Delaney was interchange after 50 minutes and also had had the half time rest. If he had had a longer rest he would not have made 50 tackles would he? I very much doubt his replacement (Walters) would have been able to make up for Delaney's work rate had he replaced him earlier.

Yes Delaney had 6 misses + 50 tackles made.... whereas Garbutt who came on fresher after 26 minutes made 23 tackles and 5 misses and Ablett 25 tackles and 5 misses and even the fully rested Singleton who you wanted on earlier had a higher missed tackle ratio. So why pick on Delaney who actually was rested after 50 minutes?

Well I tend to miss your points because they are often flawed and usually negative.



Delaney often looks knackered yet is capable of doing long minutes and keeping up a high work rate just like JP. You say he looks knackered because he is being asked to do this amount of work. Well this is true but it is equally true to say that this is the role he plays in the side just like JP, JJB and now Ward they all offer high work rates and minutes. It is why they are selected. The trend is to reduce the number of interchanges so there is a need for players that can do long minutes.

Players who regularly make a high number of tackles will also make a few misses. Garbutt, Ablett and Singleton all had a worse missed tackle ratio in this game and two of these were replacements. Last week against Catalans Walters made 6 tackles and 3 misses and no carries when he came on. Is this the type of impact replacement you are suggesting for our top tackler?

You then pose a nonsense question asking [i"perhaps more importantly how many did he not even make it to"[/i

This is comedy gold! Are you seriously saying a player that has made 50 tackle + 6 missed tackles and 10 carries has time to make any more ? I will tell you something now. A tackling machine like Delaney cannot make any tackles if he is sitting on the bench especially if replace by the likes of Walters ....now that would make an real negative impact on the team.




You also said

[i"Delaney in particular has been busted for as long as I can remember and a break of 20 mins old have meant he would have been more effective when on the field.[/i

Perhaps you didn't spot it but Delaney was rested after 50 minutes on top of the half time rest.

Juan, I am not going to get into a "quote-a-thon" with you, they become boring and derail a thread. I am also not in need of a lecture on the sport and its tactics, 30 years of playing watching and coaching tells me more about this sport than you ever could. We clearly have differing views over the coach and his approach, yours is blind loyalty which ties in nicely with McDermotts military background (perhaps you also come from the military this would support your blind faith approach), my approach otoh is more balanced even if you choose not to see it.

I'm no longer going to debate with you if you can't understand such s simple concept as not being able to be in the right place in a defensive line because you are knackered. God help anyone who ever worked or played under your leadership...

It's impossible to know whether Walters would have made any difference. He may have. Equally, he may have worsened the lack of cohesion in our defensive line. I can understand where those who say Delaney lucked f****d are coming from though; he looked that way to me too. Don't know how many carries he made but a 33 year old making 50 tackles would ideally not be making many.

I can't see walters making a difference on his ability but giving others such as ablett a ten minute rest would have made a massive difference.

Wasn't Ian Kirke's entire function in life over 8 years to give Jamie Peacock a short rest?

Cant remember him doing much when he was on the field, but the overall plan seemed to work.

Surely even such a contribution helps the overall plan more than an unused sub would, who contributes the sum total of nothing.

Just saying.

Delaney's 29 not 33.

After two key losses with players looking very knackered and others out long term and its fair to say a few players carrying or receiving injuries during the game it's not surprising .
Nor was McDermott once again not using a sub despite all of the above, ignoring the similarities from last year and continuing to flog players for long minutes .

Would Walters have made a difference ? Who knows. Would he have shared the workload and given some players a rest? Undoubtedly .

I think injuries have stopped us rotating and resting players towards the key part of the season and the CCF really needs moving out of the S8's.
They might play long minutes and put in big tackle counts but to expect them to fully fit, healthy and not mentally fatigued at this point ,never mind the floggings all season is barmy.

The last three games we seem to have gone behind by a few scores quite early, the players look fatigued / unenthusiastic from the get go, defence is fragile at best and we end up hoping for a magic / miracle play to get us back in to level pegging on the scoreboard .

The game against Hudds is massive . They will be full if confidence, at home and able to cause a big upset and finish as high as possible.
We have lost three on the trot like last year, it's must win if we want the LLS, still don't have a consistent/ good plan for the hooker position and I still think half of our forwards look shot, injured or exhausted .

