St Hilaire's comments are either made up by some scamp or he's seriously unable to fairly summarise our performance.

Salford's captain had reason for optimism "at 90-16 down I really thought the lads could get back in it but when Bradford scored to make it 96-16 the lads heads went down a bit". He went on to add "but I don't think we're far off blah blah blah..."

I was just thinking the same.

We do have the basis of a good squad, although recent games may have dictated that we do need a few additions.

If the new coach gets a bit of money to spend in pre-season we could have a good squad. We need Menzies & Langley signed up though for the new coach to work with.

In all honestly I'd let Sykes go - he's too inconsistent and with a better stand-off to partner Orford (if he's still here) we'd do better.

Kopzcak and Worrincy will definitely have to go imo and probably Reardon unless he gets his ar/se into gear.

Nero same as Sykes - if we can get someone better let him go.

I don't think this season is over yet, but we do need to stage our fightback for sometime over the next couple of weeks or it will be.

Kearney
Sheriffe
Platt
Nero or a new centre


Halley
New 6


Orford
Lynch
L'Estrange
Scruton
Langley
Whitehead
Menzies

Godwin
Hall
Sculthorpe
Rotation of youngsters ( Wigan have done something similar this season)

That would be a great team for a coach to work with providing he gets the money for a 6 and a centre.

He meant this season not as a club in general.

You're correct Ewwen, we need a centre, a stand off and IMO another prop forward.

For me and Ive said it a few times on here, but I think we should sign Craig Hall. This lad has so much promise, he's got skill, size and pace to go the distance, plus, he can kick goals. He's a bit dodgy in defence, but he's young enough to be coached to defend correctly by a coach that can, Agar can't do it. I'd be happy with Platt on the opposite centre, but Chris Nero poses absolutley no danger to anybody. He's flat footed, no pace and agility and just as dodgy in defence.

We desperatley need a stand off. I think Ratchford would be a good option if we could get hold of him, he's a skillful player and a good kicker out of hand, something that we are lacking.

Lastly, and I've mentioned him before aswell is Scarsbrook, we need a fit mobile prop forward that can crash the ball up for long periods relentlesly whilst being agile enough to be a strong defender at the edge of the ruck, we don't need a Feka, a big lump that is blowing out of their backside after 10 mins, we've already got one of those in average man Glenn Hall. And we need somebody to provide some aggression and impact because neither Hall or Kopczak are capable of it. We need an enforcer aswell.

Surley we'd be able to afford 3 young players, none of them being real stars, but all of them having losts of potential.

Richard Moore always looked the part for me, aggressive, a bit agile, a bit of pace and a good offload...

I liked Moore when he first got into our team, he did look good. He does have those attributes, he's a bit of a flat track bully though and I'm not sure he's the man to stand up when the going gets tough, he only seems to go after players he can dominate.

However, he would be a big improvement coming off the bench instead of Hall and Kop though.

I reckon in order of priority it would be Stand-off, centre, prop tbh.

I agree about Ratchford, real potential, and without sounding arrogant would he turn down a move to Bradford? Matty Smith would be another one I'd take.

Craig Hall does have all the attributes, but he still never seems to live up to the potential. A bit like K Pryce but on a lower scale.

With the props, I would get rid of Kopzcak - the back end of last season looked promising but now he's gone back to before and I can't see him doing anything worthy of an extension. I reckon there'd be too much interst in LMS so we'd be outbid, but what about Hargreaves at saints - when is he out of contract?

Yeah I'd probs agree with that, although a prop is very important.

I hate to nick all other teams youngsters, but we've got to get our own house sorted out before we worry about any body else.

Hall has been the scapegoat at Hull, the thing is he's only a youngster and theyve been harsh on him at times. With the right coaching Hall will be a star, same as Pryce will, I'd take Pryce back in a shot aswell.

I'm not a Kopczak fan really, but he'd be OK for a squad man at a squad mans price,. He's got time on his side though but he doesnt want to leave it much longer to start making a big improvement. Back end of 2008 he was starting to look good, he had a bit of bulk on him and looked similar in shape to big Joe, he's just a beanpole now though and I dont think it does him any favours.

Why would we be outbid? We're not spending the full salary cap, and it all depends what role's he's offered by whatever team's bid for him and how valuable he's seen to other clubs.

Cos Wigan and Leeds are interested.

I'd take Pryce back too - he's scoring tries for fun atm. A real proven classy centre is what we've been lacking since Shonny though. Platt is becoming very good, hopefully next season he'll develop some classy centre plays aswell. He's solid defensively and he runs the ball in like a train sometimes, but he's not the best for setting up his winger. But tbf he's only had half a season at centre.

Cos Wigan and Leeds are interested.

I'd take Pryce back too - he's scoring tries for fun atm. A real proven classy centre is what we've been lacking since Shonny though. Platt is becoming very good, hopefully next season he'll develop some classy centre plays aswell. He's solid defensively and he runs the ball in like a train sometimes, but he's not the best for setting up his winger. But tbf he's only had half a season at centre.

