Do we have to go through this cycle of Miller played well or Miller isn't good enough after every game?

He is going to be inconsistent at this stage of his career having had so little first team experience in a pivotal position. He may well turn out to be not good enough and he may be replaced come the end of the season but for the time being we need to persist with him and Rankin in my humble opinion.

Don't be coming on here with your facts.

It would appear so. The only surprise is that we haven't had a thread about each player after that second half performance



Mine too. I don't see the point of changing too often when we haven't got a great deal that is supposedly better as an alternative.

Miller is made to look poor by the timing of the runs by the players on his outside. There are many times that they overrun him, whether that is caused by the slowness of the ball from acting half to him, or their inability to time a run, I don't know - but it looks amateurish

I have to be honest, I don't really care how many tackles or how many missed tackles our scrum half makes. What I do care about is how influential he is with the ball in hand and imo Miller just doesn't cut it in that respect. He was almost anonymous at the weekend, the only time I noticed him want the ball was on the last play option when he put up a bomb or kicked downfield. He needs to make a greater contribution than that.

How many try assists did he have?

Understand what you are saying but i am getting sick of fans saying get rid because he can't tackle.

Don't think he was at fault for the tries we conceded but seems to be the main scapegoat.

He did play a crucial role in our first try but won't get an assist for that because Bowden made the final pass to Houghton.

I think he was given little room to play because we were so slow at playing the ball and our passing was pedestrian.

Plus we had little or no dummy runners because too many players sat back and left it to someone else.

I also think that Shaul was far too deep when we shifted it wide which allowed the Wakey defence time to shift across to plug the holes before we got there.

I said the same for their try in the corner by that big centre. He was too deep and he backed off the guy too much. In that situation, he should have shot out to tackle him round the legs. Rankin had the inside man, and letting a guy of his size get close to the line was always going to result in a try. Commit early and take his legs

Possibly but another big factor is that neither half was anywhere near the line when giving the ball to him most of the time. The defensive line was never committed to anyone.

Yep have to agree with that. Is that structure or the individual doing things differently on game day? Or is the dummy half distribution so slow they feel they have to stand deeper?

It's the same old same old, 1 out rugby, and then when we decide to go wide, it's all side ways and slow, no forward motion, no fluidity. Maybe we do need a half back like chase, someone who doesn't do what the coach tells them to! The high bombs , the lack of running at the line, dummy runners etc, got to be how we are been coached to play! I think that's where radfords comments about leeds structures are coming from, putting the blame on the players, basically saying, just because I've not got a clue, these players are good enough to sort it out on match day! Like leeds do! He thought we could do it the Bradford way, and he's no plan b! Personally think if we offer darryl Powell the chance to coach us, he wouldn't be able to resist! He's been a coach for a number of years now, done is apprenticeship in the lower division, and is showing what an outstanding coach he is

My problem with Chase is that he's so inconsistent...

What am I saying? He'd fit right in at FC!

Radford's point about Leeds was that their players turn up every week with 100% enthusiasm and prepared to play at the very best level they can for most of the time. Hard to disagree with. Whether that's down to the coach, the players, or a combination of both is not entirely clear but since Brian Mac won nothing at London I'd suggest the quality and approach of the players would provide the majority of the impetus.

Leeds have been like that for a long time so I'd say it was a player thing more than anything else. Players coming into the club or through the youth ranks will see the professional nature of the first team squad, buy into it, and then pass it onto the next set of players. I'm sure Brian Mac and other coaches play their part in maintaining that professional nature too of course.

Radders using Leeds as an example is hopefully a sign of what he is trying to achieve with our squad.