Joined: Aug 09 2011 Posts: 1906 Location: Deepest North Yorkshire Woodland
Trebor1 wrote:Those 3 (Wigan, Warrington, Saints) look well clear of the rest when they are on their game. That Wigan pack is huge. Very envious of it. We remain a long way off them imo.
Spot on, it’s not rocket science (hate that expression) you build a team around a big powerful and mobile pack. We have under Smith failed to do that.
We used to pretty much only have Oledski who was any good at all, Holroyd was starting to break through but we did add Sangare and Lisone who are much physically bigger than we'd had for a while.
Unfortunately we didn't get that one additional big thing. Holroyd then has been injured yet again/not fully fit and without much pre-season, and Hudson is a project (also re-injured). Our academy prospects seem a couple of years off to me still.
Beyond our big men we are straight into back rowers and we drop off significantly - made worse because our back rowers themselves aren't huge.
KaeruJim wrote:We used to pretty much only have Oledski who was any good at all, Holroyd was starting to break through but we did add Sangare and Lisone who are much physically bigger than we'd had for a while.
Unfortunately we didn't get that one additional big thing. Holroyd then has been injured yet again/not fully fit and without much pre-season, and Hudson is a project (also re-injured). Our academy prospects seem a couple of years off to me still.
Beyond our big men we are straight into back rowers and we drop off significantly - made worse because our back rowers themselves aren't huge.
You're right with the backrowers, as it's a double edged sword. And with the props, it again shows the madness of letting Walters go and replacing him with Goudemand.
Something for me that I think is a further error is trying to turn Sangare into a starting player, who plays decent minutes. I just don't think that's how to get the best out of him. I think he's best as an impact player of the bench for no more than 20 mins a game. He seemed to have a lot more potential doing that when he first started with us.
Its not just size, although that's important. We have a rotation of props who don't bend the line with the ball and are not exactly aggressive in defence. Only Lisone shows any ability to barrel through the defence, and he is a bit of a flat track bully - looks awesome against a tiring defence going backwards but otherwise easily stopped. Compare our yardage to Wigan, Sts etc and its really poor, even when we had pretty much all of our props fit, and we don't even get quick PTBs to make up for it. A lot of our problems stem from our lack of threat right up the middle.
Joined: Aug 09 2011 Posts: 1906 Location: Deepest North Yorkshire Woodland
KaeruJim wrote:We used to pretty much only have Oledski who was any good at all, Holroyd was starting to break through but we did add Sangare and Lisone who are much physically bigger than we'd had for a while.
Unfortunately we didn't get that one additional big thing. Holroyd then has been injured yet again/not fully fit and without much pre-season, and Hudson is a project (also re-injured). Our academy prospects seem a couple of years off to me still.
Beyond our big men we are straight into back rowers and we drop off significantly - made worse because our back rowers themselves aren't huge.
In other words we are in a complete shambles. Two years waiting for academy players? It’s a big step up from academy to first grade football . Majority don’t make the grade.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
