Re: salford : Mon Apr 16, 2018 6:43 pm  

There were differences between Gaskell and Brierley. One was a ex super league player who had gone down to championship " for whatever reason" The other was a Championship player who scored tries for fun with ambition to be a superleague player .

One was moved on with the reason given as " he didn't suit our style " That's true , He backed up all the time, 99% of the time to no avail because that's not " our style " he very rarely got an offload but when he did he converted most of them, He had more to do with our survival than most, It never dawned on anyone to change "our style " from the drudgery to utilise him and score some tries.

Gaskell fits us better " as we are witnessing" and will in all likelihood be with us for a long time.

Re: salford : Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:05 pm  

Jo Jumbuck wrote:

There were differences between Gaskell and Brierley. One was a ex super league player who had gone down to championship " for whatever reason" The other was a Championship player who scored tries for fun with ambition to be a superleague player .

One was moved on with the reason given as " he didn't suit our style " That's true , He backed up all the time, 99% of the time to no avail because that's not " our style " he very rarely got an offload but when he did he converted most of them, He had more to do with our survival than most, It never dawned on anyone to change "our style " from the drudgery to utilise him and score some tries.

Gaskell fits us better " as we are witnessing" and will in all likelihood be with us for a long time.

Not true, he was moved on because he was told what aspects of his game he needed to improve, he disagreed and thought he was already the best and refused to work on stuff, or at least that 's what i am led to believe.

Re: salford : Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:28 pm  

...........no different from a lot of the present squad then- it would appear from recent results?

Re: salford : Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:30 am  

Alan Cargill wrote:

Not true, he was moved on because he was told what aspects of his game he needed to improve, he disagreed and thought he was already the best and refused to work on stuff, or at least that 's what i am led to believe.

Fair enough i was just quoting what was said at the time, but i couldn't argue it.

He may have "wrongly" thought he was already the best, but he was certainly better than anyone else we had at the time or now, same with Ridyard.
Still , Water under the bridge eh, much better to stay in the comfort zone with our tried and tested style.

Re: salford : Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:38 pm  

i think brierley was seen as broughs successor

was brierley ever going to have a chance with brough still around!?!

rankin and gaskell have both felt the rath of broughs gob even if they dare try anything themselves

Re: salford : Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:04 pm  

GIANTSRL wrote:

i think brierley was seen as broughs successor

was brierley ever going to have a chance with brough still around!?!

rankin and gaskell have both felt the rath of broughs gob even if they dare try anything themselves

So the coach should have dropped him, and if he didn't have the bottle " or authority" then he wasn't the coach we need.

Re: salford : Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:00 am  

beat wakey lastnight...

not as many injuries... they have a proper conditioner like brown... when he left thats when our injuries went up!