Players tell fans: Its our fault

[thickos]

http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/de...y_id=469549&category=General Sport&m=3&y=2006

We're the ones who failed fans Players take the heat off Elliott
Peter Fitzgerald
Thursday, 30 March 2006

Senior Canberra Raiders players have backed besieged coach Matt Elliott, saying it's the team members and not the coach that should take responsibility for the club's horror start to the 2006 NRL season. Captain Clinton Schifcofske and former skipper Simon Woolford both claimed comments this week from Canberra fans calling for club management to sack Elliott were "unjustified".
They also said axing the Penrith-bound coach would not result in better on-field performances.
Elliott has been under pressure since the Raiders lost 70-32 against the Newcastle Knights 11 days ago and 56-20 against the Sydney Roosters at Aussie Stadium on Sunday.
The losses were the worst and third-worst respectively in the club's 25-year existence.
Woolford, who has played with the Raiders for 13 seasons and under Elliott for the past five, expressed disappointment that it had been Elliott and not the players who had copped the majority of blame for the embarrassing losses.
"In some cases I think a coach copping sprays left, right and centre can be justified but in our case, it's not even close to justifiable," he said.
"We've certainly had the right plan heading into our past two matches to do the job and for parts of the game, that plan has worked.
"How can you blame the coach for the players not sticking to the plan long enough to win the game?"
In both of the past two games, Canberra has been in a position to at least be competitive against the opposition, if not win.
Against Newcastle, at Canberra Stadium, the Raiders trailed 12-8 midway through the first half and appeared well in the match before things went wrong.
And last weekend, against the Roosters, Canberra led 20-10 before capitulating and conceding 46 points in the final 29 minutes.
Woolford was disappointed with his and his teammates' efforts against the Roosters in a match he believed the side "simply should have won".
"We went into that game with a point to prove after what had happened against the Knights and we put ourselves into a position where we not only could have won but should have," he said.
"What happened in that last 30 minutes is not Matt Elliott's fault and I don't care what any punter thinks.
"I've taken more out of the comments [Raiders chairman John McIntyre] said about all the players needing to have a good hard look at themselves rather than a few fans saying Matty needs to be sacked."
Schifcofske agreed it was the 13 players on the field and four on the bench who were to blame.
"It's not the coach missing tackles, dropping the ball and losing concentration when we're under the pump," the captain said.
"The fans, they pay their money so I guess they can say what they like. All I know is the coach has our full support and that's surely all that matters here."
Schifcofske admitted it had been a "trying" week at training for Elliott but the coach had not spilled any of his frustration onto the players.
Elliott made five changes to his side that lost to the Roosters for Saturday night's home clash against the Panthers, the team he will coach next season.
"It's been tough for Matt, the past few days, as it has for all of us," Schifcofske said.
"But we're not hitting the panic button yet. It's not even round four yet."

 

[hrundi99]

The coach must take SOME responsibility for the players' on-field attitude, but I tend to agree that most of the blame still lays with the team.

 

[whatwhat]

All parties ahould be held accountable for the last 2 disgraceful efforts.

 

[TiTTieS_[CNTDN]]

Yes, the players are the ones who play the game, not the coach. BUT, the coach is the one who selects these players. The best game plan will not work if the players are not good enough to execute it.

 

[Raiders_mat]

The coach should be smart enough to be able to have a Plan B, just in case things go wrong( which thay did in the last 2 weeks).

But in saying that the players still need to shoulder most of the blame as thay are the one's who have to try and play this game

 

[waltzing Meninga]

IMO our problems have come because of 2 reasons.

1. our inablitlity to feild a full strength squad be it because of Injuries or poor selection. - this is the responsibility of the coach to ensure the best squad is picked and the strangth and coditioning trainer to ensure players are fit and strong enough to avoid injury especially early in the season. I have grave doubts about Jennos off season training program he has these players on

2. Our lack of fitness, concentration and commitment in the second half - We are always in every game at half time. Most of the time we are leading yet, just like last year we end up losing about 75% of our games. The fitness falls on the coach and conditioning training, concentration falls both on the coach and the players and commitment should come from the players themselves.

IMO it is more Elliot and Jennos fault than any of the players that we are losing games. The players are not blameless, but you just have to look at the way we are losing to see that we are poorly coached, poorly trained and poorly managed.

 

[Boing Boing]

I think the fault lies mostly with the players. They were great against Manly, so it would be hard to blame Jenno's pre-season program.

 

[hrundi99]

I think the fault lies mostly with the players. They were great against Manly, so it would be hard to blame Jenno's pre-season program.

Yeah and for 51 mins they looked good enough against the Roosters, who we haven't really competed with in recent seasons (regardless of their current form).

 

[waltzing Meninga]

I think the fault lies mostly with the players. They were great against Manly, so it would be hard to blame Jenno's pre-season program.

The signs were still there in the Manly game. Manly were attrocious that night, but we still let them back into the game, before having to put them away again in the second half. It was still our best performance of the year, but we managed to lose Josh Miller for the Season.

Can you explain to me Boing, how in so many games we are leading at half time yet we lose so many games? Obviously we have the ability to get on top of sides but we can't maintain it. That is a fitness issue IMO.

