Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 11:25 am  

Saint #1 wrote:

I'm not sure we do have an outstanding set of forwards to be honest. Walmsley is carrying our pack in terms of work rate. Against Hull, between Savelio, Richards, Thompson, Flanagan, Greenwood, LMS, Masoe and Turner combined, they made 394 metres. Percival, Swift, Jones and Fleming made 430 metres. When between 8 of your forwards make less than 400 metres and only bust 2 tackles (between 8 of them!!), no wonder your halves don't look any good.

I don't think the current on field stats are a reflection of the potential, though. Blind alley, one up running is meaning our lads are hitting defences that know exactly what they're going to do and easily countering us with numbers.

I'm not going to push the "best pack in SL" tag, but we've certainly got a very good set of players to line up 8-13.

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:10 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

I don't think the current on field stats are a reflection of the potential, though. Blind alley, one up running is meaning our lads are hitting defences that know exactly what they're going to do and easily countering us with numbers.

I'm not going to push the "best pack in SL" tag, but we've certainly got a very good set of players to line up 8-13.

Fair point. I think we've got quite a one-dimensional pack. We've got a big pack (bar Amor), but hardly any of our forwards can pass consistently and accurately. I'd imagine part of the reason our support play is crap is how often would we use it? We've got a pack that is good at scoring tries from 10 out and as a whole hits good lines. We don't have many forwards who could make a clean break though, footwork is scarce, offloads aren't that common. As a result, if we aren't going over the top of teams, we struggle, particularly without Wilkin and Vea, both of whom offer something different. This is compounded by the fact Masoe and Amor are both awful at the minute.

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:38 pm  

Saint #1 wrote:

Fair point. I think we've got quite a one-dimensional pack. We've got a big pack (bar Amor), but hardly any of our forwards can pass consistently and accurately. I'd imagine part of the reason our support play is crap is how often would we use it? We've got a pack that is good at scoring tries from 10 out and as a whole hits good lines. We don't have many forwards who could make a clean break though, footwork is scarce, offloads aren't that common. As a result, if we aren't going over the top of teams, we struggle, particularly without Wilkin and Vea, both of whom offer something different. This is compounded by the fact Masoe and Amor are both awful at the minute.

I agree. I hope KC is considering recruiting a prop for 2016 who has good hands and looks for the offload. He doesn't need to be a big name, he can make his name at Saints.

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:11 pm  

Saint #1 wrote:

Fair point. I think we've got quite a one-dimensional pack. We've got a big pack (bar Amor), but hardly any of our forwards can pass consistently and accurately. I'd imagine part of the reason our support play is crap is how often would we use it? We've got a pack that is good at scoring tries from 10 out and as a whole hits good lines. We don't have many forwards who could make a clean break though, footwork is scarce, offloads aren't that common. As a result, if we aren't going over the top of teams, we struggle, particularly without Wilkin and Vea, both of whom offer something different. This is compounded by the fact Masoe and Amor are both awful at the minute.

Its all in there, though, if you dig.
Greenwood and Vea can make beaks out wide. LMS is very Mobile. Sav and Amor have good feet.
It looks like we've been told to quell offloads, but Mose can pull some great ones off and, given how rangey he is, Walmsley could easily add this to his play.
There's no Jammerequse ball player, mind.

It just seems that we want to steam roller teams, but don't realise that you have to be smarter about it than just having 1 up runners hitting the line by themselves.

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:21 pm  

Walmsley was off-loading for fun at the beginning of the season. If he isn't now, that will be down to KC's deathly dull tactics.

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:53 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

:IDEA: Its all in there, though, if you dig.
Greenwood and Vea can make beaks out wide. LMS is very Mobile. Sav and Amor have good feet.
It looks like we've been told to quell offloads, but Mose can pull some great ones off and, given how rangey he is, Walmsley could easily add this to his play.
There's no Jammerequse ball player, mind.

It just seems that we want to steam roller teams, but don't realise that you have to be smarter about it than just having 1 up runners hitting the line by themselves.

Agree with Greenwood and Vea, though I think Greenwood generally only makes breaks hitting the lead line of a second man play, and we seem reluctant to run them more than 20 out. Amor does have good feet but is a bit too small to really benefit. On the offloads: we're 7th in the league for them, so it doesn't seem too bad, but of the Super 8 teams, only Cas are below us. Walmsley is actually our top offloader, and 6th in Super League, though I think his decision making of when to offload needs work.

I think we just need to be a bit more expansive coming out of our own half. Nothing fancy, just spread the ball from the middle and get it into the hands of Percival/Turner/Vea (when fit) early. Completions are important, but it feels like we're focused on them too much. Only Widnes have made less errors than us. Not making errors is great, but Catalans, Huddersfield, Warrington, Wigan and Leeds are 1-5; sometimes errors are a necessary risk.