It doesn't matter who's interested. They might not put as much value on him as we do. Then again they might, it all depends who wants him the most and how much they are willing to offer the lad.

If they are going to mark him down as a top transfer target and so do we then we might not be able to live with them, but at the end of the day everybody is allowed to spend the same amount of pennies.

We were just awful today, and in many areas I'm afraid that there seemed to be a lack of committment. Often the defence was all over the place, but what disappointed me more was when we were on their line for what seemed like 50 tackles, yet never looked even troublesome to their defence. And that is hardly because Crusaders have an impregnable defence. At that stage of the game, and when we got back to within 10, we were starting to have the better of things, and if we had scored then, the momentum would likely have stayed with us, but we not only never looked like scoring, we let them out of jail repeatedly, and then repeatedly took poor options, dropped off tackles, kicked abysmally, and ended up looking a ragged and totally piszed off shambles.

Not helped by yet another abomination of a VR decision (what happens to benefit of the doubt to the attack when we play?) and not helped by pulling into touch being allowed against us. Both were big momentum shifting decisions and lord knows we needed all the help we could get in that department. But whilst you never know, the truth is we were so poor that they don't even deserve any suggestion that these incidents played a significant part. If we had lost narrowly maybe, but let's face it we were whupped by the whipping boys.

And McNamara didn't look any happier, or any more animated than the body language of his players. From last week and this, taken together it looks for all the world just like a club with some serious trouble in the camp. It just looks unrecogniseable from the team that did so well against Leeds and Wire, and took my mind back to the dark days early last season when players were admitting in the press that not all of them were putting it all in.

If they were, god help us. Pure speculation, but is there strife in the camp about Orford I wonder?

Looking at the youngsters, Wardle looks ready to keep a place in the squad, but neither Crossley nor Addy do. It was as 'easy' a game as there is to play in, but they didn't do much at all, and with Kopczak struggling, we were constantly driven back and losing the collision.

That's been on my mind too. If the rumours are true and he wants out, are the other lads unhappy by this and assuming Orford is on a good wage, could be another factor.

Again pure speculation, but I do wonder...........

Bradfords first try was from a "very" flat pass, could easily have been pulled back. Whiteheads try could have gone either way,two Bradford players in tackle, on another day that could have been deemed a steal. Bentham performace was a lot better than Smiths on Friday. don't forget the Crusaders were missing squad numbers 6,7 and 13 from their 17. On a more positive note, Whitehead looks a good prospect.

No more listenable than the usual suspects taking all the positives and letting us know that there is "always next week" I guess?

Why did we lose? A combination of the following I suspect....

1. Abysmal back line - made worse by Kearney playing out of position.
2. Complete lack of effort.
3. The continued Orford no show.
4. Inept coaching (and I see McNamara left St Hilaire to carry the can at this weeks joke after-match interview.)
5. Blatant lack of interest.
6. Players who cannot even do the basics correctly.

It is all well and good going on about Langley but would he have made the difference out there today? Not on his own he wouldn't.

McNamara has assembled a shocking squad and has to carry the can. Not that his apologists would ever accept that. YES we do not have a lot of money, but the bottom line is that the money has not been well spent.

one of the worst bulls performances ive seen.players just seem to be going through motions and seems to ba a defo lack of passion at mo.just makes you wonder if reports orford is back in oz or wanting to go back home are true?think also the fact the players dont know who the new coach is gonna be is killin us as well .think board need to get new coach sorted by end of month

All good suggestions there. Hall, I'm not sure what more he needs to do to fit in at Hull. Ratchford, I said on here 2 or 3 years ago that you should go for him; unfortunatley he has made the GB/England squad since, so might be a bit choosier. LMS, why would he want to leave the comfort of London for Bradford? If McD comes then a vague possibility at best.

That actually annoyed me given that McNamara was there giving out orders. He shouldn't have been there full stop. It's pretty clear as a coach you can't do both.

As far as the motivation of the playing staff and the coaching staff's reluctance to through young players in (in case it's bad for their development) and continually move everyone around out of position goes. Sam Tomkins after scoring four for England backed up to play in Wigan's thumping of Wakefield yesterday. Makes you think doesn't it? IMO if you are good enough you are old enough. I can't see the benefit of playing musical chairs every week.

You forgot number 7. Absolutely no kicking game whether Orford kicks or not. Is Sykes able to kick the ball shorter than the dead ball line?

There is a bit in this thread about who we should sign or not sign, or who we should release etc..

What worries me is that we are not utilising the players we have in our squad to their potential. Young Wardle last night, looked like a real centre. a player who can finish, and who has the ability to put someone else in. Why take him off and replace him with a second rower?

When Godwin came on we scored 16 unanswered points. We then take him off and concede nearly 30 points and score none.

address these in match tactical problems first.

So onto my opinions on which personel need looking at.

Reardon, Worrincy, Koppy, sykes. all have 2 things in common. they are cheap, and home grown. simple as. who would be as cheap as them and better? well at prop, CRossley is better than eother Koppy or Worr. or at least shopwed it last night, his only opportunity so far!

