Still missing Paul King badly.

Its also about how many defenders it takes to bring the bigger forwards down and the wrestle on the floor. Fatigue sets in quicker then.



Also look how some of these bigger forwards defend in the middle.

Hendo is a trier, but as you can see I am not his biggest fan. He tries hard but I'm sure given a little more time so too could the likes of Gledhill & Annakin etc... I would have had Hendo on the bench today but would have also liked to have seen Gledhill or Annakin over Veivers.



I grant you Gledhill & Annakin are not ready yet but that said, my point is if the likes of Annakin & Gledhill can't make the 17 due to someone like Hendo stopping them stepping in and getting a go and some SL experience then that is what upsets me has a fan. Rumour already has it some of our youngsters are getting upset at getting continuously overlooked.



Build for the future and give youth a chance or continue to select players like Hendo. I know what I'd do.



For the money were paying Hendo his wages would contribute massively to youth development within the club in a time where we really need to start planning throughout the club with this in mind. Hendo, Tony & J Smith IMHO should all be shown the door and let us build for the future, build British!



Agreed re game changed comment. Said the same on another thread elsewhere.



Looking forward to the next game already...

[=#FF00FF:17hwtxt8quote="cool4kats":17hwtxt8what are you talking about mate hendo plays prop better than either gledhill or annakin like both of the lads but gledhill gets knocked back in nearly every colision not got the power or the strenght needs more time so dose annakin dont thnik the bench made much diffrance today:17hwtxt8.



But the point this season of rebuilding is to give these sort of players time and experience.



You see Gledhill very different to me.



People keep going on about the missed touch, to me the game was lost in the first half, we just did not score enough points with the possesion we had.



I can't understand what benefit a full back on the bench is to team.

Gledhill or Annakin should have played instead of Veivers i think, and Wildie should have been given more time on the field than he did. What is all this about trying to protect Gledhill? This was said last year and this. Whenever i have seen him he has gone well. Earlier on this season didnt he not play a u21s game thursday and backed up again sunday and did ok. When i have seen him it is not like he is getting banjoed every time he takes a ball up and is work rate is very good. Confusing.

I really hate having a go at JK and do normally defend him. However I have to agree with the general sentiment on here.



I don't think JK gets it wrong because he doesn't understand modern coaching methods, to even suggest that is silly. He clearly does this on purpose and clearly has a plan. Vievers was not a forced selection. Problem is absolutely no one gets it except JK.



I can only conclude Kear is being a smarty pants and actually believes his own legend.



JK give your head a shake, yes you know far more than anyone who posts on here and I mean anyone but you're not god and you can't change the laws of nature. There is no way that a young inexperienced lightweight FB on the bench is a good idea. Gledhill and Anakin may not be a great deal better as they too are young inexperienced and lightweight but at least they play in the positions that normally inhabit the subs bench.



I would hate to see JK sacked but frankly he's sacking himself with these selections and that would be a shame.

Saturday and Sunday not Thursday and Sunday!

Stand corrected. So Ben G was ok to back up and play the day after in that situation, but not ok to do it after playing this Thursday did he not? He is either ready or he isnt. I think either Ben or Annakin would have given more than Veivers off the bench yesterday. It was like playing with only 3 subs!! Confusing!!!

My only conclusion is that when Vievers was stepped down JK did the right thing and explained to him that it was for the good of his development and that he would be back within a couple of games.



That then makes it difficult for JK not to pick him in some capacity sooner rather than later because not picking him means JK loses some credibility and stepping the next youngster down becomes more difficult.



Man management is a difficult balancing act and often calls for compromises between what is right for the team and what is right for the individual. One way round the issue is to use the layers of coaches to inform players of decisions and to then move the responsibility for communication up the pecking order to deliver more weighty news.



For eg. Paul Broadbent could have explained to Vievers why he was being rested and when the time to play him came and he was not going to be picked then JK takes time out to explain the reasons. The result is Vievers is disappointed not to be back in the team but feels better about it because the head coach has taken time to explain it one to one.



If you're not set up to do this from the Outset it's hard to implement at a later stage but I would think JKs been around long enough to have this sort of tiered man management in place.



Of course the other option is to just tell the player to 'man up' or even completely ignore the players thought and feelings but that eventually leads to discontented factions growing in the dressing room

What happens in a couple of weeks when Matt B is fit, do we have two fullbacks on the bench?

Kick-offs (again), anyone?

Brent Webb really struggled didn't he?



I suggest we just continue with the pressure kick offs to him for the return game at Headingley.