Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 2345678 LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 197

Thread: Relegation

  1. #126
    In The South Stand retro74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    St Helens, Lancashire
    Age
    49
    Posts
    4,887
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Those Challenge Cup viewing figures are quite worrying. I think women's football gets a lot more than that

  2. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    5,346
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    Your stats are impressive Gray77

    Just a thought, had league structure etc remained the same, would the figures have dropped or remained or grown?

    I suspect they would have dropped more, I think viewing figures and attendance at matches have been affected by modern trends, more channels, more concerts, X boxes, more social activities to attract people etc.

    20 years ago, pre Internet and availability of multi channels, events and concerts there were less options to spend our social time, IMO
    Or conversely, people are prioritising other options more and more over Rugby league. Its pointless making excuses. Admit the facts. The game has been poorly managed and its product appeal has declined as well.

  3. #128
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    2,287
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    Thank you.

    Spoken for me perfectly. I appreciate it
    I agree with your post and Grey's on this Ralph.

    I think the current standard is pretty poor but when ever I get back up north I try to go. I will always love the game, even in its present state, and I hope to see it improve.

    Going reminds me of the great times I had watching with my parents and family, the great times we had. It reminds me of the fact that I will always love my home town and be proud of its heritage.

    All that doesn't mean that I think Rugby League is doing fine. It's in trouble. Saints are streets ahead of everybody else yet they are still capable of imploding! Bringing Toronto into a 12 team league with multiple repeat fixtures won't make any improvement. Relegation, and specifically who is relegated is largely irrelevant I'm afraid

    Root and branch change is needed.

  4. #129
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    Or conversely, people are prioritising other options more and more over Rugby league. Its pointless making excuses. Admit the facts. The game has been poorly managed and its product appeal has declined as well.
    Not sure I have ignored the facts. Im just discussing them and debating them , there could be many reasons for the stats

    If we want to discuss facts we should be balanced, the championship has increased in attendances by 30%, I read that this years viewing figures are up, although we will have to wait for the actual figures.
    In our desire to protest against the RFL, the structure of the game and our perception we are trying very hard to find justifications. Often when we disapprove of something we only search the bad points to demonstrate and justify our disappointment, Brexit for many was a protest vote. Whilst there may be things that have gone backwards, things we don't like etc. There are also things to be positive about, but pointing that out seems to annoy so many people. This board is developing a clique, it's based on a sharing of opinions that everything (ok maybe not everything but many things) in RL is bad and anyone who doesn't join in or try's to offer balance or an alternative view isnt accepted not by all obviously but some, it's like a group mentality

    Quote "Herd mentality, mob mentality and pack mentality, also lesser known as gang mentality, describes how people can be influenced by their peers to adopt certain behaviors on a largely emotional, rather than rational, basis."

    It's my belief this happens a lot on forums, if people take a step back and look at the game as a whole, there are many good things about it, a rational look rather than an emotional look is what I try to bring, that's different than making excuses. Granted there are many good posters with very good views, I've stated before that I have changed my mind based on posts from Gray, TesSaint, Patsy offered some interesting points above, retro, Ralph often, prez, ROgues etc. All bring very good opinions which I learn from. That's why I return despite continually saying I won't as it drags my optimism down, I do learn and consider posters points, but also challenge them if I see fit

    In summary, pointing out good things, offering a different view is not making excuses and not ignoring things that are not working out

  5. #130
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,178
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    Oh I think I’m adding to the debate Upside but not in a way you are comfortable with or even understand!

    There are many possible opinions and many ways to express them. I spent close to 40 years as a psychotherapist so I’m familiar with lots of forms of self expression

    I think in rugby terms standards have fallen systematically over the last 20 years or so. There are probably many reasons for that. One is the ways in which coaches and players express themselves on the training pitch and in matches. Not being beaten has become more important than painting beautiful pictures with Matynesgue style Murphynistic self confidence. You also have your own style of expression on here as well. And so you should

    Holbrook has brought back a desire for self expression which, most of the time, has made us better to watch. Something is still missing in the mindset of some of the players. Not that they don’t try or they don’t care. I don’t believe that.

    The depreciation of standards is something to do with how we have to compete with other sports and other interests, the woeful league structure and desire for muscle ahead of skill, confidence and speed.

