Reds 2014
- Thread starter Troy
- Start date
- Status
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
Didn't you hear your packs the best running around and has been amazing all year and we dont give them the rest they deserve. .
How bout Mitchell Habana or one the other wingers sitting on the bench at toulon
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
gel
Ken Catchpole (46)
tigerland12
John Thornett (49)
R
Redsfan
Guest
To be honest, those comments by Kev brought a smile to my face. Can you name any successful QLD team, in any sport, that didn't have an enormous chip on their shoulder? It's part of being a QLDer.
I'm sure that around 2011, there was a lot of chat about the team proving themselves against those that weren't giving them a chance...
I'm sure that around 2011, there was a lot of chat about the team proving themselves against those that weren't giving them a chance...
Iluvmyfooty
Phil Hardcastle (33)
I agree with starting Browning. My only problem is that from what I have seen of him this year the Reds are using him as a workhorse and he is not getting the ball very often. I have seen the damage he can do with ball in hand when given a little space and I would like to see him start at 6 (too small for 8)
USARugger
John Thornett (49)
I think he actually just returned to Japan for the start of their season or something like that.
Unfortunately Leicester just re-signed Goneva..
A boy can only dream, I guess.
USARugger
John Thornett (49)
He's listed as heavier than Schatz and the same height. 1-2" shorter than Higginbotham and 2kg lighter. 1" shorter and 12kg lighter than Palu (who is on the heavier end of the scale for 8s).
I'd say he could easily become our starting 8 in the next 2 seasons. I don't think he's too small to start there now but honestly I'd like him to have at least another season to build his body up - the intensity and length of the season (especially once players start getting test caps) seems to interfere with the development of the younger bodies.
Tangawizi
Peter Fenwicke (45)
Well to answer my own question, no. No Premier Rugby this weekend of course...
Iluvmyfooty
Phil Hardcastle (33)
Doesn't seemed to have hurt Hooper, Skelton, McMahon and several other 21 year olds. If he is good enough and he is start him now
T
TOCC
Guest
He has been in the system for long enough now, I don't think that it's really a concern, give the lad a few starts
thierry dusautoir
Alan Cameron (40)
I have been mulling the reds situation for a while now and something has come to my attention…
There has been talks of player being stale and that the reds recruitment has been poor and what not. But my question is; did Richard Graham really have a chance for success when he is playing with another man's team?
Is it more a question of trying to teach an old dog new tricks? Rather than the dog in question being useless?
Most new coaches will keep the nucleus of an old squad but inject new players to freshen things up and create a need for a new direction. While RG only brought in one new player into the squad (Lachie Turner), and then tried to point the team in a new direction. I don't think the changes RG has tried to implement are major but i feel that historically fresh coaches work best with fresh players. So if Link was still the Reds coach would the players still be as flat, or is it a question of the old guard too comfortable in their ways and not working with RG 100% to ensure success.
There has been talks of player being stale and that the reds recruitment has been poor and what not. But my question is; did Richard Graham really have a chance for success when he is playing with another man's team?
Is it more a question of trying to teach an old dog new tricks? Rather than the dog in question being useless?
Most new coaches will keep the nucleus of an old squad but inject new players to freshen things up and create a need for a new direction. While RG only brought in one new player into the squad (Lachie Turner), and then tried to point the team in a new direction. I don't think the changes RG has tried to implement are major but i feel that historically fresh coaches work best with fresh players. So if Link was still the Reds coach would the players still be as flat, or is it a question of the old guard too comfortable in their ways and not working with RG 100% to ensure success.
for sure. Its the reason Richard will get another year. Next year he will get his players, well - more of his players. There will be a number of players cut, perhaps a few leave of their own choice. But Rich will bring new players in - even youngsters like Kerevi and Kurindrani.
Looking forward to some new faces to be honest.
Looking forward to some new faces to be honest.
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
I do agree with what you are saying Thierry dusautoir.
At the same time I also do slightly disagree with the view of needing new players. The same thing is being said about Mick Malthouse down here in Melbourne.
But isn't that what a good coach does, gets the best out of the group available to them? A Wallaby coach cannot go and recruit players. He has a fixed resource and it's his job and aim to get the best out of those players, to get them to be, to use a phrase once attributed to the Reds, "greater than the sum of their parts".
Let's remember Link didn't come in and put the broom through the place. The place was pretty much left in shambles with recent departures and retirements of Croft, Roe, Moore, Barnes, Flatley, Tune and others. He picked up the pieces and other than filling empty roster spots with players who were unwanted and had no contracts in Aus (e.g. Beau), and got the absolute best out of that group to improve them 8 ladder positions on the previous season. A key factor in this was seeing what he had in front of him, and developing a game plan that best suited those resources. Not the other way around as many coaches seem to do, mostly due to their limitations rather than those of the players also.
