Well whenever I've played (albeit at much much lower level) handling errors are usually down to a lack of concentration on what is happening and/or a lack of familiarity with other players. Sometimes it also comes down to plain ability though this is less of a factor when you get to SL level. Lastly they can be down to fatigue when tiredness causes players to make mistakes they wouldn't make when fresh.

Coaches can work to address many of these areas, they can ensure the team is a fit as possible and everyone is familiar with everyone else. Concentration is more difficult to ensure, especially if players have other things preying on their minds.

Re, we've made one more error than Saints, off three hundred less carries. Doesn't seem to be much correlation between total errors and the league table though (maybe because of the possession thing).

Hmm. A bit of maths and we see that Bulls drop it on 7.2% of carries. Leeds on 6.6% for comparison. Hull on 4.6% of them, though it doesn't seem to be doing them much good.

Its not a coaching issue its a recruitment issue.

In what way? Yes, you could argue that we've signed players that can't catch or pass, however both those can be improved by the correct application of training and coaching

The players we have our far too inconsistent. They are by nature not by coaching. Numerous good coaches tried to make Solomona more consistent but failed. MacNamara doesnt coach Platt to shepherd a 40/20 kick into touch. Halley will have plenty of good games but will find that against certain teams his lack of physique will limit his impact.

Throughout the history of rugby league there have been numerous players that were very talented but erratic. Some of them became more consistent with time, most did not. The real difference between a top quality player and a second tier player is often consistency. We seem to have specialised in recruiting the less reliable players.

A player such as Jeffries is no more likely to be coached into having 3 consecutive good matches than Joe Vagana could have been coached into scoring length of the field tries. He just doesnt have it in him.

I was thinking similar on Fri night. We have players who on their day can be very good RL players but perhaps not consistently. People like Sheriffe, Nero and Platt etc have shown some great Rugby for the Bulls but equally have had their share of howlers.

The successful Bulls sides had quality players who were dependable such as Withers, Lowes, Gartner and Forshaw. We also had some true match winners in Robbie, Henry, Hape, Vaikona and Vainikolo. We simply do not have players of an equivalent class right now.

I like this thread...

All coaches fail.

So there is no point in sacking a failing coach. As you'd be replacing them with another failing coach

Also, we lost some games but we could have won them. The ones we've won we could have lost, so we've been competitive, so let's not worry. (Isn't that just sport - you [icould[/i win, but you [icould[/i lose)

Status quo rules! Macca for England/ GB job (oh, yeah hes already got one)

Really?

Ask the fans of Aberdeen FC and Manchester United FC about Sir Alex Ferguson, Celtic FC fans about Jock Stein, or Liverpool FC fans about Bob Paisley......

Different sports, I accept, but it does tend to contradict your point.

I was indirectly quoting from an earlier celebrated post, to highlight the clear contradictions to such a generalisation. The cases you refer to are good examples of which there will be many others.

Not all coaches fail and therefore the line of argument that Macca shouldn't be replace as all coaches fail is empirically false.

My apologies. I mis-interpreted your post.

I really must try harder!

Cheers!

To a point I agree.

However a team with proven SL talent like Tadulala, Sykes, Nero, Scruton, Newton, Lynch, Burgess, Morrison, Menzies and Langley should not be running second from bottom after half a season.

Recruitment has been -poor for a few years now, but there is still plenty there for any coach worth his salt to mould into something competent, even with a couple of duds thrown in.