Haha..always been a fan of Hardaker (as I'm sure you know)...but his achilles heel was always his apparent relative inability to pass (especially to the left) and chime into the line. In the Cas team he now looks the complete FB defensively and offensively.

Forget 2016. Before then he passed the ball plenty for Leeds.

I'm not buying any of this about him suddenly becoming a much better player after a few weeks at bloody Cas!


I'm sure he'll improve, just like he'd have improved at Leeds had he not had his off field problems last year.

Welcome back by the way!

Yeah he'd have improved at Leeds this season for sure: based on the progress made by Sutcliffe, Golding, Ward et all that's patently obvious

(thanks for the welcome)

Just watch his passing game the improvement is blatant as is Powells Coaching compared to Mc.D.

Quite agree, now he is passing early and before contact far more.

Maybe going to Australia helped his passing game but I would credit playing with Luke gayle

To be fair, wrt Hardaker & comparisons with his time at Leeds, we should totally discount 2016 from our deliberations. He was a mess last year.

However, it is valid to compare him now to pre-2016. Whilst at Leeds he excelled in defence and broken field running. I have NEVER seen him CONSISTENTLY (three games in a row) look so effective as a link in the line with beautifully-timed passes to his winger/other. One can only conclude that he is: a) being coached to bring this skill to his game, or b) the style of play that Powell has Cas playing has encouraged this skill to manifest itself.

If the answer is a), then BMD is a numpty (5 or 6 years to coach the skill, compared to one off-season for Powell), if b), then BMD is a numpty (with our set of backs the past few years).

My guess is it is more b) than a). Why, for instance, do we persist in an incredibly flat attacking line (I understand why for runners near the ruck, but not out wide)? Why are we not coached to pass out wide early in the tackle count/in our own half every now & then? Anyone who has played/watched long enough know that this is when you are most likely to find gaps/space to run.

powell said he has done loads of work with hardaker, as they wanted him to try to replicate dorn.
as for our attack we have none. no dummy runners, nobody running through gaps, not that our halves can put people through gaps, and no shape.
I would conclude both your options are right

It IS like groundhog day. This IS "cut and paste" 2016 all over again.

After reading the drivel you've been posting since your return, I completely agree.

...at least I'm not the one now championing moving Ryan Hall into the 2nd row/centre. I used to believe that would be a good move in my younger naieve days, but not now FFS

Yes, very well done on only being a partial fool these days and not the total fool of yesteryear

Cant see Watkins hanging around myself

I'd like to add a 'C' option...

c) We're coached by a former forward.

Cas are coached by a team of former backs and, my word, does it show on the field. Our flat attack, limited planned moves, hopeless 6th tackle options and embarrassing inability to create anything from 10 yards out are all the hallmarks of a former lumbering forward being in charge.

I'd argue that the once exciting, flair-ridden St Helens are suffering from the same problem. If Kallum was to move to Cas, the quality ball, space and gaps they create would make him a world-beater.

I may be talking out of my 'arris, of course, but I haven't been this frustrated by the club since Dean Lance came and did his damage.

Whilst I understand the debate about too many former forwards coaching in the league.......it's up to those guys who were former halves or back to get themselves good gigs. Take Powell away and current & recent SL history doesn't bode well for former HB's coaching records.

Talking about HB's getting gigs in SL, people talk about our SL clubs sniffing around Powell.....what about Orr and Sheridan? If a vacancy comes up why doesn't a club consider them if they're considered to be a key part of Cas' play? Aussies assistant are always mentioned but not these two.

The assistant coaches in Australia have a bigger role - they coach the a team in a proper competition. Their job is to get the junior players into the first by improving them. The coach is looking to pass on his knowledge and get the assistant ready for the top job e.g. Bennett on Bellamy, Bellamy on Kidwell etc. Maguire on Wane its a different mentality

Remind me what does Barry Eaton do - carry the balls on to the training field. There isn't an assistant in SL who is mentored to take over the top job - do you think Brian is grooming Eaton for a head coaches role?

I'm not talking about Eaton though am I. I'm talking about two assistants at the form team over here who are getting rave reviews for their style.

you would think that a big club wouldn't be looking at them and rightly so. let them prove themselves first at a championship club, like powell did

The point made in the first paragraph is as applicable to Orr and Sheridan as it is to Eaton. Head coaches in SL do not prepare their assistants to take on head coaches jobs in SL in the NRL they prepare them to take on head coaches roles at other NRL clubs

I think you're over simplifying it - some NRL clubs have their Head Coach as a leader of the organisation, managing all team affairs and the strategy, whilst empowering their assistants to do the day to day coaching and implementation of the plans (Brisbane and Melbourne), and this absolutely does prepare the assistants for bigger roles - but that approach is not taken en mass.
Who are the assistants being groomed at the Eels, Warriors, Titans, Tigers, Raiders, Knights, Manly, Dragons etc? Even at the Sharks where Steve Price (ex Dragons head coach) is assistant, Flanno is still very much a hands on head coach, and they're certainly not 'grooming' Price.

Just because Bennet and Bellamy produce lots of head coaches from their set up, it doesn't mean all NRL clubs are doing this purposely - they're looking after their own interests first!

Clearly though, the NRL clubs have a bigger back room staff and use their assistants better then we generally do over here - and certainly better than leeds do.

At Manly was Toovey the assistant to Haslam?

Same one who now manages Bradford? Isn't that that the kind of level an assistant like Eaton might eventually aspire to? Or have I missed your point?

Once upon a time yes. Though again, I'd suggest that was more circumstance than a deliberate ploy to groom an assistant - Toovey had played there his whole career and moved into coaching. I think the fact Manly haven't 'groomed' a replacement since Hasler left (who were the assistants under Toovey and now Barrett?) suggests it's not a club ethos, and Hasler has been very much the top dog at the Bulldogs without grooming an assistant (the club actually forced him to change his backroom staff as they didn't like how much power he had), so that suggests it's not a Hasler thing either.

Most top coaches will have been an assistant at some point - most clubs are not running their organisation with the assistants actually being the main day to day coaches.

However, all that said, good assistant coaches who play a big part in the teams development are a vital part of the organisation in my eyes.

My take on McD is that his assistants have actually been Sinfield and Peacock, both pretty much being player/coaches. I get the impression McD is an excellent 'leader' who empowers the team to make decisions and forge their own way - a proven leadership technique. However, that technique relies on the team having the required competence - when that competence is not there, more direct management and direction is required, and I'm not sure McD has that in his locker.

Sports teams are cyclical, sometimes you need a leader McD or Bluey style, sometimes you'll need an authoritarian dictator Wane style or a 'detail' man like Tony Smith, sometimes you'll need someone in the middle of these techniques. It all depends on the playing staff at that time, and you'll usually need to cycle between the different styles to keep things fresh - now is time for more direction and hands on management of the game plan. Personally, I'd like to see McD stay involved in a leadership capacity, overseeing all rugby management (all teams, the community game etc), but put proven tacticians in the head coaching positions of each team.

The same one that many on here are suggesting would be a good replacement for McDermott - nowt as queer as folk