Joined: Feb 12 2005 Posts: 13126 Location: East Staffordshire
The short turnaround excuse was a poor one as prior to Salford we'd had 2 weeks off and, it seems, plenty of time off from training if I read Radford correctly last week. For me the most disappointing result so far was easily Salford, who we would have beaten if we had shown 80% of the intensity shown in the first two games regardless of what Chase was or wasn't doing. Last night's debacle in the second half was made worse by the fact we'd dominated them in the first half. However with a bench of Abdull, Rankin, Tugut and Feka (possibly the weakest bench we've ever fielded in SL?) we were always going to struggle over 80 mins as effectively we only played with 3 props, one of which might be classed as a 'luxury' player. Regardless of that some individuals should be personally embarrassed with their second half display particularly some of the one on one defensive efforts that took place.
"To play your best football you need players with enthusiasm and drive and energy." - Peter Sterling
Adam Pearson said not wrote:I know there are two franchises and two clubs (in Hull) and that will remain forever more
Hessle Roader wrote:How am I burying my head in the sand.
Refusing to address my statement and making a comment about me getting my money out. There does seem a general unwillingness to throw blame at AP's door. For me, he's vaivety in some ways, and arrogance in other ways, has lead us to where we are.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Doom&Gloom Merchant wrote:You know I'm right. Don't bury your head in the sand.
I know you're full of it with comments like that. Hull had no tangible assets or a place to call they're own when Pearson came in. All he's try to do is establish a permanent base for us one to call our own. Recruitment wise he's relied on others who have led him down the garden path. He is passionate about hull and wanting us to succeed after speaking with him. For me now though he's biggest fault is stubbornly believing in Radford. Radford would not get a coaching gig SL or championship currently and any other owner would have rung the changes I believe. Pearson however has backed himself into a corner and this saving face by backing Radford will ultimately backfire.
Or as someone has said you buy the club and do a better job.
carl_spackler wrote:Just ANY coach is possibly why we're in this mess. If we're going to get rid it should be for an improvement, and quickly, otherwise we'll just be in further disarray scratting about without a coach with recruitment/retention decisions to be made by our chairman who seemingly still has no clue about rugby-related matters. Or we'll just stick the next assistant coach in line in charge.
I didn't say they won't be at all telling, I said they won't be as telling as the 2 games after. There's a difference. Our battle this year is clearly going to be near the bottom end of the table again, so will be defined by how we do against the others there. Losing to 2 of the likely top 4 will change little about that, even if we do put in spirited displays. We've seen before that we can respond to our regular poor performances with the odd one- to two-off games where we really fight for it against the top-end sides, we need to see if we can start asserting ourselves against those around us. Even if we were to get a shock win in one of the next 2, I still wouldn't be convinced we've turned it around until we start backing it up in the mid-table battles.
IMO the next two games and how we perform make more of an impact than the two following games. Firstly because it is exactly how we react from the performances of last night and the week before in these two games that will have a huge bearing as to how we go on the two games and beyond as we'll have almost played 1/3 of the season. As I said the difference between how we perform over the next two games could well decide how our season pans out, lose badly in both and the chances of winning the folowing two games that you reckon have more bearing are even less. Sneak a win, a draw, just something for the players to draw upon and the following two games whilst not easy to get a result from a mental POV are a little easier. Losing confidence and the drain of losing games week in week out (which would be apt if we've lost 5 weeks running) and the added pressure each week from losing has a massive bearing on what happens next. That's why the next two games are more important for me.
Bombed Out wrote:I know you're full of it with comments like that. Hull had no tangible assets or a place to call they're own when Pearson came in. All he's try to do is establish a permanent base for us one to call our own. Recruitment wise he's relied on others who have led him down the garden path. He is passionate about hull and wanting us to succeed after speaking with him. For me now though he's biggest fault is stubbornly believing in Radford. Radford would not get a coaching gig SL or championship currently and any other owner would have rung the changes I believe. Pearson however has backed himself into a corner and this saving face by backing Radford will ultimately backfire.
Or as someone has said you buy the club and do a better job.
Yeh, I was wondering what to do with that spare £5m I have in the wardrobe, cheers Bombed Out.