Sykes is one good, three bad in terms of games. He is not a stand off, nor a centre. He is a full back. play him there if you can. problem is Kearney, Platt and Reardon are all better fullbacks than him. so its not the player that is at fault but the long term recruitment. that lays at the door of McNamara and Hood. notn having money is one thing, but wasting what money you have employing 5 fullbacks, and expecting them to become different players is plain foolish.

Halley is at best a squad player. he should not be first choice in any team with top 8 ambitions.

Hall is a major disappointment. Perhaps that money could be better used eleshwhere?

BUT WHO IS CHEAPER AND AVAILABLE AND BETTER?

we need a coach who can model a below average squad and make a silk prse out of a sow's ear. Either that, or noe who has so many contacts that he can bring in players who are high quality andplay for peanuts.

and dont get me started on Worrincy.

The fact that he wasnt one of our worst players last night tells you all that you need to know about how bad we were.

my fear is that Beaver is getting peeved at the idiots around him, and that he might retire rather than play with this shower. God i hope not!

What the hell is going on at this club?

What a difference a month makes. 14 May, we'd just beaten Wakefield and were fourth in the league.

Since then we've become Super League's cannon fodder.

Abysmal.

I'd like Messrs Hood and McNamara to tell us why we should bother turning up on Saturday night.

Unfortunately, not many will. It has been back to the seeming "lack of effort" performances at the depth of last year's slump, and the one thing to dissuade walk up fans is if they perceive that the team isn't trying.

On coaching though, do you give credit / debit to the coach on the day, or do you not? Seemingly yes, as performances as recent as Warrington indicate. So can I just point out that we were coached for this match by St. Hilaire. The team that McNamara coached this week went pretty well.

There's a lot of upset being spouted (and rightly so), however don't get too upset by it all. We were bound to have this run of defeats and poor form once we got a few injuries.

Add into this all the uncertainty around the coach and many players being out of contract it's bound to have an effect on the place.

A few things I feel would help the feel of the place include:

1. We need to get the new man in charge for next season named at the very least. If he can come in straight away, all the better.

2. Sort out the contracts of the players who the new man wants to keep. Probably only Langley and Menzies are certainties of players out of contract who we would like to stay. Others out of contract need to be told that they are playing for their future at the club and see who steps up over the next few months.

3. If / when we get everyone fit - do we try to lay down some combinations for next year? For example, could Orford and Southernwood provide a partnership at half-back? I don't buy into SO and SH being totally different positions in the modern game. We could potentialy have two creative players in the halves then? What we saw yesterday suggests that Sykes and Kearney are not the guys to break defences with clever kicks or great passes.

4. If messers Reardon, Sherrife, Nero etc are going to be given the boot, can we play players like Wardle more regularly? I appreciate that it is a big step up for the lads, given that, for example, Wardle is only 18 and playing every week will be difficult to adapt to. However, if we knew we were getting these lads primed to play a lot more next year I could take defeat more easily. At least these young lads show pride and passion!

5. If we are light on numbers (and experience), can we get a loan player in? I know we've failed recently in this aspect, but surely there are other players out there who we may be able to get in? Could we not try get a player in on a short-term deal similar to the Rinaldi one?

6. Lets play players - especially the young lads - in their best position. Kearney has looked a revelation at FB, Halley couldn't tackle a 3 year old as the last line of defence and Reardon's body just isn't up to SL any longer. Addey doesn't seem to know where he's supposed to be playing which can't be good for him and the odd player, like Whitehead could do with a rest.

When we get most players back we should pick up the required wins to make the 8. There is a bit of a gap at the minute to 9th and all teams will still take points from one another to help this cause. We'll probably lose again at the weekend but after this we have 9 games left and 6 of those are against teams lower than us currently in the table.

It's those sort of in-match strategic decisions and the odd rotation/interchange policy that contributes to many thinking Macca's not up to the job. It's happened lots of times and been pivotal in some of our more infamous losses (taking off Lynch, Solomona and Newton in the play off game against Wigan and completely reversing the momentum).



This has also been a hallmark of his tenure, first it was back rowers and now fullbacks, everyone almost without exception said that Kearney was a fullback first and foremost, and he's looked far better playing in that position. We all know Reardon is a fullback and in the brief ten minutes he got the other week, he looked far more comfortable. He's been out of position so many times defensively on the wing Leon Cudjoe has had to put £20 a week away to buy him a Christmas present, just to return the favour.

If you have the match recorded just look at Beaver having to listen to St Hilaire during the half time talk, if he's not thinking 'I could do this better' he's an even better person than I already imagine. Frankly McNamara's show then no-show, leaving St Hilaire to carry the can smacks of very poor judgement.

Those are the worst problems for me. I can accept the limitations of players but too often it looks like the players don't want to be there.



I'm interested why you think Orford would make a difference but not Langley? Different positions I know but both are senior squad players and both have uncertainty surrounding their futures.