"jobs for the boys"

"inexperienced coach"

"cheap option"

Imagine the comments after his 1st loss!

Not sure why he would, or should, get anymore respect than Powell?

It's not like many of them played with him? (Ratchford & Cooper??).

While I always felt that Monaghan had the makings of a good coach (sensible, seemingly intelligent bloke, good speaker & an obvious rugby brain), I'm not sure throwing him head first into our job would have been wise - Similarly, I'm not sure a club with high expectations as Leeds is the right call either, though I guess he might be good for getting the Sezer/Austin partnership firing?

Fair comment.
I’ve nothing against Powell, and I’m happy with his appointment.

My comment was generally about thinking outside the box and I know I’m going off the threads subject but:
What makes St Helens go for Justin Holbrook who in a season and half turns them into grand final winners from what he inherited (coached the Australian kids for a few games) and lays platform for another coach in Kristian Woolfe a coach who had a few games with Tonga take over and his likely to win 3 on the bounce.
If any of them 2 were mentioned when we employed Steve Price, 95% of this forum would of asked who?
The thing is with Saints when they make a mistake (Cunningham), they rectify it quickly. Saints have a great CEO in Mike Rush who the owner trusts to make the right decision.
It was obvious after 2 and bit seasons that Steve Price’s rugby wasn’t going to win us the cup we wanted and his type of rugby had our crowds dwindling but we still persisted for another 2 years.

It’s been said that Price was offered the job as the initial targets didn’t take up the offer or didn’t show interest after the first chat to the CEO.

Leeds rectify quickly too, I recall that Furner was out after 6 months following poor results. Peet won't be at Wigan too long if they have a poor season too.

But, embedded culture is a big part of it. Everyone involved in the Saints, Leeds, Wigan set up [iexpect [/ito win the GF, whereas with Warrington we [ihope [/ito. Big difference.

Couple of points.

1. Holbrook was appointed before Price so we would have known him when Price was employed. (Holbrook was well thought of in Australia. If we had acted quicker at the demise of Smith we could have potentially recruited him).

2. We asked "who?" when we employed Price after the original targets turned us down.

I accept that we are not where we want to be but I think this “culture” thing can be overstated. I’m sure Saints expected to win the 4 GF’s that they lost. In high stake games a single incident can have a massive impact, from an injury, a card, a rush of blood to the head (the Flower incident) or a ball bouncing back off the post. Getting to the final is crucial, what happens next is often the finest of margins.

well, re that, i'm just listening the to podcast with jason clark, its just occurred to me that for all the darts thrown from the usual suspects at middleton/moran, fitz and powelly, no one has had a pop at the welfare manager kylie leuluai, who if you recall we were told was being brought in as a standard and example setter from his time at leeds,

Of course to expect is not to guarantee. We seem to talk about "being there or thereabouts" and "making finals" and "just 1 GF win in my lifetime" etc.

What I mean to say is that any player joining those clubs will know the club has the expectation of winning the GF backed up by a track record of being serial GF winners. I don't think it's the same at Warrington, it cannot be.

Anyhow, I'm now not getting irritated by our lack of achievement, it's more an observation. If we win it - great, if we don't I'll try to enjoy the games.

Easy to lose sight of the fact that basically we all want the best for our club when discussing “the issues”. I know I “sometimes” do!

The one thing that unites us all - we all want to see the Wire win the big one.