I can understand why you do not wish to be reminded of what you said but I will remind you that you personally invited me to provide an argument against Walters making a difference. This I have done based on my knowledge gained over 57 years experience of playing, coaching, managing and watching.

I thought this is a forum for debating different opinions rather than a place where you only wish to debate with those that share your opinion or get upset when your opinions are challenged with alternative views. I do not expect everyone to agree with my opinions so why do you expect me to blindly agree with yours.

I have put up fair and reasoned points as to why it would not have made any difference to the result by leaving Walters on the bench. You chose to pick on Delaney as "busted for as long as I can remember" and was critical of the coach not giving him "a break of 20 minutes". Yet he was not at fault for any of the first 3 tries in the first half. Delaney did miss a tackle that led to their 4th try (but so did Ablett, Hall and Hardaker) but that was just after he had had a 15/20 minute half time break and 5 minutes later he was interchanged with Singleton. So why was the coach wrong regarding Delaney?

You flatter yourself on having a balanced approach I have seen little of it in your ongoing critique of the coach over the years which has been one sided. Because I disagree with your criticisms does not mean I have blind loyalty to the coach or any Military background either.

If you have coaching/team management experience then you should be aware of the many and various decisions that are not always obvious from the touchline. You also should know what your players are capable of and who are the ones you can rely on most to fulfill the game plan. All players make mistakes and can get tired and some allowances should be made for the better performers and for the coaches.

In Ablett's case I can agree with you but there would be a risk in what Walters would let in, in those 10 minutes

what can I say? He convinced me.

Well, the full blooded bashing style he has and the way he has been flogged down the last few years his body is more than likely akin to someone in their mid 30s.I certainly wouldn't expect Delaney to play more than a couple more seasons at this level if he continues in the same style.

www.superleague.co.uk/report/11957 Stats from the game...

www.superleague.co.uk/report/11957 Stats from the game...

That's a lot of tackling we did. Watkins with 39 as well. The effect of having to hide your extra half on the field

Yep.

Watching the game on Thursday really brought it into view for me as to why McDermott had used an extra forward with Sinfield at hooker in the absence of Aiton. I couldn't really see why before but it's obviously to try and compensate for the absence of a mobile tackling machine in the middle.

And we really missed that v Cas. Had we had that mobile tackler in the middle of the pitch I think a couple of their breaks wouldn't have taken place.

I also wonder if our pack is a bit too big now? Leuluai, Garbutt, Peacock & Cuthbertson are all huge blokes, add in Delaney who isn't particularly nimble and Ablett who can, at times, appear a tad flat-footed in defence and it shouldn't be much of a surprise that teams are finding holes in our middle defence when we've no hooker to fill up some of the gaps.
We're probably feeling the combined effects of Aiton plus a few of our more mobile second rowers out at the same time.

S Ward is quite mobile and Keinhorst is when he plays. our issue is age/knackered IMO. Next year Peacock and Kylie will be gone and players much younger will take their place. JJB will be out most of the year but Delaney will have a long rest over the off season and S Ward might benefit from being in the England squad (if not the team) too.

What we need to do is decide what to do with Keinhorst. with an ageing back row I would like to see them try but a bit of size on him and play him there over Achurch,as back up/rest stops for the above first choice players.

Would personally prefer keinhorst to stay as is. He is a utility player and offers cover in forwards and backs. Would like to see Minchella used as back up SR. Always been impressed with him. Also baldwinson offers cover at 13. Agree would have all 3 before achurch

He would still be able to cover centre,I'm sure.

It's always dangerous trying to bulk players up look at Walters we have bulked him up to the point he can't even play 2nd row

indded. he's so big he couldn't get off the bench on thursday

I remember start of year, and wasn't they trying to develop Minchella into an hooker? Could he be a good bench option, back up hooker? Can do backrow and that role as needed. Therefore you get the backup we don't have this year, but with the option of also playing other roles in the pack.

I can't see it myself

How did Minchella go on at London?

It went well for him, getting experience playing first team rugby. He played loose forward most games, couple at second row and one at stand off