I was recently at an event where Mike Rush and a number of other people from the RL top table were present. Rush had a certain aura about him and he impressed me.

I didn't experience any 'aura' around Rush when he said hello in the Red Vee Cafe. He's got a bit of a belly on him though.

Really what does that have to do with anything? He's not taking to the pitch, so his middle age spread is immaterial

So is his 'aura'. Why pick up on only my comment?

I think there is a bit of double standards here. Surprise surprise!!!

People have started calling for an improvement in recruitment, saying that we have not been the same since a Rugby man was in control of getting new players. A rugby man is appointed and suddenly everyone is worrying about the finance side of things.

CEO is not the same role as head coach. So regardless of our thoughts on his time as head coach, this has no reflection on him as a CEO.

I do think he is a St. Helens man and he wants to do what is best for St. Helens. I don't think we should fall into the trap of thinking that people are trying to undermine St. Helens on purpose. There is no long conspiracy.

Part of this is down to peoples lack of reasonable expectations, linked in to strange recruitment in the halfbacks.

Hopefully he can go well and put us back where we need to be.

CEO is a fancy way of saying Managing Director, so whilst you may doubt his qualification for financial or marketing reasons - he wont be the one filling those roles, he'll just be responsible for making sure the folks employed are doing their job to the best of their ability. In order to do this, he needs to know about as many different facets of running a rugby club. As Dux says, Rush has quite a unique range of experience regarding this, so as long as he has enough of an idea not to let the finance department pull the wool over his eyes, I wouldn't panic.

Apart from his general smarts and judgement, his success in this role will depend on the following -
Knowledge of his Industry.
Work rate and commitment to the role.
The standards he sets/expects from his team.

I don't particulary worry about any of those facets of Rush's character, so perhaps he'll make a decent fist of it?

Most sensible thing I've read on this thread. (Your sig is the lease sensible thing I've read on the thread though.)

No one says he is not a nice guy, but I do think he is a McManus man! and for one person that is all that counts! We have a nice guy but his background is in marketing & at the top, but.....in cricket and it shows!

You're not the messiah, you're a very naughty boy

I think given the roles Rush has had at Saints, he is more than capable of seeing over the next part of our transition into the best team in Super League.

Give him chance folks, it seems some are quick to deem Rush as a failure before he has even fully taken his opportunity as CEO.

I think the deeming him a failure comes back to last year. I too was frustrated with the stagnation that we had last year.

BUT

When you look at stagnation compared to the decline in the first part of 2012, then stagnation was in fact an improvement.

I think it's always hard to be dispassionate about sport, but that passion can cloud our expectations. For me last year was all about a holding pattern. Rush was asked to do that and did it. Job done. This job has nothing to do with last year and most fans would never have know who he was if it was not for last year.

He's been in the job for less than 24 hours and the cladding announcement is made. The man is clearly a hero on the rampage to resolve the key issues at the club.

Well done Rushy!

Now, operation cladgate is progressing well, can we accelerate operation 'bring the half back' now?

I'm very grateful to him, but the again I have been a supporter for 30 odd years not a few like some. I'm pretty sure he doesn't want eternal gratitude either but he does deserve a lot more respect than some numptys on here are giving him!!