    None of this means that I devalue modern players. I couldn’t do one tenth of what they do.

    I hope our new coach valued the beauty of the game. If want to tell me my posts are vacuous again. That’s ok. I don’t mind.

    You mean you dare to have an opinion different to his.

  6. #131
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    2,287
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    You mean you dare to have an opinion different to his.
    I think you may be right!

  7. #132
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    2,287
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    Not sure I have ignored the facts. Im just discussing them and debating them , there could be many reasons for the stats

    If we want to discuss facts we should be balanced, the championship has increased in attendances by 30%, I read that this years viewing figures are up, although we will have to wait for the actual figures.
    In our desire to protest against the RFL, the structure of the game and our perception we are trying very hard to find justifications. Often when we disapprove of something we only search the bad points to demonstrate and justify our disappointment, Brexit for many was a protest vote. Whilst there may be things that have gone backwards, things we don't like etc. There are also things to be positive about, but pointing that out seems to annoy so many people. This board is developing a clique, it's based on a sharing of opinions that everything (ok maybe not everything but many things) in RL is bad and anyone who doesn't join in or try's to offer balance or an alternative view isnt accepted not by all obviously but some, it's like a group mentality

    Quote "Herd mentality, mob mentality and pack mentality, also lesser known as gang mentality, describes how people can be influenced by their peers to adopt certain behaviors on a largely emotional, rather than rational, basis."

    It's my belief this happens a lot on forums, if people take a step back and look at the game as a whole, there are many good things about it, a rational look rather than an emotional look is what I try to bring, that's different than making excuses. Granted there are many good posters with very good views, I've stated before that I have changed my mind based on posts from Gray, TesSaint, Patsy offered some interesting points above, retro, Ralph often, prez, ROgues etc. All bring very good opinions which I learn from. That's why I return despite continually saying I won't as it drags my optimism down, I do learn and consider posters points, but also challenge them if I see fit

    In summary, pointing out good things, offering a different view is not making excuses and not ignoring things that are not working out
    On balance I like this post. Thanks Upside. I'm not sure there is a clique in this forum, but there may well be a majority view. It's fine to be in a minority. What I really dislike is the way you jumped on Ralph a few posts up. In my view he expressed a fair opinion in a fair way and I don't think he has any reason to "retract" as you suggest in post 132. Sometimes it feels like you are a dog with a bone to me. You are are obviously entitled to do that if you want to. I'm going to stop now anyway.

  8. #133
    In The South Stand Tez the Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    3,502
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    ....
    Steve Prescott MBE (1973-2013)
    V

  9. #134
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    I think you may be right!

    Despite what I've posted above you believe this?

    Edit, just seen your latest post

  10. #135
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    On balance I like this post. Thanks Upside. I'm not sure there is a clique in this forum, but there may well be a majority view. It's fine to be in a minority. What I really dislike is the way you jumped on Ralph a few posts up. In my view he expressed a fair opinion in a fair way and I don't think he has any reason to "retract" as you suggest in post 132. Sometimes it feels like you are a dog with a bone to me. You are are obviously entitled to do that if you want to. I'm going to stop now anyway.
    I don't believe I jumped on the post I just challenged it, he said he will leave the game unless his suggestions are acted upon, I believe it was the usual empty threat seen by many RL fans over the decades, if he wants to post that he will not be a fan of the game, then he cannot be surprised if he is asked to back up his claim or accept it was an empty threat

    Edit, reasons to add another though - one reason we went to 12 teams is that there were not enough players good enough to support 14 teams, of the standard has dropped, why do you call for 14 teams again? Seems a contradiction?
    Last edited by Upside; 17th September 2019 at 13:54.

  11. #136
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,211
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    I think you may be right!
    Upside is one of those who thinks that his opinion is gospel, he also tends to filibuster his replies so you get bored and dont bother. He made a comment on another post along the lines of ‘i say it how it is’ trying to pass off his opinion as fact.

    Like it or not it is a widely perceived opinion that standards have fallen, especially at the top, over the past 2 years we have been a total of 26 points clear of the team in 2nd place at the end of the league season (not counting the super8s last season), it is not good for rugby for the same team to be double figure points ahead of 2nd 2 years in a row, look at the premier league, city won it by 19 points 2 seasons ago, and were pushed all the way last season, usually a team or 2 close the gap the next season, but the gap has widened this year, which is why people say standards have fallen.

