasn't been for a while. Yes he picks the team but that's his job, if the club don't like it then get rid. It's too easy just to blame Kear. Why haen't the club stepped in and convinced Gledhill to stay - answer money. Why isn't Gledhill willing to stay and take his chances under a new coach - answer money. Unlike Trout and Spiers I think Gledhill has had plenty of chances to impress and hasn't, can't really fault Kear with this one as I wouldn't have picked him either on performances.

There are a number of players who have been allowed to stagnate I agree but Gledhill is a poor example to use as a proving point - Anekin is a far better example, now that one is criminal when you think Smith, Hickey and Lee get a game.

Come on Chissitt, you've been around and you know how it works.

Over the years I have read your posts with great interest and you speak a great deal of sense but where this is concerned you have not got a clue what you are talking about and the circumstances around the alleged departure. You talk (in this case) utter bo77ocks.