So are seriously suggesting he dropped McDermott because he had one bad game? half the team had a bad game so why did he choose to drop McDermott and nobody else?

Care to expand on what "happened in perpignan"??

As I said before Smith was getting stick last season because of the gradual decline in standards since the middle of 2005 almost two years of pretty abject rugby - 2006 was a complete wash out don't forget - Smith was pretty fortunate to keep his job by the end of 2006 - so to say McClennan is getting treated differently is correct - the circumstances are completely different would you not agree?

Something else that begs the question - why was GH so supportive of Smith getting the England job? do you not think he had also realised Smith had reached the end of the road with this group of players?

Some will rubbish this but the form suddenly picked up as soon as Smith's departure was announced - coincidence or Smith masterplan!!!

For me look at the second half performance at Wigan - whilst they didn't win the game McClennan changed it around enough at half time turn 17-0 into 6-23 pretty impressive in my view

Because you can't drop half a team.
What makes you think it was all to do with the trip to France, once again it's all hear say.
Do you really think that Smith could be so petty?

Not on here no

Pm???????
Seriously i have no idea WTF you are on about

Agreed you can't but why drop a prop forward against the biggest pack in SL just because he along with half his colleagues had a bad game the previous week - it makes no logical sense.

Definitely - Smith is all about control - he doesn't have the man management skills so he rules by fear as soon as anyone stands upto him/steps out of line they are dealt with. Ask why Brian McDermott suddenly departed for Harlequins!!

An example of his need for control - if the players wanted to take the WAG out for dinner they had to ask Smith's permission!!

Au contraire.

Tony Smith was appointed to the GB gig on the 26th March last year, just after the Round 7 win over Harlequins.

The SL record prior to the appointment was:

WWLWLWW (1.43 points per game)

After the appointment it was:

WLWWWWLWWWLWLLWWWDLW (1.35 points per game)

To be statistically accurate you should take the 7 rounds after the announcement (same as before it). In which case the ratio is 5 wins and 2 defeats in each 7 game set.

Sorry I've been reading tvoc..........

Rob - lies, damm lies and statistics - you have to compare the quality of the opposition home - who did Leeds play in the first seven games? Also compare the twenty previous games to Smith announcement to the twenty after.

The win ratio only tells half the story - for me it is about how well they play not about if they win - the best performance of last season was the defeat at Saints in the play offs.

Defeat to 8th placed Hull, only one try in a later home defeat to Hull, being kept try-less at Wigan, a home defeat to Wakefield and a home drubbing by Bradford. They all happened after the announcement of departure and don't fit any pattern of improved performance.

The points per game for Tony Smith's tenure:

2004 1.82
2005 1.57
2006 1.44
2007 1.43 (pre announcement)
2007 1.35 (post announcement)

That might give you a decent case for saying Leeds's performance got progressively worse under Tony Smith (though it would ignore external factors) but I don't think it supports any notion that the side picked up once they knew he was off.

What have you changed your mind about, that you judged Smith too harshly?

BTW, I see you had time to reply to a number of other posts after this. What's wrong, mine too searching for you?

My packing is now done.

I have changed my mind over that it is possible for professional atheletes to back off from trying to achieve peak performance in every game they play.


BTW nice piece of issue dodging my "non mind changing" friend....

With a mind as brilliant as mine why on earth would I ever want to change it?