And your qualification to pontificate that Clawson is "nowhere near capable enough" to do strength/conditioning is . . .

Well in my opinion the squad hasn't been quite as fit as I would have hoped they would be. Even by our own coaches admission he has insinuated that the squad needs to become fitter. Do you feel are squad have had the fitness levels of the Leeds team for example?

Time will tell as if he has already left the club or if his contract is not renewed come the end of the coming season then we will have the clubs take on this matter.

I'm not sure if you can put last year's failings down to fitness. I think more was to do with technique and basic ability. Clawson was good enough at conditioning when we won the title in 2005. What's changed since then? Well a lot of good players left, the coaching setup changed too.

I do think that we appear to be less adept at controlling the ruck consistently in recent years but is that down to lack of strength or technique and ability? From the terraces I'd say it's very difficult to tell unless you're well versed in these arts yourself.

From what I'm led to believe the garden leave rumour is true more should be known in the New Year.

Please dont misunderstand me as I totally agree that our fitness wasn't the main contributor to last seasons failings. But as well as the technical aspects of our game that need improving I think at times over the past three seasons are fitness levels have not been as good as they should be either, especially in the 2008 season. Its only my opinion that Basil Richards and Martin Clawson can hopefully be replaced with better personnel.

In mine too, in regard to [isome[/i players, but that's a long way off accusing Clawson of being "nowhere near capable". As has been pointed out we have won a title under him, so he can't be a mug.


Well, it wouldn't sound good if they dredged along the bottom-feeders of the league at "peak fitness", but in the majority of players' cases I wouldn't think their fitness levels were far off any other team's - Leeds included. But I don't think it was lack of fitness that was the main problem in 2009. And compared to Leeds, simply put they were a far better side, over the season, than us. In terms of ability to play rugby.


But everybody leaves every club sooner or later. It doesn't mean they are great, or crap.

Lets get Jennings back.

I wish!

Andy Lynch's comments in the [url=http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportbulls/4825668.Lynch__Success_beckons_if_we_put_our_minds_to_it/=#FF0000T&A[/url include some interesting pointers. Although I'd always be a bit hesitant at reading too much into printed words, this bit:



struck me as possibly hinting at things - see the highlighted words. Not so much what they say, more what they maybe imply about the past?

But its another in a string of positive pieces. Hopefully we'll see the optimism justified out on the park.

Adey you missed this bit in comments from someone called Prycey

They have said before that the training is going well. I was told just before Christams by one of the players that they were a little surprised when they started training that Richards and Clawson have now left the club. Medders is now helping with the first team and an Australian in the new conditioner. Maybe this is having an affect as new training methods can make a change.

It`s always difficult to measure fitness levels from the terraces; when the team`s on top, going forward and winning the collisions you always look fitter and on top of things. However, when it`s you dropping the ball and giving away penalties and finding other reasons to hand the ball over (in fewer words: running back to make the ten every fifteen seconds) then it`s you who suddenly doesn`t look quite so fit.

I`m not saying that our fitness levels were good or bad (cos I don`t know), but you can`t remove the other aspects of performance from the equation because they are inextricably linked .

Didn't miss it - it was posted some time after I made the post on here!