Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 6:30 am  

Twentyman wrote:

He's probably on some Australian cricket forum telling them they can still win the ashes.

He's been writing his post since 7pm Saturday night trying to list as many injuries as possible and how much harder it is to play against 12 men than 13.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 8:34 am  

Harry Pinner wrote:

I read statements like this on here regularly but what does this actually mean? Whenever I see these statements my immediate reaction is 'Says who?'

I think one of our biggest problems is that Cunningham's hero status makes him almost unsackable.

You think results this year make him sackable???

Semi final and 3 points off top, with 6 games to go.

Hardly what you would call sackable status.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 8:53 am  

Harry Pinner wrote:

I read statements like this on here regularly but what does this actually mean? Whenever I see these statements my immediate reaction is 'Says who?'

I think one of our biggest problems is that Cunningham's hero status makes him almost unsackable.

Its usually the sky pundits isn't it, don't think these days saints fans take much notice of it due to our regular annual injury crisis negates it.

With Cunningham there is always going to be a transitional period between retired legendary hero to an experienced proven coach. He started off well early season but this was very much based on a team with few injuries hitting a bit of form and still influenced by the Brown effect of last season.
Second part of this season both coach and players are struggling for performance consistency, KC has not got big game coaching experience yet, so I don't know why people moan so much about it, if he gets us in the top 4 then he's done a reasonable job in his first season as coach.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 9:40 am  

I had nightmares about the Catalans performance last night. Just the wrong time of the season to have your pack exhausted and your form capitulating.

It's a good job we weren't good enough to reach the CC Final. I reckon we'd have lost that to KR had we got there.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:20 am  

To coach at Saints there's usually 2 targets you must meet with the fans but obviously only 1 target with McManus.

First target is to win trophies or be within a game or two of doing so. On paper that's great and I imagine when fans from other clubs look at these boards they're baffled when we talk of sacking coaches when we're sat near the top of the table. And that's because of target 2 which is to entertain and play the game the right way. When we weren't winning much (pre 1996) we were playing really good rugby and although it was frustrating not being able to push Wigan off their pedestal, we were at least proud of the fact we played entertaining rugby. Then post 1996, we started winning stuff and playing great rugby and us Saints fans ended up spoilt rotten.

It seems that Cunningham, a club legend, is a McManus man. He's his boss so I guess that's obvious. However that means he's only interested in getting us in a position to compete for trophies and thus playing 'safe, conservative, take no risks' rugby to achieve this. Which doesn't meet the criteria of the fans.

Saints have got the players to play expansive rugby. The try against Warrington from deep is just one example of that. I hope as time goes on and Cunningham gets more experience, that he becomes more confident and trusting to let his team off the leash a bit.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 11:01 am  

Twentyman wrote:

To coach at Saints there's usually 2 targets you must meet with the fans but obviously only 1 target with McManus.

First target is to win trophies or be within a game or two of doing so. On paper that's great and I imagine when fans from other clubs look at these boards they're baffled when we talk of sacking coaches when we're sat near the top of the table. And that's because of target 2 which is to entertain and play the game the right way. When we weren't winning much (pre 1996) we were playing really good rugby and although it was frustrating not being able to push Wigan off their pedestal, we were at least proud of the fact we played entertaining rugby. Then post 1996, we started winning stuff and playing great rugby and us Saints fans ended up spoilt rotten.

It seems that Cunningham, a club legend, is a McManus man. He's his boss so I guess that's obvious. However that means he's only interested in getting us in a position to compete for trophies and thus playing 'safe, conservative, take no risks' rugby to achieve this. Which doesn't meet the criteria of the fans.

Saints have got the players to play expansive rugby. The try against Warrington from deep is just one example of that. I hope as time goes on and Cunningham gets more experience, that he becomes more confident and trusting to let his team off the leash a bit.

That's an excellent assessment. Winning is obviously the foremost aim of any sports organization but it's a shame we've so willingly cast aside our ethos as a flamboyant team who likes to play fast and take risks. And even more disappointing that others (particularly Leeds) have seemed to take this mantle. It's something we're known and respected for throughout the game and should always be part of our DNA. It might be a misty-eyed romantic view but when you're going through the turnstiles for 15 home games, I'd rather watch flamboyant, exciting rugby every week than 'win at all costs' error-free percentage stuff, even if it occasionally costs us points.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 11:12 am  

Twentyman wrote:

It seems that Cunningham, a club legend, is a McManus man. He's his boss so I guess that's obvious. However that means he's only interested in getting us in a position to compete for trophies and thus playing 'safe, conservative, take no risks' rugby to achieve this. Which doesn't meet the criteria of the fans.

Saints have got the players to play expansive rugby. The try against Warrington from deep is just one example of that. I hope as time goes on and Cunningham gets more experience, that he becomes more confident and trusting to let his team off the leash a bit.

Conservative was one of the (many) accusations levelled at McDermott. He seems to have let our team off the leash but it certainly wasn't an overnight process.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 11:40 am  

Twentyman wrote:

Saints have got the players to play expansive rugby. The try against Warrington from deep is just one example of that. I hope as time goes on and Cunningham gets more experience, that he becomes more confident and trusting to let his team off the leash a bit.

My thoughts exactly, its a pity some of the usual fans don,t see it that way and have little faith in what could be achieved, its about this time last year the "usual suspects" came on board saying we will struggle to make the top 5, won't get to a grand final never mind winning one. Brown found a way of adapting to the cards he was dealt with.
This season is harder because the coaching staff are here 12 months too soon, every club benefits from stability which takes time, but some fans want a quick fix to success. (a la Salford)

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 11:54 am  

That Dawson 'effort' just about summed up our night. Possibly the most embarrassing thing I've ever seen on a Rugby field. You could have drove a London bus through the gap he had to score, the fool didn't need to dive.

At least another 2 season ahead of him into the bargain.

Re: The Entertainers? A general moan (Sorry) : Mon Aug 10, 2015 12:25 pm  

There is a real danger Saints will be swallowed up by three or four teams. Leeds are comfortably better, Wigan will be next season, Wire and Huddersfield potentially too if their recruitment pays off.

It's not just the lack of strike players, poor halves and awful backs holding us back. We're playing the game like London Broncos did at the beginning of Super League. Boring, percentage based RL that is easily beaten if you can get a lead. Leeds have changed the game, the quick play the balls, the determination to offload not tuck and drive like we do and the ability to throw it wide with fantastic core skills. We're behind technically as much as we are in terms of players.

Our tactics current are:
1 - Winger runs across pitch and skids into the knees of defender
2 - Hit up by Walmsley/Amor against a rampant defense
3 - Hit up by Walmsley/Amor/backrower
4 - Kick to opposition fullback by Walsh

The wingers and Quinlan need to do more to get us going, either by hurtling into the line or evading the first man. Then the first drive can be productive rather than a 2m gain under huge pressure like it is now. All our pack should be looking to offload, fighting for that rather than extra yardage like we do now. This forces the opposition to compress and opens the space out wide that the likes of Watkins, Moon, McGuire enjoy so much at Leeds. It's risky, we don't have players with the technical ability Leeds have, but it's the future and we need to adapt to it and sign players that can play that way.

Our current tactics of low risk percentage plays ALL THE TIME would be okay if we had two or three dangerous individuals who can worry the defensive line and create breaks from nothing. We don't have that.