Hawkandro wrote:

Walmsley was off-loading for fun at the beginning of the season. If he isn't now, that will be down to KC's deathly dull tactics.

Was KC not the coach at the beginning of the season then?

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 4:54 pm  

Saint #1 wrote:

The specific example quoted was 20 out from the Catalan line, I'd be more concerned if a winger was scooting there! I suppose part of the problem is with Wilkin out, we don't have any ball-playing forwards who can take the ball to the line and actually hit a pass. The drop off is one of the only ways we can look like we're actually going wide (which we can only actually do off a quick PTB due to our pedestrian halves.

I'm not sure we do have an outstanding set of forwards to be honest. Walmsley is carrying our pack in terms of work rate. Against Hull, between Savelio, Richards, Thompson, Flanagan, Greenwood, LMS, Masoe and Turner combined, they made 394 metres. Percival, Swift, Jones and Fleming made 430 metres. When between 8 of your forwards make less than 400 metres and only bust 2 tackles (between 8 of them!!), no wonder your halves don't look any good.

I agree, we don't have a great pack, we have a decent pack and nothing more. Roby and walmsley a carrying that pack big time.

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:19 pm  

Hawkandro wrote:

Walmsley was off-loading for fun at the beginning of the season. If he isn't now, that will be down to KC's deathly dull tactics.

He was early on, but he seemed to have offset it with tackle busting (101) hence the massive amount of accrued metres so far this season. LMS has improved his offloading game. Richards improvement is that he doesn,t make that many errors, just had 2 bad games. As we all know its Amor who has struggled most of this season except for the Hull KR game (150 metres).

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:28 pm  

Twentyman wrote:

Aimlessly? Throwing the ball out wide, creating overlaps, missing players out, offloads etc this is what it means to play for a team like Saints, who were long famous for scoring last minute tries (Never write off the Saints etc) before the successes of post 96 never mind before it.

I'm sorry, I know for many other clubs, that strategy against 12 men is totally acceptable, but if that's what we've settled for as Saints fans then we've lost the very thing that set us apart from other teams...I don't mean winning trophies, i mean playing the game like the Brazilians play football.

I'm not losing hope yet...players like Lomax (when he comes back), Makinson, Swift, Percival, Richards, Thompson, Charnock, Roby, Greenwood, Savelio and co all know what it means to play for Saints.

So ... we should just hand back the trophies we won last season and under Hanley because we didn't play "The Saints Way"?

In any case - SINCE WHEN was it good strategy to simply decree that Saints "must always play in such and such a fashion" - for ever and ever amen?

Leaving aside the fact that people might have radically different opinions on the ideal style of play - have you considered the possibility that Saints (for whatever reason) might not HAVE the players to play in such fashion.

Good coaching is all about analysing the strengths and weaknesses of your roster AND THEN picking a strategy which gets the best out of them - not the other way around.

Re: This is not St Helens RLFC : Mon Aug 17, 2015 10:47 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

So ... we should just hand back the trophies we won last season and under Hanley because we didn't play "The Saints Way"?

In any case - SINCE WHEN was it good strategy to simply decree that Saints "must always play in such and such a fashion" - for ever and ever amen?

Leaving aside the fact that people might have radically different opinions on the ideal style of play - have you considered the possibility that Saints (for whatever reason) might not HAVE the players to play in such fashion.

Good coaching is all about analysing the strengths and weaknesses of your roster AND THEN picking a strategy which gets the best out of them - not the other way around.

Haha, I'm gonna regret engaging with you but I can't resist.

The difference between last year and 99 was that last year we had several key players injured and adjusted our style of play to win matches. I have no issue with the way Brown won the league and GF. It was fantastic.

In 99, we had strike players who could change a game and play exciting rugby league if they were let off the leash (As Millward did with them the season after) such as Newlove, Iro, Long, Martyn, Sullivan etc

The club prides itself on its entertainment tag and its fans refer to them as that, hence the title of this board. It's in the CULTURE (I'll use patronising capitals like you) of the club to play exciting, expansive rugby league. Only a few seasons ago, Mike Rush referred to us as having a culture much like what Ajax, Barcelona etc have in football for playing the game in an exciting way.

The club up until recently have tried to sign rugby league players who fit in with the culture of the club.

The CULTURE (How do you keep up the capitals without feeling like a proper nobstick?) of the club I'm sure will be pummelled into the young kids who sign for the club. Our 1st team is full of the kids who have come through the system. A few of the tries we've scored this season imo have more than shown we do have the personnel to ditch this boring brand of rugby and play some decent expansive stuff instead.

Ultimately, it's an entertainment business. People will stop going to the games and will just pick and choose games instead if this brand of ZZZzzzz rugby keeps getting served up.

I can't wait to read your patronising response were you will no doubt use the capitals, put some words in bold and underline others.