Official West Hartlepool RFC

Supercali called for debate on who should and shouldn't be playing in the first team (somewhat after the horse had bolted post Mowden game). I think it's easy to say after a loss that selection was wrong, but I personally feel the coaches always pick the best available players. Before any team has been announced, rather than suggesting who shouldn't be playing, I think it would be interesting to hear who is playing well on the Stags (or even Bucks), that you feel maybe deserves a chance?

A failry pointless exercise. Most of us would agree what the best first team is but with injuries and work commitments etc it never gets selected.
It's down to the coaches who they select. To their credit they have given lots of players a chance this season. It might be argued that they have done that too often. Hopefully though we will see the benefit in the next couple of seasons.

All this hand-wringing and, in one case, attempting to point the finger of blame is a waste of time.
We have not been strong enough this season, but as WPA says let's hope the experience has proved valuable and that the lads finish the season with a bit of a flourish and give the coaches something to think about for next season.

Why stop with the players and coach.

Lets moan about the bar staff / helpers / physio's / sunday morning cooks / cleaners and uncle tom coblie and all.

I think you've both backed up my point really, along with the fact that despite people winging about selection, when it comes down to avaiability, no one can really argue with the coaches selections. It is sad to see, however that some if the teams in the club have been struggling for players at times this season, I think there is a lot to be said for having a strong 2s and 3rd team putting the pressure on the lads ahead of them to perform (and train!). Not saying the Stags aren't strong this year, but rather they were exceptionally strong last year in winning the Candy league! Best of luck to all teams for the rest of the season.

The stags were stronger last year because the firsts were stronger last year, doesn't take much working out!

In reply to ``supercalifragalistic`` I must say that I did NOT call for a debate on who should, or who should not be playing in the first team.
This decision will always be made by the coaches who are in a better position week in, week out, to see who is performing well in training and also who is available or not.
What I actually wanted was peoples opinions on who had played well, or not so well, in the games that we had watched.
Also I would like to know peoples views on players playing in various positions, as I feel that some of the younger lads coming into the first team have not always played in positions that they are used to i.e after playing for the 18`s for a long time in one position and then coming in to the first team in another position ?
One point that I agree totally with WPA and DOG TRACK, is that the experience of playing first team rugby for all the young lads can only be of benefit for future seasons, and I am looking forward to see how the team progresses.
Hopefully with a win on saturday !

Let me guess Cali.

Your sonny boy is knocking on 1st team / Stags door but he has cried on your shoulder because he is unhappy at being asked to play out of position even though sonny boy knows the established player above him is a better player.

This is why you are calling for this a debate and looking for silent moral support.

Its easy to get an idea who played well at the various matches by looking at the "man of the match" poll at the side of the page , presumably these people who voted where at the game and in their opinion they vote for the player he/she thinks has played well , "simples" , as for the young lads coming into the first team whether this year or next they must understand the level of rugby is much better than they have been used to , lets not forget the stags play maybe 3 leagues (my guess) below the first team , so making the 1st team is going to be a shock to the system , its faster you have to think quicker and you have to play as a team and not as a individual , any bad decisions are punished as we have found out , you cannot just hoof the ball away and think you are going to retrieve it , it dos`nt work that way and the defending team will run it back or at least find touch , apart from all this i hope the lads do well tomorrow and really hope they can get out of the mire , keep your heads up boys and play rugby ....

I agree totally that the level of first team rugby is much better than these lads have been used to, which is why I think it makes sense to play them in a position that they are used to playing in, rather than playing them out of position where they may make mistakes, especially in defence.
In reply to the previous post, no I dont have a ``sonny boy``playing rugby unfortunately !!

Everyone is dodging the basic issue. Numbers at training this season have been s h i t e.
You cant practise anything if half the pack or half the backs are missing. At least going down might mean that lads who train twice a week get a better chance of being picked ahead of "better" players who only turn up now and then.

Well said CB ... training is as important as the game, and the hands of the coaches are tied if they can't work on the team during the week because not many of them have bothered turning out.

I must admit I dont think we have looked as fit this season. In my day you didn't get picked if you didnt train or had to play for the 2nds, 3rd, 4th, or 5ths but that was before league rugby when playing the game mattered more than the result.

I agree totally that if you don`t turn up for training you should not be picked for the first team ( remember Simon Mitchell and Mick Watson and ``Tizza``the coach, I believe ) when they were dropped for not training ,or turning up late.
This was ok when we had a large squad at a high level, but how do the coaches decide now when the options are limited for all of the teams ?

If people aren't turning up for training then it's no wonder we've had the season we've had. The same thing happened to rovers when they went down a couple of seasons ago - their numbers at training were right down and the results followed

If we are going on don't train then you don't play, based purely on who trained last night, we could put the following team out on Sat:
Carr
Dixon (Andy)
Stockdale
Dixon (Tom)
Davies
Young
Bailly
Howard
Waites
Moss
Butcher
Connelly
Wilson (Ian)
Kerr
Thomas

subs:
Southern
Spencer
Miller

I may have missed someone there, so appologies if I have.
Hodgey and Davy T trained, but not available.

I don't think that team would do too badly, however, you have to consider that a) some of the non attendees will have had genuine reasons and b) it's not neccasarily the same people each week not turning up, interestingly, the Boatman brothers are two of the best attenders, yet they have the furthest to come (and I'm sure they will have had good reason for not being there last night!)

Do you mean Hodgson and Tighe are not available to play this Saturday? Bit of a blow.

Read the above post a bit more carefully WPA then your question might be answered

There will always be genuine reasons for a few missing training, but players are really only cheating themselves in the long run if they are bad trainers.