Board index ‹ Super League ‹ Leeds Rhinos - southstander.com ‹ Hanley Blasts Super League Standards

I agree with pretty much all of that. I think we not only need to completely rethink our national structure, but we also need to completely rethink our entire pathway
I think the time has come to take youth development away from our SL clubs, some of them clearly arent up to it, and the others have their priority as the first team, Leeds will produce the player Leeds want, not necessarily the best player. Thats not a criticism of them, its just acceptance of their priorities.

I think it is probably the time we looked at developing our youngsters centrally where making the players the best they can be is the priority over doing what is best for an individual club.

Which is fine, but the elite coaches will invariably go where they can make the best living - the professional game.

[Bullseye]

DHM wrote:

The irony of what Ellery says - and the point I pulled him up on, was that in 92 we got closest to beating them in a series mathematically since 1970 and never that close since (although I still think we were actually closer in 90 - but hey). And of course we know back then there was only one team in the competition...

This

Believe one of the greatest rugby players this country has produced or a load of overweight Leeds fans who rugby knowledge stretches to a game of tag rugby once a year

hmmmm

Saint77777 wrote:

Believe one of the greatest rugby players this country has produced or a load of overweight Leeds fans who rugby knowledge stretches to a game of tag rugby once a year

hmmmm

Yeah, because All these fat Leeds fans have actually disagreed with what Hanly said. Just because your a great player doesn't mean your excempt from talking 5hite! Look at Gary Schofield and Alex Murphy.

SmokeyTA wrote:

I agree with pretty much all of that. I think we not only need to completely rethink our national structure, but we also need to completely rethink our entire pathway
I think the time has come to take youth development away from our SL clubs, some of them clearly arent up to it, and the others have their priority as the first team, Leeds will produce the player Leeds want, not necessarily the best player. Thats not a criticism of them, its just acceptance of their priorities.

I think it is probably the time we looked at developing our youngsters centrally where making the players the best they can be is the priority over doing what is best for an individual club.

I'd agree to a point, in that many SL clubs youth development is poor, however I'd suggest the problem starts below that at grassroots level. Players simply aren't arriving at academy age with good enough basic skills. There are still too many coaches and teams where the pass it to the big kid strategy is prevalent.
I think we need to move to a system where kids play in smaller teams on smaller pitches with less space available for the big kid to run straight through and it might develop better passing and handling. Plus I'd like to see a change in the points system for youngsters. At primary school in York the mini league comp we played in gave 3 points for a try or 5 points if the ball was passed more than 3 times. It at least tried to encourage and reward passing the ball.
I think the SL clubs could do a lot more with a better coached influx of players to their academy.

...or play a lot more touch football at junior level, removing the edge the big lads have altogether?

Anyway, DHM is right. Its laughable that the best halfback SL has produced over the past 20 years was a player who 9 times out of 10 folded completely against the Aussies, because he simply didn't have the sort of disciplined game required at that level despite having all the skills. Also laughable that a centre like Yeaman, who is one of the worst passers of the ball I've seen in that position, is somehow England standard. Or that our own Hardaker can continue to be picked at centre for over half a season inside one of Sl's top wingers, and yet have no more idea how to get him the ball after half a season than after one game.

From what I've seen of our U20s they seem to be pretty well drilled TBH, but I think that the sport as a whole is playing long-term catch-up to make up for years of absolute neglect of junior development.

The other issue I'd add is psychological. Hammerings do occur in the NRL, but they're far rarer than SL. Compare and contrast Leeds' reaction against Wigan and Wire - in one game we never ever looked like trying to claw back, in the other we at least tried to stem the flow. Then last night I watched two NRL games which exemplify the difference between SL and NRL attitudes. Canterbury were 18-0 up against St george after about 20 minutes, scored tries just before and after halftime, and yet only won 28-20. Why? Because St george, whilst well-beaten, simply didn't throw the towel in at any stage, despite probably the worst first 30 minutes I've seen from an NRL side this year. NRL sides are EXPECTED to do that, and it happens more often than not. Then the Bronocs got beaten 12-0 by the Cowboys, with the first try not coming until about 65 minutes in, on the back of huge defence by both sides throughout.

The issue is, even the likes of Widnes, Broncos - and ourselves recently - very rarely show any kind of bottle as a team when we start to lose. Heads drop, body language sucks, and fans and players alike seem to take this as acceptable. It shouldn't be.

Yep you're right Brisbane I think a touch rugby comp should be a mandatory part of the amateur season. It doesn't half sharpen your passing & handling when you know you can't just barge over the line.
It also helps keep it enjoyable for some of the smaller, less physical or less confident players.

I was thinking on my way home from work yesterday pretty much what you said. When I was playing juniors we played on full size pitches which for most of the season were mud baths. This resulted in the tactics being 'give it to big Graham and let him run'. So the big guys were hailed as stars and the smaller guys with the skill were left watching. These big guys get signed but are no longer the big guys and can't back it up. Compare it to the nrl where forwards are happier handling the ball and it emphasises the difference. I'm all for amateur moving to summer and junior rugby playing on smaller pitches. The physical element still needs to be there but with more emphasis on skill. Just because the pitches are smaller, it doesn't mean the ball will be thrown around. You see it at the half time matches where the big kid still tries to run it through. There needs to be more structure in the coaching with the need to win played down and the development of skills prioritised. Less emphasis on playing particular positions and more on developing all skills

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

...or play a lot more touch football at junior level, removing the edge the big lads have altogether?

Anyway, DHM is right. Its laughable that the best halfback SL has produced over the past 20 years was a player who 9 times out of 10 folded completely against the Aussies, because he simply didn't have the sort of disciplined game required at that level despite having all the skills.

I was always baffled by that as well, especially when you think we had a pack consisting of Fielden, Farrell, Sculthorpe, Morley, Peacock and Cunningham or Newton - all in their prime. Then I read extracts from his book and it all became obvious. He could get away with being p!$$ed all week at SL level.

I coach U9 (now U10's) in Union and funnily enough the RFU is so worried about the fact thay players coming through at the moment are too focused on taking contact that they are changeing the entire game at minis level to encourage ball skills rather than contact. The tagline now is that rugby is an "evasion" sport not a contact sport. I don't know what League is like at that level but the game that we now are looking to adopt in Union from 6-12 is very different from the adult game.