Jack Burton wrote:I don't necessarily think Smith should go, and I definitely don't think he will be sacked as long as we're in and around the top 6, which despite the last 2 games, we are currently doing. It's hardly surprising, though that the knives are out for RS so intensely within the fan base. Our most successful coach ever had a 'please god, go' thread on here throughout his tenure. A large portion of the fan base were also ecstatic when Tony Smith got the England job and would be leaving, a few months later he won another GF. So if public opinion turns against our most successful coaches, we shouldn't be surprised so many want RS gone.
Once were Loiners wrote:I don't want Smith out either. I think he's a better coach than a lot of people think, and I think he's got a plan for the team which will ultimately bear fruit.
But the speed with which people have turned on him this season isn't because we're all spoiled etc, its because we're coming off the back of an awful season, and started with a lot of hope that things would be much better due to the huge outlay on players and replacement of much of the dead wood. Sadly some of the fears that were expressed in the off season are starting to look worryingly real - lack of size in the pack, questions over Frawley's ability and Momirovski and Fusitua's fitness. We've played reasonable sides so far, but are averaging just over two tries a game, of which a couple were Handley specials which cannot be relied on every week.
On the plus side we look like we have a massive amount of improvement in us, especially if we cut out the errors and the forwards play more like the first half vs Sts last week. Hopefully our fears will turn out to be unfounded. Glass half full and all that...
I keep on saying this but our awful season last year wasn’t just down to RS, as much as some on here can’t seem to get beyond results only. There was a lot going on behind the scenes and this season he will be judged on his own merits more.
I’m hoping to go see us at Cas this week because I think it will be a really instructive game. We need some response.
Joined: Aug 15 2006 Posts: 9189 Location: NOT in "Crying Corner" on the SWMC Coach
While I agree (IMO) its FAR to early for the knives to be out for RS I can see why people are frustrated with the same issues cropping up time after time, game after game.
Weve been very workmanlike few opening rounds. A lack of understanding in the playing group, new combinations, team mates etc and playing on cabbage patches hasnt exactly done us any favours but the basics for me are not being done consistently and correctly. Throwing the ball around like a hot potato is only going to get you so far.
BELIEVE. BELIEF. BEYOND.
IT AIN'T WHERE YOUR FROM, ITS WHERE YOUR AT.
SWMC Coach's very own timekeeping aficionado & expert stair inspector.
LeedsLurch wrote:Before we had kicked a ball this season, most on here were saying lets judge after 12 games, new spine has to bed in, half the side are strangers and unfair to judge too early. 5 weeks in and the knives are out. Sit back and reserve your judgment as you proposed at the season start. Am I happy with the progress so far, of course I'm not. I'm also not going to throw anyone to the wolves this early
Interesting comments.
My problem is that most matches so far this season look like 17 guys who play RL meet outside headingley 3 hours before the game and said “ do you lot fancy a kick about later?” Isn’t it the coaches job to prepare for upcoming matches.?
You also mention Wolves in a different context.
Sam Burgess has had less than 10 games in charge and they already look like a winning side How many does Smith need? 110? 210?
My problem is that most matches so far this season look like 17 guys who play RL meet outside headingley 3 hours before the game and said “ do you lot fancy a kick about later?” Isn’t it the coaches job to prepare for upcoming matches.?
You also mention Wolves in a different context.
Sam Burgess has had less than 10 games in charge and they already look like a winning side How many does Smith need? 110? 210?
Maybe if we hadnt played Saints twice, and had instead played a poor London and Hull, like Warrington have, we wouldn't be saying Smith out just yet
Perhaps those easier games would have given our new spine time to gel a little more and play a bit better in attack, and we'd be saying there's a little progress being made
Neruda wrote:Maybe if we hadnt played Saints twice, and had instead played a poor London and Hull, like Warrington have, we wouldn't be saying Smith out just yet
Perhaps those easier games would have given our new spine time to gel a little more and play a bit better in attack, and we'd be saying there's a little progress being made
So based on your analogy then Castleford need to add an extension to their scoreboard to accommodate what’s to come on Thursday evening
Bobtownrhino wrote:So based on your analogy then Castleford need to add an extension to their scoreboard to accommodate what’s to come on Thursday evening
Not sure I said that, just explaining why we shouldn't really be comparing Warrington and us at this point
Joined: May 28 2002 Posts: 7378 Location: Isca Dumnoniorum
I get the over-reaction after the disappointment of the cup loss. If we're not in a significantly improved position compared to this time last season after 10-12 rounds of SL I will be worried.
I'm prepared to see some of the last performance as a one-off - the poor attacking play was a collective problem, not really about individuals (apart from Frawley's kicking game first half). Time will tell on that. Defensively we were still good. The tries Saints scored were not clearly executed moves where they beat us with power and skill (Clark's soft try aside) but rather had an element of lady luck about them with the bounce of the ball. On the other hand, we created a couple of nice chances from kicks in the second half and didn't get the bounce to capitalise (and no, I don't think this is why we lost).
What I would like to see next:
1. The team finds an answer to being pegged in our own half - whether it is the forwards being more aggressive, a better kicking game (more Croft kicking please), and/or fewer errors coming from throwing the ball around before we've earned the right to play like that. Bottom line is we're less likely to concede tries if we keep the opposition away from the try line for longer.
2. We learn to adapt our current style of play with a lot of lateral movement and high skill passing to match a) the tempo of the game, b) the weather conditions, c) the way the referee is interpreting the rules, and d) the strengths and weaknesses of the opposition. We need to be cleverer in 'yardage' as well as in the opposition 20. You do get the sense that we're trying to score off every play rather than building pressure over multiple sets, and instead we're the ones absorbing pressure over multiple sets, and it's killing us slowly.
Neruda wrote:Not sure I said that, just explaining why we shouldn't really be comparing Warrington and us at this point
Well my comparison was based on 2.5 years Vs 2.5 months. But fair play Burgess was a class act players Smith was a mediocre amateur player at his playing height and therefore has no concept of what it’s like to achieve anything on the field.
Neruda wrote:Not sure I said that, just explaining why we shouldn't really be comparing Warrington and us at this point
Unfortunately your repeated rebuttals for all things Hetherington make me feel like you could be one of his minions always on the back foot defending the indefensible ie him and his languid approach to RL and the fans.
As a businessman I doff my cap as an advocate for Leeds Rhinos / Rugby league / Expansionism I run for the hills.
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
