In every season there will be a couple of exceptional wins such as those against Leeds & St Helens. Its also to be expected that there will be a couple of rank bad performances eg Wigan away, Wolves at home. Those should really be discounted.

The 7 games that we've basically thrown away suggest a more serious malaise and really cant be ignored.

I agree with the last comment, but absolutely not discounting the wins against Saints and Leeds. They make things worse, as they show what the team can do if it wants.

I doubt he can TBH. He is either a professional dunce or else he is a damn fine actor.

Either way, it looks stupid.

Indeed. But if you read my post again you will note it was in argument for the potential positive momemtum a change in coach has given warrington, not an argument against McNamara;

Warrington 2009 under Jimmy = bottom 4 form.
Warrington 2009 under Smith = top 4 form.

They improved under smith, that was the point, not to hold up the wire coaching set up as the one we must have. This was not a one off magic trick and could be made to work elsewhere, this was the supplementary point.

That is why I showed the percentage stats as that is the only way we can compare like with like to demonstrate to people who don't seem to grasp the point that a 68% win ratio is better than Cullen or Jimmy managed, hence improvement, best shown by how many games a team wins.

And we have had upper 60% win ratios under McNamara you're right, which is why you wont be able to find a single post of mine that says he is not a good coach. You will also not find a post where I have called for him to go. But just because he's done a couple of times it doesn't mean he'll be able to do it again, just as one dismal season does not mean we cannot turn it around to a positive ratio next season.

Ad hominem, as per usual. Is that really all you can do?

What point are you making here? I really don't get it.
Warrington have improved under Smith. Warrington did ok in previous years, but not as well as us, but they had a different coach then. Warrington are out performing us this season. Noone is holding up Wire as something we are aiming to be, but they have improved with a new coach. This season.
Why are you arguing?

If we want to aspire to be like someone, it should be KR or Hudds maybe. Their coaches seem to have an "average" squad of players performing to a higher level than they should.

Why is that?

Why do I have to be making a point? Can't I just be having a conversation?

Everyone is pretty much outperforming us this season.

I think the people arguing are ones who seem to have some childishly simplistic view that if we could just sack the coach it'd be all right and we'd be Champions again soon just like the recent good old days.

We should not aspire to be HKR or Shudds at all. I am certain they aspire to be us (though not this year, but still, as a club, and probably for the majority of our team). We should aspire to gradually build a squad, based on a blend of youth, home grown talent and experience and cunning imports, to try to find the elusive magic formula of once again becoming one of the top teams. We should aspire to nothing less.

Where I differ from a lot is that I have always seen this as a project to be measured in years, and with absolutely no certain outcome. Golden years are hard to achieve, some clubs never have them at all, and no-one has a right to them.

It would be nice to think that you could keep your club in the top 2 or 3 forever, regardless of re-building, but it's not possible, never has been, never will be.

So either we have a plan and stick with it or we disrupt the plan for some short-term "Warrington level" mediocre improvement. Sure they're doing better - but could hardly have been doing worse. Might we get a temporary mediocre improvement with a new coach factor? Very possibly yes. Is there a point to having a temprary improvement from crap to mediocrity? None at all, especially if it means disruption and sacrificing longer term objectives. Do I want a "Warrington 2009"-style quick fix? No, not at all.

Would a change in head coach mean that would happen? I don't think it would. Any new coach would be working with similar constraints as McNamara and the board could stipulate that they require junior football to be given the same amount of consideration.

Thats my thoughts exactly.

Haven't Leeds and Saints changed coaches and still carried on the junior development.

Spot on. If Hood wanted to change coach he would. Whether its down to financial constraints or something else i don't know, but it wouldn't be too hard to find another coach who could work just as well or better with the juniors and the junior system.

Does anyone know when Rinaldi's fit anyway?