Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:17 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Let me ask you something.

If McManus had announced that Mike Unknown* who oversaw youth development at Crunulla Sharks plus Keiron Legend* who retired from playing there a year ago were going to coach Saints after the sacking of Royce Simmons, would you have been happy at that appointment?

PS: For those still unsure of the difference, the names with the asterisks marked beside them are made up. That is, they are imaginary.

Are you for real? You've made up a ridiculous scenario there to back your wild imagination up.

The majority of fans felt that under Royce Simmons Saints had lost their identity, they weren't playing the Saints way and the blokes in charge now have been fully immersed in the Saints culture for the last god know how long. They aren't two complete outsiders,They aren't RL idiots, they've been in the game long enough to know how to run a team and as has been said the results since they've been put in place have show that the decision has been the right one.

For what it's worth I know exactly how things are done at the club at th eminute, who's making decisions on team selection and your idea of this 'collective' well it's nothing like the truth.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:28 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

I'm either making stuff up or I'm expressing an opinion. Do you know the difference between the two?

Let me help you. I'm expressing an opinion. I've said that all along.

No you haven't. In the first instance you stated that the reason Foster wasn't playing was because Meli wanted to play on the wing and there was a 'coaching collective' in charge of the club. You didn't express it as an opinion, you stated it as if it were fact.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:29 pm  

Talk Some Sense! wrote:

Are you for real? You've made up a ridiculous scenario there to back your wild imagination up.

No I didn't. I made up some ridiculous names to illustrate the situation we are in at present. Saints fans would have expressed outrage if two coaches with the combined experience of one season as an assistant at first grade had been appointed from outside the club. Do you disagree with that statement?

However. Because - and only because - the two replacement coaching staff comprise Mike Rush and Keiron Cunningham clearly they need no extra help at all.

Oh, I'd like to know what this 'Saints way' of playing is btw? Is it how we played under Millward or under Anderson or what? Coz we look no different to me than we did when Royce was in charge (except that we have cut down on the individual errors).

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:30 pm  

Dux wrote:

No you haven't. In the first instance you stated that the reason Foster wasn't playing was because Meli wanted to play on the wing and there was a 'coaching collective' in charge of the club. You didn't express it as an opinion, you stated it as if it were fact.

What? You mean I have to say 'in my opinion' every time I write anything for it to qualify as an opinion?

Exactly how do you think it could be anything other than an opinion? Do you think I am one of the coaching staff or something?

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:38 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

No I didn't. I made up some ridiculous names to illustrate the situation we are in at present. Saints fans would have expressed outrage if two coaches with the combined experience of one season as an assistant at first grade had been appointed from outside the club. Do you disagree with that statement?

However. Because - and only because - the two replacement coaching staff comprise Mike Rush and Keiron Cunningham clearly they need no extra help at all.

Oh, I'd like to know what this 'Saints way' of playing is btw? Is it how we played under Millward or under Anderson or what? Coz we look no different to me than we did when Royce was in charge (except that we have cut down on the individual errors).

Have you been watching the same team as me? We've looked a lot better than the team that started the season so dismally. The stats showed that we made more metres, more offloads, more breaks since the change - a completely different team, and part of this has been the decision to leave gaskell and foster out and play a more experienced team.

With regards the hypothetical situation, of course it would be a concern however it is what it is, Mike Rush & KC know the club inside out, they know the players better than most and they know what it take to have a succesfull team having been involved in one for many years. Would you honestly rather we'd stuck with Simmons and expected to see the same turnaround from the team?

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:02 pm  

Talk Some Sense! wrote:

Have you been watching the same team as me? We've looked a lot better than the team that started the season so dismally. The stats showed that we made more metres, more offloads, more breaks since the change - a completely different team, and part of this has been the decision to leave gaskell and foster out and play a more experienced team.

I think you are confusing style of play with level of performance. I was talking about style of play, responding to the point about playing 'the Saints way'. But we were as conservative against Widnes as we were against Bradford and Hull, for example. The big difference is that certain players have started making an effort going forward (attitude) and the individual errors have dropped. As you identified, the greatest sources of those indivdual errors were Gaskell and Foster and they have been dropped (something I too was suggesting over a month ago so as to get their confidence/form back).

I wonder if anyone ever considered that we actually need to play conservatively because the team is not capable of playing otherwise?