It was be naïve to compare situations. I'm sure Link didn't have any players with any unwarranted sense of entitlement (easy not to when you're team is that fucking terrible - or you're new and there because nowhere else wanted you) which may be there now after a good period as well as a team and supporter base with an emotional attachment to some past warriors who are now past it despite being integral to our success, but as coach if he is any good as a coach, he should be able to lead the group to a reasonable level of success despite this. Otherwise coaching would be just recruiting and picking the best 15 players possible and that would be it.
I certainly don't advocate punting the bloke. In all fairness I think Link may have got a little lucky in 2010 straight off the bat and he shouldn't be expected to immediately determine what is the best way for his team to play or what is undoubtedly his best team. I'm just saying don't make the excuse that he hasn't had the chance to build his roster. If he needs to do that to get the team performing to a reasonable level both in performance and cohesion, he isn't a good coach then.
At the same time I also do slightly disagree with the view of needing new players. The same thing is being said about Mick Malthouse down here in Melbourne.
But isn't that what a good coach does, gets the best out of the group available to them? A Wallaby coach cannot go and recruit players. He has a fixed resource and it's his job and aim to get the best out of those players, to get them to be, to use a phrase once attributed to the Reds, "greater than the sum of their parts".
Let's remember Link didn't come in and put the broom through the place. The place was pretty much left in shambles with recent departures and retirements of Croft, Roe, Moore, Barnes, Flatley, Tune and others. He picked up the pieces and other than filling empty roster spots with players who were unwanted and had no contracts in Aus (e.g. Beau), and got the absolute best out of that group to improve them 8 ladder positions on the previous season. A key factor in this was seeing what he had in front of him, and developing a game plan that best suited those resources. Not the other way around as many coaches seem to do, mostly due to their limitations rather than those of the players also.
It was be naïve to compare situations. I'm sure Link didn't have any players with any unwarranted sense of entitlement (easy not to when you're team is that fucking terrible - or you're new and there because nowhere else wanted you) which may be there now after a good period as well as a team and supporter base with an emotional attachment to some past warriors who are now past it despite being integral to our success, but as coach if he is any good as a coach, he should be able to lead the group to a reasonable level of success despite this. Otherwise coaching would be just recruiting and picking the best 15 players possible and that would be it.
I certainly don't advocate punting the bloke. In all fairness I think Link may have got a little lucky in 2010 straight off the bat and he shouldn't be expected to immediately determine what is the best way for his team to play or what is undoubtedly his best team. I'm just saying don't make the excuse that he hasn't had the chance to build his roster. If he needs to do that to get the team performing to a reasonable level both in performance and cohesion, he isn't a good coach then.
EatSleepDrinkRuck
Larry Dwyer (12)
the media has no hespect for the heds... no hespect
R
Redsfan
Guest
I'd love to see Phil Mooney involved again, especially now that he has more experience under his belt. Maybe just as attack/skills coach, but I'm of the opinion that he really laid the foundations for the Link-led resurgence. The players seemed to love him too.
redveincheese
Billy Sheehan (19)
As far as the playing roster goes, Richard Graham has no choice at the moment but to work with what he has. Why that is a problem however, I cannot fathom.
Injuries aside he has 10 wallabies reps which include the worlds best scrumhalf not so long ago, A former national captain, a fly half with a freakish skill set, and a tight five that continually goes above and beyond their call, and most have finals and championship experience.
Coaches with far less of a decorated roster are doing far better. (Foley).
I think RG should be able to complete the rest of the year unfettered and with the full support of the club. However to say he needs to bring in "his own players" Im sorry I just do not understand.
This team is a team that can beat any other team in this comp if they click on the day.
If recruitment over the last few seasons is an issue, and maybe it was/is, then why was recruitment so badly mishandled?
I just cant accept that a new coach needs a new roster in order to achieve any success, especially in the case of this current reds lineup.
Injuries aside he has 10 wallabies reps which include the worlds best scrumhalf not so long ago, A former national captain, a fly half with a freakish skill set, and a tight five that continually goes above and beyond their call, and most have finals and championship experience.
Coaches with far less of a decorated roster are doing far better. (Foley).
I think RG should be able to complete the rest of the year unfettered and with the full support of the club. However to say he needs to bring in "his own players" Im sorry I just do not understand.
This team is a team that can beat any other team in this comp if they click on the day.
If recruitment over the last few seasons is an issue, and maybe it was/is, then why was recruitment so badly mishandled?
I just cant accept that a new coach needs a new roster in order to achieve any success, especially in the case of this current reds lineup.
- Status