thats because i am an AMATEUR poster

That's what I've been wondering. The only missing ingredient is, of course, the magic wand that all experienced SuperLeague coaches own.
This allows them to transform any side into a top team, attracting the best players in the world, and all for peanuts.

Y'know, pointless hyperbole is equally counter-productive on both sides of an argument.

www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Marc-Sne ... story.html Well that's it, it's officially out now it was the most points we have ever conceded in a second half at home in our history! In fact I think its the most we have ever conceded in a second half anywhere. One for the 150th Celebration boys!!

www.hulldailymail.co.uk/Marc-Sne ... story.html Well that's it, it's officially out now it was the most points we have ever conceded in a second half at home in our history! In fact I think its the most we have ever conceded in a second half anywhere. One for the 150th Celebration boys!!

Its deja vu all over again. Poor performance = players in the HDM saying we'll put it right. Looks like Sneyd and Pryce are the fall guys this season.

Club antagonist (for mentioning the HDM)

If it were pointless, then you might have been right.

It was pointless. Nobody - not even the usual suspects - is suggesting that a new coach would have a 'magic wand' that would transform us into a top team with top players for 'peanuts'.

Unless, of course, you can quote someone saying that?

(apart from Blacklock) its always our half backs who are the fall guys.

People have been claiming for years that new half backs would transform us whereas anyone who knows the game could see that our major problems lie in a lack of structure to our attack, no one running decent lines, no dummy runners creating confusion and options, no backing up of the man with the ball (Oh to make a break and have 3 or 4 players on that man's shoulder as we saw leeds doing time and again on Thursday). Add in a serious lack of pace in the back line and a set of forwards who struggle to get us on the front foot and no wonder we're 2nd lowest points scorers in SL. The best half backs in the world need something around them to be effective. Anyone know if it's our former prop or our failed SL hooker who is in charge of coaching the attack?

Hard to argue with this, we just don't create openings, we either barge over or look to get on the end of a kick.

Spot on post
You have to ask why even a team like HKR can open the opposition up so regularly with ball in hand when we regularly fail to score from an attack in the opposition 20 even after several repeat sets.
The above post says it all for me.

I've said for this for years. If everyone knows their roles to the letter and you've got everyone running in the right places, then putting the passes out is the easy bit. I could do it.

What I was hoping however was that a couple of more experienced halves might be able to have more influence on the way we attacked. With regards to the kind of things we worked on in training etc. So far we seem just as disjointed as ever.

What I was hoping was that new halfs would have more clue than the 2 coaches but still to see much evidence

That's kind of what I meant. You just put it more bluntly than I did.

Said for the last few years we've failed to compensate for quality personnel in the halves through structure and executing the basics well in organised fashion. Our width at times looks better but fails to deliver because we've no runners or shape.

Slightly unfair to Sneyd and in particular Pryce. We're seeing a lot more attempted creativity from the pair of them than from our halves of recent years, but the lack of options being offered by their team-mates borders on the criminal. There's only so much they can do in that regard.

And it's not just the halves that are suffering. We have a number of players who have a good offload game and nobody is following them around waiting for the ball to pop up.

This is the kind of thing I lay squarely at the door of the coaching staff.

Have to agree with these 2 posts. It's still early in the season and hopefully we'll see change, but my concern for a few years now has been that we seem to want our halves to do too much of the coaches' jobs for them.

Can't blame anyone.. because there isnt anyone..... AFAIK

I heard we tried to sign Cooke as attack coach,also Monaghan as attack coach.. both deals fell through..

Also.. What coaching experience do the coaching team have???-Zero

Interesting that Castleford's assistant coaches Orr & Sheridan(both ex halfbacks) have signed contract extensions...

IF Adam Pearson is serious about taking this club to a higher level. I would bring in Brian Smith for 6 weeks, to do a 'root and branch' review in where the coaching areas can be improved...(as Salford have done with Sheens)

But.. would AP implement Smith's recommendations???

I fully agree. It shouldn't be down to the halfs, the players should be drilled in what they need to do and the halfs merely call and execute the plays.

Cas have 3 former half backs on their coaching staff and it shows

Our Coaching set up is to inexperienced.
We need a DOR who could help and advise Radford. Also the said man would be able to attract talent .
All pie in the sky , utopian thinking I know !!

Schofields column was interesting reading today

Backing up is an in built thing, sorry to say none of our backs have that instinct in them (nor the pace). Watch our 19's, every time a break is made you can guarantee Lancaster, Logan, HTW etc. are all flooding through in support. They sniff opportunities.
I want Lancaster in the team, always have, and for what the bin man does I don't see any reason why he can't do it from centre and bin Yeaman off.
Another problem is Shaul, absolutely terrible 'link man' got no passing ability at all. We either swap him for Rankin (who may not be quite as safe under the high ball) or we go back to playing Westerman at 1st receiver, push our halves a little wider and use Shaul as an option runner. Westerman (obviously aware he's behind the others due to England commitments) has been below par because his role has changed, again!

I'd go for option b), please. Plays to the strengths of more players IMO, and with a still-struggling attack I don't think it's a good idea to add a fullback who can be iffy under kicks to our defence.

You have one!