  12. #137
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomsepho View Post
    Upside is one of those who thinks that his opinion is gospel, he also tends to filibuster his replies so you get bored and dont bother. He made a comment on another post along the lines of ‘i say it how it is’ trying to pass off his opinion as fact.

    Like it or not it is a widely perceived opinion that standards have fallen, especially at the top, over the past 2 years we have been a total of 26 points clear of the team in 2nd place at the end of the league season (not counting the super8s last season), it is not good for rugby for the same team to be double figure points ahead of 2nd 2 years in a row, look at the premier league, city won it by 19 points 2 seasons ago, and were pushed all the way last season, usually a team or 2 close the gap the next season, but the gap has widened this year, which is why people say standards have fallen.
    I have never claimed my opinion is gospel, you may find it easier to dismiss my view with that claim but that's on you. You could equally say that about anyone's view.

    A team being so many points clear could be a sign of standards improving, as the top team have improved dramatically on the rest.
    Take Wigan in the 80s and early 90s, they were head and shoulders above everyone, their standard was far better than anything seen before. Them being much better than the rest isn't proof standards had dropped but Standards had improved with the rest needing to follow
    Last edited by Upside; 17th September 2019 at 12:57.

  13. #138
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    I have never claimed my opinion is gospel, you may find it easier to dismiss my view with that claim but that's on you. You could equally say that about anyone's view.

    A team being so many points clear could be a sign of standards improving, as the top team have improved dramatically on the rest.
    Take Wigan in the 80s and early 90s, they were head and shoulders above everyone, their standard was far better than anything seen before. Them being is much better than the rest isn't proof standards had dropped but I proved with the rest needing to follow
    Funny how most people are dismissing your view isn't it? I wouldn't mind you don't even make sense half the time you giddy sap.

  14. #139
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    In the spirit of balance.

    What's better now?
    - Players are better looked after and are in general in better condition to play the game
    - Stadiums are more comfortable and more welcoming to kids, women and older people
    - Stadiums attract more corporate hospitality and bring in more money for those clubs that own their own ground
    - The Grand Final has had more positives than negatives in terms of being a showcase end of season game
    - Magic Weekend seems to be a success and is a good weekend for the sport when played in the right place (Newcastle was perfect for it)
    - The national team is relatively strong and is shown FTA on BBC
    - We have a secure (if possibly undervalued) TV deal
    - The GB Lions return this year, albeit they should never have gone away
    - We may get a proper Australia tour next year to accompany the Ashes series

    What is worse now?
    - Stadiums lack character and identity, and lack the atmosphere of the older grounds
    - We have far less characters in the game and less players who are prepared to play outside of a rigid system
    - We have far less elite Australians and Kiwis playing in our game
    - The Challenge Cup has been severely weakened
    - Replacing GB Lions with England took away something unique that we had as a sport at international level
    - The weekly rounds have been diluted by a play-off system, and further diluted by the repeated changes in the play-off system.
    - Trophies are now won on two Saturdays in the season, and not won based on consistency and putting in hard graft and winning more points/games than everyone else.

    There are loads more, but those are the ones off the top of my head. Some people may think the first list of things is more important, that's fair enough. Comfort of stadiums, having 70 live games on Sky etc is a big thing for some, that's fine. Personally the second list is more important to me. I've never cared too much about having a comfy seat at a stadium, and never cared too much if we had wall to wall TV games etc. I'm happy the Lions are back, but how much will they now mean for younger fans given they've been gone for a good while?

    For me, the rigid nature of the modern game, the lack of creativity on the park, the boring modern grounds, the dilution of the weekly rounds, the weakening of the Challenge Cup and the way success is now artificially defined (finish 8th, finish 5th etc) rather than winning the most games and the most points all mean more to me than anything.

    But we all value certain things in different ways I suppose.

  15. #140
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,211
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    In the spirit of balance.

