I have inferred nothing of the sort in either post. So is this another of your personal crusades? as I see you are not asking others who have said the same thing.




I don't comment on things I have not seen, whether that is a game or just players. I never saw Bennett play, and I can't really remember Smith either. Then again as they are in a completely different country and competition, that would be the same for most.

I did however see Cummins play, so I am in a position to comment on that, which I did. I would be surprised if Bennett and Smith had the same failings.

I seem to remember Tony Smith playing for Workington (I think?) sometime in the 1990's but he didn't come across as some sort of brave heart.Although he was playing with/in a beaten pack.

I can't see what special qualities Lowes has displayed in his coaching career that give the impression he will do a better job than Francis Cummins.

That would depend how much credit you see in McDermott. Because nothing won since he left McDermott's side from Leeds. Could be argued he played a big part in the success. He certainly seemed to improve Carnegie a hell of a lot, and a different sport to go with it.

I am not disagreeing with you, but think its worth considering the above. And perhaps that is also what Bradford have considered.

He certainly showed a lot of qualities in his playing days that would give the impression he would be a better coach than Cummins.

So did Schofield and Goulding but not so much Paul Anderson and Wane possibly. Look at how that's worked out.

My argument falls down in 2 quick words though: 'Lee' and 'Radford'

Don't think we are talking of the same qualities. I would certainly have put Wane down in his playing days as a potentially a better coach than Schofield and Goulding.

Great players are sometimes good coaches. Mal Meninga always seemed to do OK, for instance. Brian Clough, from another sport would be an example. Kenny Dalglish too, arguably. But they do seem to be the exception.

Ellery Hanley is an interesting case. His coaching career seemed to end for reasons not entirely related to his ability to coach a team (I'm actually not altogether sure why it ended).

I'm not sure there's a single formula to define what qualities make a great coach. As such it isn't all that easy to predict which players will manage it.

All good coaches have something in them that is clear.

You might see a more of "great" players we see today becoming coaches, than in the past. The problem with players like Schofield, Goulding, Crooks, is that they always had other influences, baggage that shouldn't be there. There was always extra baggage. With that you can not move on. Today's top players, and there are exceptions, in the main seem much more mature and keep the outside influences to a minimum.

For purest reasons i believe, he coaches / gets involved when he fancies it. Rather than doing something for the sake of it. Look how he came back out of no-where for the Cas gig.

(think he also has a few fingers in a few pies with business ventures)