Vs cas

[josie andrews]

I keep reading suggestions of Bateman to LF, Faz to LF or MM to loose forward.Surely the logical answer would be to buy a loose forward instead of trying to convert players to positions that they are not cut out for.On the other hand it would cost moneyand that is the hitch with ILs reluctance to spend.

Faz played loose when he was in the academy.

[moto748]

I keep reading suggestions of Bateman to LF, Faz to LF or MM to loose forward.Surely the logical answer would be to buy a loose forward instead of trying to convert players to positions that they are not cut out for.On the other hand it would cost money and that is the hitch with ILs reluctance to spend.

More importantly,the bigger hitch is that there just aren't the Lockers-style loose forwards around? Who would you suggest? Even in the NRL, the ball-playing loose forward is a dying breed; Glenn Stewart was probably the last one.

[Wintergreen]

Why does everyone keep saying Bateman to loose forward?

Liam Farrell played all his academy at loose, that would be the ideal choice IMO

Both are NOT loose forwards.

I can count on one hand the number of times Faz has passed all season.

Likewise Bateman's hands are not his strong point.


Both are suited to running out wide where they can "go on their own" rather than be part of a passing movement.

Plus, in all honesty, both are too small to go in the middle.

[AncientWarrior]

To me everything we do is slow,we're slow around the ruck our play the ball is really slow we're very slow in thought.

Today showed exactly where we're at ,our player's looked like they've been in to many war's .the players look uninspired and stale,even they look bored with the playing style. Im dreading next season without significant change.

Totally agree.

To me it's pointless criticizing this player or that; altering a player's position; signing this player or aother, in the belief that our performances are solely down to players.

Castleford during the past two seasons have created a new benchmark in attacking rugby that is very entertaining and effective and it is up to the rest to respond in a positive way. They have developed a style of play which includes set-piece plays, running angles to induce defensive errors, a varied tactical kicking game and an emphasis on speed and handling skills.

No other club has raised its game accordingly.

Our players are just as fit and skillful but unfortunately, in my opinion, those skills are not being utilized properly within the current system.

Change in systems is urgently needed.

[BriH]

Joel was one of our better players today..

All he did was shove a Cas player when we'd scored a try to cause an unnecessary pushing match. Other than that he did bugger all as usual. Probably the biggest waste of salary cap we've had this year and considering we have FPN that's saying something.

There is no room for sentiment in sport, some of the greatest players that we have had got moved on when they started to decline, others were moved on because they were not good enough. IFL and Rads are responsible for the hiring and firing and they have made some really bad decisions, it's time for them to put it right. We badly need to undertake major surgery. I think most will agree that Waney has run his course and that we need new ideas on the training pitch. To give Joel a new contract was ludicrous, Tommy has been a disappointment. FPN, MM, Clubb and Powell are not good enough as we have no punch upfront and no creativity around the ruck. Faz and Batty play so wide that we might as well play them as centres rather than forwards. Cas are not a great team but they do the basics a lot better than most teams, anyone who knows nothing about RL would have thought that it was a must win game for Cas today and that Wigan had already qualified for the semis. If players can't get motivated in front of almost 16,000 fans with so much at stake then they have got to ask if they should be playing professional RL. This season has been shambolic and the CEO needs to sort it.

Absolutely.

IL and Radlinski have to sort this out and make changes where necessary.

I have said it before: how can the same group of players play so badly c.f. the previous match? The analysis of the results points to the absence of Lockers.
If this is the case, then we have a big problem.

[southportcdm]

I agree with the last couple of posters, it's the systems not the players that are our biggest problem. In addition, we won't replace Lockers with another similar player so have to accept that we change our style accordingly. The best teams in the league don't have a Lockers type of player and seem to manage O.K. I also think that our style stunts the development of some of the younger players who seem to peak in the early part of their career and don't improve further. This development of course may be affected by injuries or the fact that our coaching of the youngest player is so good that they look good earlier than those from other teams.
e.g. George is no better this season than last when he should be improving each season. Bateman is one of our most important players but has he really improved in the past couple of seasons? Budgie was better before he went to Australia (so probably not out fault?) and Sam Powell was more effective last season too. Any thoughts?