To address some of your points: - We have a 'training complex' knocked up with some MDF and plaster board & the situation with the KC has never been this bad, fuelled partly by his relationship with the Allams. - His reliance on others is his own fault for being naive and ignorant, the buck stops with him. - Passionate & wanting us to win, completely agree, that's not in question. - Stubbornly believing in Radford. Time will tell. getting rid of a coach after 18 months isn't good, I'd point to the appointment originally as being his mistake.
Bottom line is we're a laughing stock, most of which is due to his poor decisions.
Cup Winners: 1914, 1982, 2005, 2016, 2017. Cup Runners-Up: 1908, 1909, 1910, 1922, 1923, 1959, 1960, 1980, 1983, 1985, 2008, 2013. League Champions: 1920, 1921, 1936, 1956, 1958, 1983. League Runners-Up: 1957, 1982, 1984, 2006.
Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
knockersbumpMKII wrote:IMO the next two games and how we perform make more of an impact than the two following games. Firstly because it is exactly how we react from the performances of last night and the week before in these two games that will have a huge bearing as to how we go on the two games and beyond as we'll have almost played 1/3 of the season. As I said the difference between how we perform over the next two games could well decide how our season pans out, lose badly in both and the chances of winning the folowing two games that you reckon have more bearing are even less. Sneak a win, a draw, just something for the players to draw upon and the following two games whilst not easy to get a result from a mental POV are a little easier. Losing confidence and the drain of losing games week in week out (which would be apt if we've lost 5 weeks running) and the added pressure each week from losing has a massive bearing on what happens next. That's why the next two games are more important for me.
This is where I think you're wrong. That's how it works for normal sides, but over the last few years we have consistently shown that that is exactly what we do not do. We are consistently inconsistent, and putting in performances in the next 2 games make it no more or less likely that we'll carry that on. In fact, recent history has multiple examples of the opposite, where we do well for a couple of games against good sides then go back to being plain awful against those around us in the table. Last night's second half was quite surprising for that, the first half was much more our style against a top 4 side. For about 7 or 8 years now we've lumbered from performances to build upon to coaches looking for a reaction to an unacceptable debacle almost from week to week. In terms of results and importance, the next 2 games are the same as all the others, but as indicators as to whether we've finally put our split-personality to bed they are pretty irrelevant. That's what I mean by how telling they are about our long-term progress.
It was six years ago yesterday since Tony Smith was appointed at Warrington. Prior to that we were a club that liked to believe we could win things and probably had a set of players who were capable of winning things. In those six years we've won three challenge cups, a league leaders shield and been to two Grand Finals. Without Smith I doubt we'd have achieved any of the above. Appointing the correct coach is the key. Radford is I suspect our Paul Cullen.
I know that Brian Smith was available to Salford before Noble was appointed but Koucash decided he was too expensive. On a long list to choose from that still remains Koucash's biggest recruitment mistake at Salford.
Perhaps Pearson should be on the phone to Brian Smith.
Joined: Jan 11 2005 Posts: 3916 Location: West Hull
fcandy wrote:The excuses Lee Radford gave after the defeat last night were as disappointing as the performance. For example, the short turn around excuse. The players are full time athletes who are only four games into a season and have recently had a week's rest. We also had many players who haven't played in all 3 of the previous games. On top of that four days is enough time to adequately repair the body to go again. A more reasonable explanation is that our conditioning is not as it should be or our recovery processes are sub standard. Perhaps even the training schedule is too harsh and is taking too much out of the players when we have short turn a rounds? The way Radford spoke was as if he felt that we are incapable of winning games when we have a short turn around. That negative attitude will subconsciously transfer to the players and staff and for me was disheartening to hear.
We also look as mentally fragile as any Hull FC side in the recent past. What are the psychologists actually working on with these players? They couldn't be more week in this domain if they tried! You could tell just by looking at the body language after the first try Leeds scored that they had thrown the towel in at that exact moment.
The other issue we have is recruitment. We have so many unwanted players in the squad. There is a reason why the other clubs didn't want them! We also have some other players who are just bang average in their positions at this level.
I hope that one day the inconsistency is ironed out to a reasonable level but with Lee in charge I just can't see it. What happened to the attacking style of Rugby they promised for 2015?
I dont think Hull FC employ one..
In our dressing room, prior to a game, we dont see any psychological evidence.
For example,Wigan....
They have photos of their players pinned on each hook in the dressing room,with instructions, also large banners with motivational phrases..
Hull KR do exactly the same. when we play them in the Derby..
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