    What's better now?
    - Players are better looked after and are in general in better condition to play the game
    - Stadiums are more comfortable and more welcoming to kids, women and older people
    - Stadiums attract more corporate hospitality and bring in more money for those clubs that own their own ground
    - The Grand Final has had more positives than negatives in terms of being a showcase end of season game
    - Magic Weekend seems to be a success and is a good weekend for the sport when played in the right place (Newcastle was perfect for it)
    - The national team is relatively strong and is shown FTA on BBC
    - We have a secure (if possibly undervalued) TV deal
    - The GB Lions return this year, albeit they should never have gone away
    - We may get a proper Australia tour next year to accompany the Ashes series

    What is worse now?
    - Stadiums lack character and identity, and lack the atmosphere of the older grounds
    - We have far less characters in the game and less players who are prepared to play outside of a rigid system
    - We have far less elite Australians and Kiwis playing in our game
    - The Challenge Cup has been severely weakened
    - Replacing GB Lions with England took away something unique that we had as a sport at international level
    - The weekly rounds have been diluted by a play-off system, and further diluted by the repeated changes in the play-off system.
    - Trophies are now won on two Saturdays in the season, and not won based on consistency and putting in hard graft and winning more points/games than everyone else.

    There are loads more, but those are the ones off the top of my head. Some people may think the first list of things is more important, that's fair enough. Comfort of stadiums, having 70 live games on Sky etc is a big thing for some, that's fine. Personally the second list is more important to me. I've never cared too much about having a comfy seat at a stadium, and never cared too much if we had wall to wall TV games etc. I'm happy the Lions are back, but how much will they now mean for younger fans given they've been gone for a good while?

    For me, the rigid nature of the modern game, the lack of creativity on the park, the boring modern grounds, the dilution of the weekly rounds, the weakening of the Challenge Cup and the way success is now artificially defined (finish 8th, finish 5th etc) rather than winning the most games and the most points all mean more to me than anything.

    But we all value certain things in different ways I suppose.

    Gray77, great post, certain things are better than previous, player welfare and condition being one of them, and a key one at that. I think the point about the atmosphere in the stadium is a good one as well, with moving stadiums the atmosphere naturally changes, a lot of the older grounds are smaller and more intimate, You were packed in at Knowsley road so sounded louder as a group when singing, where as at TW i feel wa are further away. A big one for me is when games are played, Thursday night games are a bad one for me, especially if played away, it’s difficult to motivate yourself to go to the likes of Hull and Wakefield when you have work the next day, why couldnt we during the summer when football is off play in their spots on a Saturday, Lunchtime or 5pm, attempt to cash in a little on the lack of football for the audience, rather than hiding on Thursdays.

  16. #141
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    In the spirit of balance.

    What's better now?
    - Players are better looked after and are in general in better condition to play the game
    - Stadiums are more comfortable and more welcoming to kids, women and older people
    - Stadiums attract more corporate hospitality and bring in more money for those clubs that own their own ground
    - The Grand Final has had more positives than negatives in terms of being a showcase end of season game
    - Magic Weekend seems to be a success and is a good weekend for the sport when played in the right place (Newcastle was perfect for it)
    - The national team is relatively strong and is shown FTA on BBC
    - We have a secure (if possibly undervalued) TV deal
    - The GB Lions return this year, albeit they should never have gone away
    - We may get a proper Australia tour next year to accompany the Ashes series

    What is worse now?
    - Stadiums lack character and identity, and lack the atmosphere of the older grounds
    - We have far less characters in the game and less players who are prepared to play outside of a rigid system
    - We have far less elite Australians and Kiwis playing in our game
    - The Challenge Cup has been severely weakened
    - Replacing GB Lions with England took away something unique that we had as a sport at international level
    - The weekly rounds have been diluted by a play-off system, and further diluted by the repeated changes in the play-off system.
    - Trophies are now won on two Saturdays in the season, and not won based on consistency and putting in hard graft and winning more points/games than everyone else.

    There are loads more, but those are the ones off the top of my head. Some people may think the first list of things is more important, that's fair enough. Comfort of stadiums, having 70 live games on Sky etc is a big thing for some, that's fine. Personally the second list is more important to me. I've never cared too much about having a comfy seat at a stadium, and never cared too much if we had wall to wall TV games etc. I'm happy the Lions are back, but how much will they now mean for younger fans given they've been gone for a good while?

