Time for Noble to earn his corn

[phibes]

I think we could at least replace a couple (Millard and DV) in the 18 with no harm done. And perhaps drop someone to the bench. But I agree, to an large extent, the coach's hands are tied.

It's just depressing that our first-choice squad seem to need an unexpected defeat almost every other game before they can play consistently for 80min.

[Jake]

DaveO posted:
I am convinced Noble contributed to the defeat v Wakey by putting three players returning from injury straight back into the side.

The side he put them into had previously thrashed Les Cats 30-0 so there was no need to rush them back and indeed more of a case for not changing a winning side.

Especially as we were supposed to be playing one of the "lesser" sides in the league so we were not in theory desperate for the services of these three players.

Nobby compounded the problem by as you say going with only three props when he must have known Feka was not 100%.

Seeing press reports of Noble saying Feka was to get more game time earlier in the week I was expecting to be reading headlines today as to how he single handedly tore Wakefield up. Instead I am reading reports on how one of their props ran 60m to score. Nobby must have known this was not going to happen yet left O'Carroll out.

He needs to act on his public statements and as he says "see who wants to be here". Anyone who he concludes does not needs to be dropped otherwise he won't have any respect from the players as they will know he never acts on what he says.

Dave

You are quite wrong there one of the Wakey props didn't run 60 yds he only ran 35 he walked the last 25

[robjoenz]

DaveO posted:
...Prior to Wakefield these two also had the same week off as the rest of the squad and in McIllorums case he has only played two SL games so burnout was not an issue.

That argument was no justification for not playing them v Wakefield. In fact with a week off and playing against one of the "lesser" teams is when I would expect such players to be given a run out. Especially when in McIllorum's case he had played well and his replacement was coming back from unjury.

They should both have played.

...but how long does it take a 19 year old to recover after playing a super league game? Age-wise, they've not long since left the junior academy. Whilst the senior academy premier division in fast it doesn't have anything like the physical intensity that SL has.

We aren't in the position to make judgements on how well players recover from big games because we don't see them throughout the week. That's what Brians Noble's job is. Maybe you are right and Noble is being over protective or just making poor selections, but the grass is always greener on the other side isn't it.

I'd go further and drop Hock because he is a liability at the moment. Hansen inthe starting 13 with Tomkins on the bench will improve out penalty count no end.

Hock's got a daft head on his shoulders but he can't be accused of having no fire in his belly. Hansen received criticism earlier in the season for poor form so how does he warrant a place back in the first 13? Have you seen him train? Would a more positive penalty count be outweighed by the lack of Hocks power going forward and good tackling (when it's legitimate)?


I'm not necassarily disagreeing with you here DaveO, I'm more playing devil's advocate because I don't think it's as simple as people like to think regarding the choices Noble has to make.

GeoffN summed it up well...

GeoffN posted:I completely agree with the "competition for places" argument; the problem is we don't have a strong enough or big enough squad to do that.
On yesterday's performance, at least 10 players should be dropped, but we don't have anything like that depth of cover...

[jinkin jimmy]

There's a news article on here about Fletcher possibly returning the Aus with St George. In it there is a comment that there is no point talking to Fletch at the moment because "he is only one game away from Wembley". Could it be that our players have put the cue on the rack as far as the league is concerned?

[Fujiman]

jinkin jimmy posted:
There's a news article on here about Fletcher possibly returning the Aus with St George. In it there is a comment that there is no point talking to Fletch at the moment because "he is only one game away from Wembley". Could it be that our players have put the cue on the rack as far as the league is concerned?

Or he could be concentrating on his game and doesn't want any distractions. You can look at it both ways you know. BTW after watching them on Sunday the've put the cues away and covered the table

[DaveO]

robjoenz posted:

DaveO posted:
...Prior to Wakefield these two also had the same week off as the rest of the squad and in McIllorums case he has only played two SL games so burnout was not an issue.

That argument was no justification for not playing them v Wakefield. In fact with a week off and playing against one of the "lesser" teams is when I would expect such players to be given a run out. Especially when in McIllorum's case he had played well and his replacement was coming back from unjury.

They should both have played.

...but how long does it take a 19 year old to recover after playing a super league game?

About the same time ans any other 19 year old playing in SL I suppose. The point is there was a week off which meant two weeks between games.

When will he be up to the job of playing in SL? When he is 21?

Age-wise, they've not long since left the junior academy. Whilst the senior academy premier division in fast it doesn't have anything like the physical intensity that SL has.

We aren't in the position to make judgements on how well players recover from big games because we don't see them throughout the week. That's what Brians Noble's job is. Maybe you are right and Noble is being over protective or just making poor selections, but the grass is always greener on the other side isn't it.

It is not a case of the grass is always greener at all. It is a simple matter of seeing how poor Millard is, how well McIllorum played and coming to the conclusion that with the gap in the fixtures playing McIllorum against Wakefield should have been the automatic selection ashe should have easily recovered. Not the return of a player who 99% of the fans think makes the team worse not better.

Also Higham can play longer than he does so McIllorum could be a true backup brought on only as needs be as opposed to on a 20 minute rotation which seems the extent of Nobby's "tactics" as regards the hookers if it is not thought McIllorum is up to playing longer..

I'd go further and drop Hock because he is a liability at the moment. Hansen inthe starting 13 with Tomkins on the bench will improve out penalty count no end.

Hock's got a daft head on his shoulders but he can't be accused of having no fire in his belly. Hansen received criticism earlier in the season for poor form so how does he warrant a place back in the first 13? Have you seen him train? Would a more positive penalty count be outweighed by the lack of Hocks power going forward and good tackling (when it's legitimate)?

That is a matter of opinion and when we beat Les Cats we had our lowest penalty count of the season. I think he has the potential to be a great player but it seems to me we are losing games almost directly in proportion as to how indisciplined we are if you see what I mean.

So at the moment I am forming the opinion that the fire he offers going forward is more then being offset by the negative aspects of his game.

I'm not necassarily disagreeing with you here DaveO, I'm more playing devil's advocate because I don't think it's as simple as people like to think regarding the choices Noble has to make.

GeoffN summed it up well...

GeoffN posted:I completely agree with the "competition for places" argument; the problem is we don't have a strong enough or big enough squad to do that.
On yesterday's performance, at least 10 players should be dropped, but we don't have anything like that depth of cover...

But with Hock and Millards positions we do have options to make changes.

I agree we can't drop 10 bit we can change the hooking positions and likewise second row are areas we do have depth. So there are options for Noble here and since you quote Geoff I am sure he would agree the hooking role is definitely one that Noble should act on.

Dave