Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 11:50 am  

The Eclipse wrote:

A well coached team is a team where each individual knows their role which is simplified with clear instructions.
A well coached team also has all players playing as a team with plans and goals.
A good coach can also improve and motivate his players, unfortunately none of the above apply at Saints under Nathan Brown.

Saints have several International players, something is drastically wrong and it starts at the top.

What were missing at the moment is someone to do what Nobby did at Wigan when he saved them from the drop. He went back to basics and got the good players they had playing to a simple system to get the confidence back. We need something similar because were just all over the place and playing tinkerman with our current limited squad is not helping at all.

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:14 pm  

Let's make a change. Even if it's only a short term one for the rest of the season.

It's obvious he's not the man. There's no pointing keeping Brown any longer.


Get rid.

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:44 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Sorry, but it is you who is kidding yourself! We are NOT better! Aside from our first game, most of our losses have been close and we have been seeing little bits of something good in all our matches. Then Brown moves everyone around, they don't know what they are doing or who they are doing it with and we lose again.

His tinkering is destroying any chance we have of winning a bloody game for heaven's sake. It isn't just a little aside. It's central to our problems. Why break up a really promising partnership on our left edge just to accommodate Meli? Ridiculous. Why change around the whole of the halfback scenario (our 10th change, and not even injuries to excuse it) just to accommodate O'Brien? Ludicrous.

You may see it that way, but the win at Leeds had a lot more of luck about it than planning, from where I was stood at the time. The number of times Leeds literally gifted Saints tries that night, was unbelievable.

Last night we where woeful in the first half but solidified the defense more in the second half and did not fade. There were some nice touches, but the big difference was having direct running forwards hitting the ball at pace.

There is absolutely no of this at the moment. Our ball carries are stood about 1 meter to the left or right of the ruck and they are starting pretty much standing still. The fact we are making progression down feild bodes well. But with that type of running near the opposition line, the opposition are more in our faces, so you need to hit them at pace. We were very pedestrian, but still this was an improvement on Leeds where we were reliant on Luck.

I agree on the changing of the halfbacks. But overall as a team I thought for the 80 minutes we had more in our control than during the Leeds match. The question is with so much tinkering having gone on, if he now reverts Wilkin back to 7, he will be accused of tinkering again. Personally I think he should have kept Wilkin at 7 and GOB at 6. But if he now does this it will be another case of Brown changing the halves.

I do think he is taking a little too much lattitude with the season, he has to remember that whilst we want a winning team eventually. The games leading up to that still matter in terms of fans, support, revenue. We all joke that the season is a pre-season for the playoffs, but Brown has pushed this to the extreme.

I can still see us winning the next few games, but more than anything now, I'm wanting to see evidence that Brown knows who is the best starting 17. Sure injury and month loans have to be accounted for, but there is no need to move 5 players to fit in one.

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:51 pm  

No1 Saint wrote:

What were missing at the moment is someone to do what Nobby did at Wigan when he saved them from the drop. He went back to basics and got the good players they had playing to a simple system to get the confidence back. We need something similar because were just all over the place and playing tinkerman with our current limited squad is not helping at all.

That is what rush did last year, he steadied the team with basic rugby, which worked, to a point. And that was te point that Brown came in to a team that was reasonable if nothing else. His job was to turn the reasonable team into challengers, which so far he has struggled to do. Partly that is because of injuries and disruptions, but last night we had a virtually full strength team that should have been capable of beating Hudds. The fact that our performance was so far below what it should have been raises questions as to why?

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 2:57 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

You may see it that way, but the win at Leeds had a lot more of luck about it than planning, from where I was stood at the time. The number of times Leeds literally gifted Saints tries that night, was unbelievable.

That's a very convenient but unconvincing argument.

Last night we where woeful in the first half but solidified the defense more in the second half and did not fade. There were some nice touches, but the big difference was having direct running forwards hitting the ball at pace.

Yeah, because it takes us half the game to work out who is on our inside/outside and what they're doing while there due to Brown's stupid tinkering. We have just finished round 17. I see no development, just the same old, same old. In each game bar the first there have been things 'to take out' of the match but we still look the same overall, bar the Leeds game when at least we had pace and flair out wide on one edge (and that made a difference). He ruined that of course by changing it all around needlessly.

I do think he is taking a little too much lattitude with the season, he has to remember that whilst we want a winning team eventually. The games leading up to that still matter in terms of fans, support, revenue. We all joke that the season is a pre-season for the playoffs, but Brown has pushed this to the extreme.

This I agree with. However, given the lack of urgency he appears to be playing out club policy as there are no signs from McManus that he is unhappy to exploit the fans to this degree.

I can still see us winning the next few games,

Frankly I can't. I can't see where the next win is coming from. Had we beaten London and Widnes then I'd agree but we can't even be relied upon to perform against lower placed or out of form teams.

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 4:58 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

That's a very convenient but unconvincing argument.

Unconvincing? Some of the tries they conceded were worthy of the Moscow State Circus.

Not convenient either from my point of view, given my comments after the Leeds match were:

FearTheVee wrote:

Not going to get carried away as I thought leeds were appallingly bad, but fair play to the lads for showing loads of heart

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 5:24 pm  

Last year, losing at Odsal was the final straw which led to Royces' sacking.

I know we're in a bad run of form at the moment, and Saints are usually a bit of a graveyard for us - but - if we were to win, is another Saints coach at risk?

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 5:41 pm  

Highlander wrote:

Last year, losing at Odsal was the final straw which led to Royces' sacking.

I know we're in a bad run of form at the moment, and Saints are usually a bit of a graveyard for us - but - if we were to win, is another Saints coach at risk?

Ultimately I think not. The board at Saints clearly don't care one bit about winning and I can't see them paying off the rest of Brown's contract.

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 6:09 pm  

Highlander wrote:

Last year, losing at Odsal was the final straw which led to Royces' sacking.

I know we're in a bad run of form at the moment, and Saints are usually a bit of a graveyard for us - but - if we were to win, is another Saints coach at risk?

I don't think there is as big a push for the sacking as last year. But then again I would have given Royce till easter. Unlike saddened who will sack and remove all players and coaches at will contracts exsist in the real world. We've done sacking coaches I think this season the buck stops with the players. It does not divorce brown of all responsibility. But it gives him a he'll of a lot more leeway than Royce in his last season.

Re: Nathan Brown : Tue Jun 04, 2013 6:37 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

When all is said and done we looked utterly clueless with the ball at times (unsurprising given we had a new halves partnership, one of whom had been at the club a matter of days), but we lost by 9 points away to potential GF winners without Lomax and with Roby getting himself back from injury.

Our pack did well and I think there were positives to take from the game, we will improve from here without doubt.

Pretty much agree with this and also your later comments around the fact that our second half performance was better than that against Leeds.

The thing I took from it was that despite being disjointed due to lack of settled half backs we still ran the giants close.
With proper settled halves we would be able to cause teams a lot more problems.

The Bradford game on Sunday will give us a better idea of were we are as a side. They are a mid table side and one we should be able to knock over on our own turf.

Saints have the 6th best defence in the league but the third worst attack.
This lack of attack is a clear indication of our lack of strike in the halves and three quarters.