Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:43 pm  

Garry Brindley Esq. wrote:

That's the common mistake though, his primary remit isn't to produce a fairly successful reserves side, it's to produce players for the first team

A few points on this:
1. His remit won’t be to finish bottom either.
2. The reserves finished 3rd. Not too shabby for a team and structure with, according to Pearson, a lack of investment.
3. How could the team have finished 3rd if he wasn’t producing at least some players capable of debuting in SL?

Garry Brindley Esq. wrote:

As CS said, there's grounds to have faith simply because he's one of the few coaches to be retained, and if the likes of Crookes and Pearce thrive next season then I'll take it all back.

Make your mind up. 2 posts ago you were saying you were “greatly concerned”.
The fact that successive regimes have highlighted Last’s potential and he’s survived a huge cull suggest his retention, particularly in the context of also now having Hay and Radford on board to support Gentle, is not as “greatly concerning” as you would like us to think. My personal view is that Agar’s refusal to give any players a debut last season was completely unacceptable and that Pearson is now talking about addressing underinvestment. These 2 factors being addressed hopefully will be enough to address, at least in part, your major concerns about Andy Last.

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:29 pm  

Make my mind up? I simply took on board what another poster had said, sorry if you have a problem with that.

It's really irrelevant where our reserves finished last year, if Last's reserve team lads make a break-through next season you'll be right about him, if they don't then I'll be right.

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sat Oct 15, 2011 3:47 pm  

Garry Brindley Esq. wrote:

Make my mind up? I simply took on board what another poster had said, sorry if you have a problem with that.

It's really irrelevant where our reserves finished last year, if Last's reserve team lads make a break-through next season you'll be right about him, if they don't then I'll be right.

Is it? What if they'd finished bottom?

Agar chose to give none of them a chance in 2011. Therefore the only thing we can really judge Last on is his team performing well in that competition, finishing behind only Warrington and Wigan. I don't see the grounds to condemn Last as a major concern as you do, but obviously you're entitled to your opinion. Radford and Hay too will be involved in the youth set-up, as will McRae, so it might be hard to isolate the individual contribution and impact of Last in the way you describe.

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:13 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Is it? What if they'd finished bottom?

Agar chose to give none of them a chance in 2011. Therefore the only thing we can really judge Last on is his team performing well in that competition, finishing behind only Warrington and Wigan. I don't see the grounds to condemn Last as a major concern as you do, but obviously you're entitled to your opinion. Radford and Hay too will be involved in the youth set-up, as will McRae, so it might be hard to isolate the individual contribution and impact of Last in the way you describe.

Maybe we only finished 3rd because every other team were playing some of their U20's in the first team?

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:18 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

Maybe we only finished 3rd because every other team were playing some of their U20's in the first team?

Very likely. I''m just not sharing the major concern over Last that our friend is.

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:59 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

Maybe we only finished 3rd because every other team were playing some of their U20's in the first team?

Good point. Still not Last's fault, though.

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sun Oct 16, 2011 1:05 am  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Is it? What if they'd finished bottom?

Agar chose to give none of them a chance in 2011. Therefore the only thing we can really judge Last on is his team performing well in that competition, finishing behind only Warrington and Wigan. I don't see the grounds to condemn Last as a major concern as you do, but obviously you're entitled to your opinion. Radford and Hay too will be involved in the youth set-up, as will McRae, so it might be hard to isolate the individual contribution and impact of Last in the way you describe.

Sorry if I missed the parade for our 3rd place finish in the reserves league but I couldn't care less, and I don't really believe you do either. The idea that because our reserves finished 3rd there 'must be some players capable of playing in SL' is a complete non sequitur. In the last few years, the only players we've produced for ourselves are Briscoe (who would have come through if you or I were coaching him) and Houghton, and that means Last failed at his job.

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sun Oct 16, 2011 6:11 am  

Garry Brindley Esq. wrote:

Sorry if I missed the parade for our 3rd place finish in the reserves league but I couldn't care less, and I don't really believe you do either. The idea that because our reserves finished 3rd there 'must be some players capable of playing in SL' is a complete non sequitur. In the last few years, the only players we've produced for ourselves are Briscoe (who would have come through if you or I were coaching him) and Houghton, and that means Last failed at his job.

To be fair Featherstone handed Briscoe on a plate to you.

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sun Oct 16, 2011 7:43 am  

joburg wrote:

To be fair Featherstone handed Briscoe on a plate to you.

Did they? When was he signed with rovers? Presume that also includes his brothers?

Re: Gentle's clean sheet : Sun Oct 16, 2011 7:46 am  

Garry Brindley Esq. wrote:

Sorry if I missed the parade for our 3rd place finish in the reserves league but I couldn't care less, and I don't really believe you do either. The idea that because our reserves finished 3rd there 'must be some players capable of playing in SL' is a complete non sequitur. In the last few years, the only players we've produced for ourselves are Briscoe (who would have come through if you or I were coaching him) and Houghton, and that means Last failed at his job.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that there should have been a parade for third place and I've said elsewhere that our record on bringing youth through is a disgrace under Agar. I've started a thread on it. Where we differ is you having "great concerns" about the retention of Andy Last who you say is a failure.

It could be that we have a set of players in the U20s that he's let down and allowed their potential to go unfulfilled. It's possible. It could also be that, as has been pointed out many times on here, the U20s doesn't prepare you for SL in itself, hence the extensive use of dual registrations. We also hear that, as well as the fact that Agar didn't give a single player a debut last year, allegedly he was either rude to them or ignored them. If a head coach is not fully engaged in the reserve team, I would say it makes the job of reserve coach harder. As for the non sequitur bit, I'd say it's the only general measure of the overall standard of our U20s. Even taking into account that other teams are weaker because they are actively promoting their youth to the first team, I think it is some evidence that Last is not the complete failure you believe he is and therefore I won't the same sleepless nights over retaining this major concern that you will. Time will tell, I suppose, but with so much else changing too, isolating the impact of Last will be quite hard.