    For me, the rigid nature of the modern game, the lack of creativity on the park, the boring modern grounds, the dilution of the weekly rounds, the weakening of the Challenge Cup and the way success is now artificially defined (finish 8th, finish 5th etc) rather than winning the most games and the most points all mean more to me than anything.

    But we all value certain things in different ways I suppose.
    Great post kudos given

    An overarching theme here is that for some/many depending on your point of view consider the experience less engaging than 10 years ago. I still argue this isn't the same as standards as that suggest the players are rubbish if the standard is rubbish. Much of the points raised suggest the experience isn't as good, completely different

  17. #142
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    Great post kudos given

    An overarching theme here is that for some/many depending on your point of view consider the experience less engaging than 10 years ago. I still argue this isn't the same as standards as that suggest the players are rubbish if the standard is rubbish. Much of the points raised suggest the experience isn't as good, completely different
    I've never really gone down the route of criticising modern players because I feel it is a cultural shift in the sport and a change in coaching methods more than the actual ability of a load of young lads coming through in the game.

    There is no reason why the best crop of 15-16 year olds playing all over the place could not be as good as Hanley, Sculthorpe, Farrell, Long, etc in five years time. But if they are coached not to take as many chances, and coached to play a rigid style of RL dominated by 'completion stats' and doing low percentage stuff repeatedly then they'll never get the chance to even try to be as good as those players. No young lad trying to become a professional is going to go off script and defy what he's being coached to do, so I don't attach any blame to them.

    But, that problem exists, and has existed for a while. A poorer style of play is the main issue, but a lowering of standards is linked in because really high standards of creativity are not being coached in this crop of players. Cunningham was such a disappointment because he had coaches like McRae and Millward who encouraged KC's generation to express themselves and play a really stylish brand of RL but also at a high standard. Cunningham seemed to ignore everything that made his playing career so exciting and successful. Would he, Sculthorpe, Martyn, Long etc have been half as dynamic under a coach like KC became? The problem is coaching and culture, not necessarily poorer players.

  18. #143
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,426
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    I'm not sure what, if anything the rfl could do to market the game better, and to encourage new fans
    I'm gobsmacked at this to be honest

  19. #144
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    I've never really gone down the route of criticising modern players because I feel it is a cultural shift in the sport and a change in coaching methods more than the actual ability of a load of young lads coming through in the game.

    There is no reason why the best crop of 15-16 year olds playing all over the place could not be as good as Hanley, Sculthorpe, Farrell, Long, etc in five years time. But if they are coached not to take as many chances, and coached to play a rigid style of RL dominated by 'completion stats' and doing low percentage stuff repeatedly then they'll never get the chance to even try to be as good as those players. No young lad trying to become a professional is going to go off script and defy what he's being coached to do, so I don't attach any blame to them.

    But, that problem exists, and has existed for a while. A poorer style of play is the main issue, but a lowering of standards is linked in because really high standards of creativity are not being coached in this crop of players. Cunningham was such a disappointment because he had coaches like McRae and Millward who encouraged KC's generation to express themselves and play a really stylish brand of RL but also at a high standard. Cunningham seemed to ignore everything that made his playing career so exciting and successful. Would he, Sculthorpe, Martyn, Long etc have been half as dynamic under a coach like KC became? The problem is coaching and culture, not necessarily poorer players.
    I agree, and in some ways it's never going to be the same again. The wrestle, completion rates, which are being debated on another thread discussion error counts, structured play are commonplace in the modern version of the game. I think KC version was extreme and the relationships he had just broke down, I like to think if he had his time again he would be able to mold the players better.

    The NRL of which much of the coaching and tactics come from are very successful, they also have a play off system which doesn't harm their product, so it's not as easy as simply saying change the structure and everything will return to what it was. Coaching won't go back, it will only move forward, the NRL is held in high esteem with the same approaches, possibly even more so and they create great players and show flair. Think we need to accept time has moved on, realise that a slower play of the ball does not mean the product is poor, attacking teams just need to think of new ways to break down defences. I also don't buy into this notion that lots of try's makes for an exciting game, I've seen some very close exciting low scoring games, I'm not a fan of basketball were they score every few seconds, it's again not as simple as saying lots of try's means good product.

