Intriguing - serious question now, not trying to doubt you, but be honest - out of our signings over the past 3 or 4 seasons, how many did you instantly feel "good signing that, should do well" and how many did you think "he's not what we need, won't do a good job for us"?

As for new players, I understand that there may well be more departures before season end and some new faces too. Sorry that doesn't sound like solid info, but I offer it up all the same.

Why get new players? To improve the squad maybe.

If the kids are good enough they will get their chance. Would like to see McCarthy and Murphy get a chance, and Penny given an extended run on the wing.

Aside from that, who are these centres and halfbacks banging on the door of the first team?

to be honest i would say morley,king and rauhihi,all of them signing on the back of a couple of outstanding seasons.
obviously with the signing of johns you knew that you were getting a superstar,barring injury he would have signed permanently for us and today still keeps in close contact with the club.

sorry seb forgot to answer the last question,in the category of not what we needed i would put vinnie anderson in there as to be honest i have never seen just where he is best placed in our starting line up,he disappears too much during games for me.
stuart reardon was a very bad signing despite featuring for great britain,i personally have thought that he was at best average.
the reason i didn't welcome the above signings is that they both came from clubs who were successful at the time they were sold,successful clubs do not sell key playing staff on the whole,unless they are under financial pressure to do so.at the time of these signings neither bradford or saints were.

Darbyshire spent the latter part of his time here as conditioning coach, he was replaced by Stridgeon, who was an improvement in most people's eyes.

He was conditioning coach in his last season 2007. He was assistant coach before that which drew plenty of criticism on the forum, everyone said what does he do but put the cones out.....we needed someone who had won things. Remember how well Salford were doing in 2006 with Lowes and Hunte on their backroom staff, we needed someone like Lowes who had experience of winning trophies...

Also on the Stridgeon thing the only reason everyone was happy with that appointment was because he had been talked up so much, none of us who aren't in the camp had any idea of how good he was in comparison to his peers, we just heard that he'd been conditioner at Wasps RU and worked with Shaun Edwards and were assured that he was great. I'm not saying he wasn't, just that most comments about the conditioners, backroom staff etc are based on judgements from hearsay rather than being in a fair position to judge.

Nigel Halmshaw was much maligned when he came in because of the idea that he was Jimmy Lowes mate....I put to you that this year we have had a much lower injury list than we had in the past few seasons and perhaps if we had had Halmshaw conditioning the squad in the past few years then we would have had Johnson, Reardon, Bridge, Wood the Andersons fit every week and maybe if we'd had our first teamers available rather than having to play kids we could have won those trophies that were denied us by our injury list...?

I think you have raised a very good point. We should be buying players that have proved to shine at a club in a similar position to ourselves rather than go for the big name which may fade without the support of class players around them. We should have done better with the money that has been spent IMO.

I think Wakefield are a great example of this, bringing in players like Drew and Brough who are known to produce week in week out.

We shouldn't just buy players because they have won something. We should also get players that have proved to be good in weaker team

Fire wire, iwas just making the obsevation that we are a club in turmoil with certain playing staff not performing to there full potential, has for the half backs and centres not sure whos knocking on the door but the winger rhys looks handy and the new big stand off looks interesting. We have nothing to lose by intergrating a couple of players or even rotating them from the reserves to the first team, to see if any of these boys have the quality we are looking for. However in Smith we trust.

My criticism of Darbyshire/ the back room staff in particular was they were all from the same stock. They had come from the tutelage of the Johnson and Van de Velde era, whether this was a good or bad thing is open to debate. But where was the differing ideas and techniques going to come from when their education was all from the same sources? As for a player winning things, take a look at the best coachs knocking about; Bennett and Bellamy, hardly star players. Hasler, maybe open to an element of debate In SL; Anderson, Smith and McLennan, hardly littered with medals. I for one am happy that Lowes came in as assistant, for the exact reasons I have stated above, irrelevant of his playing career.

You raise an good point about injuries. Stridgeon stated that training on heavy pitches, ie; Long Lane would increase the chances of injury. I can't quite remember the specific area he highlighted, but it was an instigation of us going to Leigh to train on their 3G pitch.

If Stridgeon wasn't at the top of his profession, then the RFU wouldn't have come knocking for him to become the England fitness coach.

My scepticism of Halmshaw is his experience, conditioning an Academy squad doesn't exactly correlate with going to a first team set up. As has been mentioned many times, the difference in levels on the playing side would verify this. Or are you advocating we should give an important role to someone learing on the job?

I'd like to know how you condition against injuries in an impact sport? Pulls and strains, possibly. Dislocations and ruptures, please explain how you avoid these?

The author of this book thinks it is possible.

rlclickyrl

No I agree with you, we should be looking at bringing through young players especially now the threat of relegation has gone.

Too many clubs, including ourselves would rather play a man out of position than try someone who specialises in that position from the lower grades. For example, why play jack of all trades master of none Johnson on the wing, when there is the option of Kevin Penny or Rhys Williams? Surely Murphy deserves an opportunity at full back instead of Hicks who is a winger and should be playing there.

But if TS thinks these players aren't good enough, then its time to start buying others. There seems to be a lot of anti-aussie sentiment from certain posters on here, but if they're the right players what does it matter where they come from?

As you say in Smith we trust. I believe he will give the young players the opportunity at the right times, maybe its time to see a young centre given a chance, and maybe one of the young halves on the bench.

He says you can prepare for avoidance of injury, but how do you actually stop it? If you read the text, he refers to coaching players to make tackles and landing on the ground to reduce injury.

He also discusses strapping, warm up, stretching, warm down, strength building exercises etc. Anyhow your question was "I'd like to know how you condition against injuries in an impact sport?", by your own words the book details how you can prepare for avoidance of injury. I would suggest "prepare for avoidance" and "condition against" whilst not directly analogous would result in the same ends of reduced injury. Therefore it supports the assertion that the level and quality of conditioning would correlate to the level of injuries received in the main.

Yet his inference is on coaching the players on how to, and take a tackle. Furthermore, if you read my comment, I was being specific against dislocations and ruptures.