[catman]

The biggest factor holding back our young players is the brutal wrestling regime at Orrell. Young players should be trained in the skills of the game in a way that does compromise their physical wellbeing. I've heard numerous reports of the goings on in academy training which are very unsavoury, I've heard about long training sessions without the ball resulting in stitches, injuries etc. Sessions like these are not developing our young players just turning them into injury prone crocks.

[old hooker]

I keep reading suggestions of Bateman to LF, Faz to LF or MM to loose forward.Surely the logical answer would be to buy a loose forward instead of trying to convert players to positions that they are not cut out for.On the other hand it would cost moneyand that is the hitch with ILs reluctance to spend.

Faz played loose when he was in the academy.

And how long since is that? Tony Clubb played centre for London and England, should we move him too ?

[shaunedwardsfanclub]

Both are NOT loose forwards.

I can count on one hand the number of times Faz has passed all season.

Likewise Bateman's hands are not his strong point.


Both are suited to running out wide where they can "go on their own" rather than be part of a passing movement.

Plus, in all honesty, both are too small to go in the middle.

Were you born in St Helens? How many fingers have you got on your hands? Faz's passing game might not be his strongest asset but he's put in plenty of good passes. In fact he's even created tries with his passing, particularly inside balls to George - a tactic that's worked pretty well at times this year.

Not that I do see Faz as a future 13. I think when we're playing well our left edge is one of the most dangerous attacking forces in the league. Loss of form by both individuals and the team as a whole has limited their effectiveness but there's no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's no reason why that left edge can't find form again next season and Faz is an integral part of it. That's why I'd keep Faz on the left.

As for Bateman, he's not a playmaker who throws out quality passes but the truth is we're very unlikely to replace Lockers like for like. We're probably going to have to go for someone slightly different down the middle so the fact that Bateman isn't a natural playmaker doesn't mean he isn't capable of playing loose forward. Most teams no longer have a playmaker at 13. We don't when O'Loughlin is off the field. Just look at Cas, they've had Nathan Massey playing 13 plenty of times and he's a reasonably good prop. They play some excellent attacking rugby without a ball playing 13 and there's no reason why we can't do the same.

I honestly think trying to replace like for like won't work. We could try to bring in a replacement but given the dispensation we get for O'Loughlin's long service with the club we won't be able to use his true wage to sign a replacement.

For me Bateman is a reasonable choice because he's strong enough to cause problems down the middle, is more aggressive in defence than Farrell and so likely to be more dominant. He might not be a top quality passer but he does have decent hands. He also seems to have a good eye for spotting a weakness in the defence and making the most of it. Bateman is also a threat who teams will focus on. You need threatening players down the middle otherwise you'll never draw teams wide and I think props running with Bateman on their shoulder, and vice versa, gives defences something to be wary of.

Of course we might just stick another prop forward, like Sutton or Tautai, into the 13 role and they might do fine. It's all speculation for now.

Bateman has played quite a bit of rugby at 6 so he must have some good handling skills. Yes Lockers will be a loss but that is compounded by the fact that we don't have a hooker or halfback who have the required skills. If we can solve those problems then we can put a tough, hard running forward into the LF role in the same way as the Aussies do.

[DaveO]

The biggest factor holding back our young players is the brutal wrestling regime at Orrell. Young players should be trained in the skills of the game in a way that does compromise their physical wellbeing. I've heard numerous reports of the goings on in academy training which are very unsavoury, I've heard about long training sessions without the ball resulting in stitches, injuries etc. Sessions like these are not developing our young players just turning them into injury prone crocks.

It's comments like this that make me wonder if, as several people have suggested, bringing in an attacking coach would make one jot of difference.

The training philosophy of the club is dictated by Wane. Players talk about being "flogged" in training" after a defeat. Wane himself seems to think running the players ragged after a loss is a good idea.

It all sounds very old fashioned and right out of the Alex Murphy coaching manual.