    The youth systems we have are very good, not sure if you watch any but lots available on YouTube, the standard is high.
    I think the perception is greater than reality, people need to accept it's changed as continually searching for structural changes that will somehow change the product is a waste of energy, coaches focus completion rates won't change because the date of the CC moves

  20. #145
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    I'm gobsmacked at this to be honest
    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Why's that?
    Many people associate marketing simply with posters, it's much much more than that. Modern marketing is so different and quite a unique task in itself.
    I'm not sure what else they could do with the budget they have for it, but I'd like to hear from someone with sound marketing knowledge
    Full eighty podcast they spoke about clubs sitting back and waiting for the game to be marketed by the RFL, Newcastle said they couldn't understand why the clubs didn't do their own marketing with the community, now I know saints do a very good job, but Newcastle have taken it to another level, they run the community game, they set up new clubs, it's brilliant what they are doing. Swinton or Manchester wanted to take much of what they have done but sadly now that's dead in the water

  21. #146
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Some neutral fans have even said to me the grand final isn't marketed very well, but I've no idea what else they can do?
    I'm open to ideas from marketing people

  22. #147
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    4,739
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mancunian Saint View Post
    Some neutral fans have even said to me the grand final isn't marketed very well, but I've no idea what else they can do?
    To be fair you could fill a book with what you don’t know.

  23. #148
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    2,287
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    I've never really gone down the route of criticising modern players because I feel it is a cultural shift in the sport and a change in coaching methods more than the actual ability of a load of young lads coming through in the game.

    There is no reason why the best crop of 15-16 year olds playing all over the place could not be as good as Hanley, Sculthorpe, Farrell, Long, etc in five years time. But if they are coached not to take as many chances, and coached to play a rigid style of RL dominated by 'completion stats' and doing low percentage stuff repeatedly then they'll never get the chance to even try to be as good as those players. No young lad trying to become a professional is going to go off script and defy what he's being coached to do, so I don't attach any blame to them.

    But, that problem exists, and has existed for a while. A poorer style of play is the main issue, but a lowering of standards is linked in because really high standards of creativity are not being coached in this crop of players. Cunningham was such a disappointment because he had coaches like McRae and Millward who encouraged KC's generation to express themselves and play a really stylish brand of RL but also at a high standard. Cunningham seemed to ignore everything that made his playing career so exciting and successful. Would he, Sculthorpe, Martyn, Long etc have been half as dynamic under a coach like KC became? The problem is coaching and culture, not necessarily poorer players.
    I couldn’t agree more

  24. #149
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    1,211
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pasty View Post
    I couldn’t agree more
    Yeah, i think in terms of standards you can think of it 2 different ways, standard of player or standard of the play, these do not mean the same, i do not think there is anything wrong with the standard of players, but there is a feel that the standard of rugby in the game is not there. So if it is not down to the players there must be something wrong with the standard of play, this could be due to over-analysis of statistics leading to the high use of set plays and structure, this limits creativity and flair to a large degree, more flair and creativity builds a better product, look at how we played under KC, basically 4 drives, a series of passes left and a kick, it was boring methodical rugby which did not allow players to play with freedom. In essence by doing this they have numbed the feel out of the game, sometimes relying on data and statistics does a detriment to the game.

  25. #150
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    2,287
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomsepho View Post
    Yeah, i think in terms of standards you can think of it 2 different ways, standard of player or standard of the play, these do not mean the same, i do not think there is anything wrong with the standard of players, but there is a feel that the standard of rugby in the game is not there. So if it is not down to the players there must be something wrong with the standard of play, this could be due to over-analysis of statistics leading to the high use of set plays and structure, this limits creativity and flair to a large degree, more flair and creativity builds a better product, look at how we played under KC, basically 4 drives, a series of passes left and a kick, it was boring methodical rugby which did not allow players to play with freedom. In essence by doing this they have numbed the feel out of the game, sometimes relying on data and statistics does a detriment to the game.
    Yes. I wonder if this is why we still struggle when the game gets difficult such as most recently at Wembley. In other words, if players are not coached to be creative, to trust their decision making and not confident in themselves they crumble when the tactics that have been coached in the preceding week don’t work. When that happens they don’t know how to take the game by the scruff of its neck and create something unscripted
    Last edited by John; 17th September 2019 at 17:17.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •