Kruise Leeming

[V02]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

"Kruise has a rugby player's brain and he thinks, you contrast him to Paul McShane, his addition is exactly what Castleford need, and Leeds need Jarrod O'Connor"

Taken out of a wider comment by JJB and Barrie McDermott around how Smith wants a hooker who just passes to the halfbacks.

That is a comment by Barrie McDermott, a pundit and nothing else. Would you say McShane has no rugby players brain too? Bizarre.

[EastLondonMike]

Managed to catch a bit of the Matty Johns show after todays Cronulla/Canberra game, and Kruise Leeming got a mention (via a tongue in cheek email from an English fan asking if he'd be an option for the Roosters), with Bryan fletcher talking him up and saying he thought he was a decent player..

Not sure if/where he'd get a start in the NRL, but if he was going to go over and have a crack now would seem to be the best time to do so.

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, V02 said:

That is a comment by Barrie McDermott, a pundit and nothing else. Would you say McShane has no rugby players brain too? Bizarre.

Quite the opposite. McShane wouldn't work under Smith precisely because he has a rugby brain to not just pass and tackle.

[V02]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Quite the opposite. McShane wouldn't work under Smith precisely because he has a rugby brain to not just pass and tackle.

Does Danny Levi have a rugby brain? Does a rugby brain to you mean not knowing when to pass? 

[Tippytoe]

6 hours ago, V02 said:

It's a really weird school of thought you have that the hooker plays on his own rather than in combination with the other spine players. A dumbing down of a hookers duties is thinking he's the only one who can call a play and that he has no need to give the halves the ball at any point.

Can you show me which comment JJB made that said Rohan Smith doesn't want a hooker with a rugby brain?

It's not weird just common sense you're hooker gets his hands on the ball more than any other player,if as suggested by JJB and Mcdermot that Smith doesn't want his hooker to do anything other than pass and tackle then anyone can play 9 as illustrated by putting Bentley there thus dumbing down.

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, V02 said:

Does Danny Levi have a rugby brain? Does a rugby brain to you mean not knowing when to pass? 

It seems to Smith to mean, hooker doesn't matter, just pass the ball to the half backs.

That's fine, but I wouldn't want to play that position for him if it was my preferred role.

[Tommygilf]

57 minutes ago, Tippytoe said:

It's not weird just common sense you're hooker gets his hands on the ball more than any other player,if as suggested by JJB and Mcdermot that Smith doesn't want his hooker to do anything other than pass and tackle then anyone can play 9 as illustrated by putting Bentley there thus dumbing down.

Exactly. The hooking role is not one Smith seems to have a great respect for or expectations of.

[Chrispmartha]

You guys seem to be reading way too much out of something said by a pundit and creating your own narratives.

Edited March 19, 2023 by Chrispmartha

[Tippytoe]

13 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

You guys seem to be reading way too much out of something said by a pundit and creating your own narratives.

On the contrary just quoting pundits evaluation on conversations with Smith and actual facts.

[Tippytoe]

29 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Exactly. The hooking role is not one Smith seems to have a great respect for or expectations of.

It seems to be the case maybe another master stroke which flies in the face of other coaches who tend to go with two 9s per game. 

[Chrispmartha]

7 minutes ago, Tippytoe said:

It seems to be the case maybe another master stroke which flies in the face of other coaches who tend to go with two 9s per game. 

Smith has ran with two nines per game in most games.

[Chrispmartha]

12 minutes ago, Tippytoe said:

On the contrary just quoting pundits evaluation on conversations with Smith and actual facts.

Im not sure insinuating Smith doesn’t care about the hooking role is any where near close to a ‘fact’

[Tommygilf]

32 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

You guys seem to be reading way too much out of something said by a pundit and creating your own narratives.

You seem to be willfully ignoring what's in front of you

[Chrispmartha]

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

You seem to be willfully ignoring what's in front of you

Not really.

You are saying Smith doesn’t care about the hooking role, Id say that’s nonsense based on nothing other than you interpreting something that pundits have said.

Smith may want certain things from a starting number 9, doesn’t mean he doesn’t care about it.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Not really.

You are saying Smith doesn’t care about the hooking role, Id say that’s nonsense based on nothing other than you interpreting something that pundits have said.

Smith may want certain things from a starting number 9, doesn’t mean he doesn’t care about it.

I didn't say he didn't care. He evidently does. 

What I did say is that he seems to have no great expectations of the role. He doesn't want a game changing 9 or someone with flair in that position. Indeed it would seem that isn't a consideration in his tactical thought. 9 is there to tackle and pass to other players who then create things; and given the basic nature of those skills for an RL player a specialist in that role isn't necessary. That's probably why our 2 specialists have been allowed to go from last season, and played 2 back rowers there this year (and last for O'Connor).

Its against the grain, which goes with most of his style choices! I don't agree with it, I think it stunts us in attack and makes us more predictable, but that is undeniably how Smith wants us to set up tactically.

[Chrispmartha]

6 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I didn't say he didn't care. He evidently does. 

What I did say is that he seems to have no great expectations of the role. He doesn't want a game changing 9 or someone with flair in that position. Indeed it would seem that isn't a consideration in his tactical thought. 9 is there to tackle and pass to other players who then create things; and given the basic nature of those skills for an RL player a specialist in that role isn't necessary. That's probably why our 2 specialists have been allowed to go from last season, and played 2 back rowers there this year (and last for O'Connor).

Its against the grain, which goes with most of his style choices! I don't agree with it, I think it stunts us in attack and makes us more predictable, but that is undeniably how Smith wants us to set up tactically.

We’ll have to agree to disagree, I think both Dwyer and Leeming to some extent blunted our attack, Dwyer especially. Yes he might make a few exciting breaks but for most of the time he was s headless chicken leading to no attacking structures.

Leeming started the first two games this year, he was terrible in defence and took the wrong options a lot.

To be fair I don’t want Leeming to leave I think he is a good player but I do prefer OConner starting with Leeming off the bench.

Leeming seems to not want that.

[Tippytoe]

29 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Im not sure insinuating Smith doesn’t care about the hooking role is any where near close to a ‘fact’

You're misquoting me. I said dumbing down and the fact was playing a second row at hooker.

[sentoffagain2]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Exactly. The hooking role is not one Smith seems to have a great respect for or expectations of.

  James Robey proves that there is more to a hooker than just passing.

[Chrispmartha]

3 minutes ago, Tippytoe said:

You're misquoting me. I said dumbing down and the fact was playing a second row at hooker.

Got you and Tommy mixed up.

Apologies.

[Chrispmartha]

6 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

  James Robey proves that there is more to a hooker than just passing.

And also James Roby shows how important passing is - he is one of the best distributors in the game.

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

  James Robey proves that there is more to a hooker than just passing.

And the rest! Most hookers are far more versatile playmakers now and most coaches have them as their top players because they do the most on the pitch.

I can understand Smith's tactics, even if I don't agree with them. He doesn't value versatility in that role and wants a 1 dimensional aspect to that position. Its fine, but I can understand why a hooker with aspirations wouldn't want that.

[Tommygilf]

16 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree, I think both Dwyer and Leeming to some extent blunted our attack, Dwyer especially. Yes he might make a few exciting breaks but for most of the time he was s headless chicken leading to no attacking structures.

Leeming started the first two games this year, he was terrible in defence and took the wrong options a lot.

To be fair I don’t want Leeming to leave I think he is a good player but I do prefer OConner starting with Leeming off the bench.

Leeming seems to not want that.

I don't disagree with getting rid of Dwyer for the reasons you state. 

O'Connor isn't going to win any games for us this season (or ever) from 9. He's not shown that he has got a 40/20 kick in him, nor the vision to scoot or take on the line himself. He is there because, as stated by JJB and Barrie in their comments, Smith wants a hooker to just pass to the half backs and let them do the creative and running stuff. Its retro thinking certainly, and benefits someone like O'Connor who wouldn't be a hooker for most other top flight coaches and enables him to forge a niche in this team. I think that stunts our attack however and makes us easier to defend against.

I think, as I said before the season with the short kick offs, a leadership group and the rest, that the passing only/back rower 9 experiment will be either a stroke of genius or see Smith out of his role by Maytime...

[redjonn]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't disagree with getting rid of Dwyer for the reasons you state. 

O'Connor isn't going to win any games for us this season (or ever) from 9. He's not shown that he has got a 40/20 kick in him, nor the vision to scoot or take on the line himself. He is there because, as stated by JJB and Barrie in their comments, Smith wants a hooker to just pass to the half backs and let them do the creative and running stuff. Its retro thinking certainly, and benefits someone like O'Connor who wouldn't be a hooker for most other top flight coaches and enables him to forge a niche in this team. I think that stunts our attack however and makes us easier to defend against.

I think, as I said before the season with the short kick offs, a leadership group and the rest, that the passing only/back rower 9 experiment will be either a stroke of genius or see Smith out of his role by Maytime...

O'connor does scoot occasionally. Leeming overdoses it at times and sometimes just runs into a wall.

Obviously Leeming has the better overall game given his experience. Then again he does give penalties away with his arm stuck in the attacker. Don't know if it's deliberate in trying to show down ptb or a technique issue. Nevertheless it happens a lot.

[Tippytoe]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

Got you and Tommy mixed up.

Apologies.

No problem mate we all have different opinions and post on here thus I'm just at the point of thinking what direction is Smith going with selection,  players out of position etc Fwiw I'm not too fussed about Lemming going he's one of a bunch of current players who seem to only play when they when they feel like it.

[redjonn]

Anyway I think leeds have more issues than hooker/dummy half duties. On that though its about balance as what's best with your half backs you have. Leeming, Sezer, Austin don't gel that well.

I still don't think leeds have a strong set of props plus they tend to play with a soft/passive defence with some jumping out the line when patience keeping yer shape is more needed. Against saints they played a more aggressive defence and looked better for it.

Apart from Hanley they don't have good winger options. Centre winger combinations are not their yet, although newman back will help one side. If myler gets injured and Hanley drops back that will make issue worse.