 

[edabomb]

Manly was a night game though, would of been a bit cooler then the Roosters and especially the Knights. Lets see how they hold up this weekend during a night game.

 

[Stuart]

The problem has been an ongoing one that elliot has failed to fix. So IMO the trend is mainly Elliots fault, he has failed to address it and make progress in that area which reflects pretty badly on his coaching. The horrible scores? The blaim can be laid mainly at the players feet IMO.

 

[hrundi99]

The problem has been an ongoing one that elliot has failed to fix. So IMO the trend is mainly Elliots fault, he has failed to address it and make progress in that area which reflects pretty badly on his coaching. The horrible scores? The blaim can be laid mainly at the players feet IMO.

Which is it, then?

 

[Stuart]

Which is it, then?

I think a distiction can be made between losing a game by 30 or 40 while falling away inexcusably as we have in the last 2 games and continually losing games in the last 30 mins from good positions which has been happening for 3 years.

For the last two losses the players have to take a lot of the responsibility but so does the coach for allowing an obvious weakness to remain prevalent for 3 or so seasons.

If you take the 2 losses in isolation, the calls for Elliots head are very harsh and the majority of the blame would be on the players heads, but if you take them in the context of the last 3 seasons they are justifiable and a lot of the blame falls directly on Elliot IMO.

Obviously my thoughts on this aren't exactly clear, im still workling out where i stand :?

 

[Edwahu]

You cant blame the players for not been good enough. If you think our problems are as simple as attitude or mental application its time to rethink your position.

 

[Stuart]

You cant blame the players for not been good enough. If you think our problems are as simple as attitude or mental application its time to rethink your position.

If thats the entire problem i dont think sacking (which, if i remember correctly i think you support edwahu) the coach will achieve much at all (this season anyway, there are long term arguments, esp if our 2007 coach takes over), and we may have to get used to losing by 40 points on a regular basis not matter who is in charge. It may be mere optimism but I belive our players/roster is better than that (126 points in 2 weeks). I dont think its strong by any stretch of the imagination, bottom three yes, wooden spoon maybe but not as weak as it has appeared in the last 2 weeks.

Again i stress im still working out where i stand on the situation, there are a lot of factors to synthesise and im finding it hard to settle into an opinion. One thing im sure of is we've got a lot of problems, some of which run deep and arent going to be fixed quickly.

 

[dubby]

You cant blame the players for not been good enough. If you think our problems are as simple as attitude or mental application its time to rethink your position.

I cannot understand why you dont account for the ability of the players (mentally and physically).
The players HAVE to accept the responsibility they have in preparing and switching on during the game. THe coach plays a part, sure. But in saying that, the players attitude stems from their heart, mental strength and self belief. It sure sounds to me that the players realise this, and are making it clear to all interested that it is a player related problem; and it sure sounds to me like they know this. THe comments made by SHif and Germ are loud and clear: we (the Players) are not concentrating. In every game we have been competitive for a duration, but they lose their way.
And certain players are NOT good enough Ed, you know this. Howell, for one is not upto NRL level.

 

[Edwahu]

My whole point is that I do account for the players abillity. Its not good enough. The players are going to say its because of things they feel are able to change like mental application. They are not going to come out and say "I havent been developed as a player properly or recieved adequate training, so I cant play the game consistently well enough for us to compete" are they.

It is not the players responsibillity to put a side out on the park that is up to standard. Its the Coaches job.
If I didnt think Elliot had of had the resources to do that then I would not be laying into him so much but he has had more then enough in the 5 years he has been here to put a good side together.

 

[reptar]

Well, as has often been said, it's not as if the Raiders have a lack of junior talent. For some reason they're unable to meet their potential if they stay at our club (case of point: Mark McLinden).

 

[Sully]

BAY AND BOING...

Looks like the Germ and Schiff don't like your comments!!

No Surrender,
No Surrender,
No Surrender to the Raid-ers Army!

Get stuck in Germ!!! Silly "Punters".

 

[woodgers]

"What happened in that last 30 minutes is not Matt Elliott's fault and I don't care what any punter thinks.
"I've taken more out of the comments [Raiders chairman John McIntyre] said about all the players needing to have a good hard look at themselves rather than a few fans saying Matty needs to be sacked."

Nice one Germ you f**king idiot, the punters have only given you a massive house and 3 coffee shops but who give a f**k what they think? If you had half a brain you would be dangerous.

The point everyone has missed here is the big one. Of course these players are going to back up Elliott, he is like a good mate to them. Especially when he guarantees you a position every other week. I wonder what Carney, Chalk, Ale and a few others say behind closed doors?

I was never laying blame on the coach solely but was simply stating that Elliott has run his race. Most these players will think Elliott is good because they haven't worked under anyone else at this level. I must sound like a tired old record but I only care about winning footy matches and the club being successful. I would prefer a Chris Anderson or Ricky Stuart who don't care about how chummy they are with their 'staff' and just worry about what will be best to make them successful as coach and win footy matches.

To be honest I knew one or two players would be unhappy at the article earlier in the week but I didn't expect to be completely disregarded by someone when I contribute to his wages. No respect.