With regards the hypothetical situation, of course it would be a concern however it is what it is, Mike Rush & KC know the club inside out, they know the players better than most and they know what it take to have a succesfull team having been involved in one for many years. Would you honestly rather we'd stuck with Simmons and expected to see the same turnaround from the team?

Well, as I've said before, I wasn't of the view that the team would have stayed the way it was with Royce in charge because we turned around last year and on that evidence there was no reason to believe we wouldn't have turned around this year, especially since our losses were so very close (and in the last two, with Robes and others out injured). However, what I would rather have is an experienced coach in charge and unlike some people I don't rate our current set up solely based upon the fact that they've been at the club for ages. That doesn't make them good first team coaches. I think though that McManus was banking on the fans being appeased in the way that many have been appeased because he would have known that he couldn't have pulled off what he did without choosing exactly those two people to be in charge.

However, I just view them in the same way I would any other coaching team and so far as I can see, bar the individual errors, we haven't changed as a team. We still have the same frailties, as last week showed. We still play to the same style.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:07 pm  

Talk Some Sense! wrote:

part of this has been the decision to leave gaskell and foster out and play a more experienced team.

Incidentally, we now have more inexperience in the team than we had when Royce was here because Josh Jones and Adam Swift are brand new to the first team. Nobody brand new came in this season under Royce. So I think that might undermine your suggestion that we needed more experience.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:27 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

I think you are confusing style of play with level of performance. I was talking about style of play, responding to the point about playing 'the Saints way'. But we were as conservative against Widnes as we were against Bradford and Hull, for example. The big difference is that certain players have started making an effort going forward (attitude) and the individual errors have dropped. As you identified, the greatest sources of those indivdual errors were Gaskell and Foster and they have been dropped (something I too was suggesting over a month ago so as to get their confidence/form back).

I wonder if anyone ever considered that we actually need to play conservatively because the team is not capable of playing otherwise?

Well, as I've said before, I wasn't of the view that the team would have stayed the way it was with Royce in charge because we turned around last year and on that evidence there was no reason to believe we wouldn't have turned around this year, especially since our losses were so very close (and in the last two, with Robes and others out injured). However, what I would rather have is an experienced coach in charge and unlike some people I don't rate our current set up solely based upon the fact that they've been at the club for ages. That doesn't make them good first team coaches. I think though that McManus was banking on the fans being appeased in the way that many have been appeased because he would have known that he couldn't have pulled off what he did without choosing exactly those two people to be in charge.

However, I just view them in the same way I would any other coaching team and so far as I can see, bar the individual errors, we haven't changed as a team. We still have the same frailties, as last week showed. We still play to the same style.

No i'm not confusing anything. We're doing lots of things differently now and players are given different direction under the current coaches, I know that for a fact too so it's unfortunately not something thats open for debate.

With regards to your experience issue, anybody who isn't so obsessed with Royce Simmons would be able to tell you that experience in the team has been key, the thing with Swift in particular is it's easier to bring youth into a team that isn't under the cosh in the same way we'd been. It needed some experience to steady the ship, that did the job and now we're in a far better position that we were under Simmons.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:42 pm  

SaintsFan wrote: I'm either making stuff up or I'm expressing an opinion. Do you know the difference between the two? Let me help you. I'm expressing an opinion. I've said that all along. Just because you're expressing your opinion it doesn't mean you aren't making it up. If you think the two are mutually exclusive you're even more stupid than I thought. You're going to get your name on the famous board in pizza hut at this rate. http://www.redvee.net/forums/showthread ... -on-rlfans I honestly don't know if you're batsh!t crazy or just winding us up.

SaintsFan wrote: I'm either making stuff up or I'm expressing an opinion. Do you know the difference between the two? Let me help you. I'm expressing an opinion. I've said that all along. Just because you're expressing your opinion it doesn't mean you aren't making it up. If you think the two are mutually exclusive you're even more stupid than I thought. You're going to get your name on the famous board in pizza hut at this rate. http://www.redvee.net/forums/showthread ... -on-rlfans I honestly don't know if you're batsh!t crazy or just winding us up.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:37 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Oh, I'd like to know what this 'Saints way' of playing is btw? Is it how we played under Millward or under Anderson or what? Coz we look no different to me than we did when Royce was in charge (except that we have cut down on the individual errors).

Are you mad? How long have you been watching Saints? Do you have any idea what the Saints way of playing is?

I thought not.