What changed at Warrington for Price was the meddling in player recruitment & retention by the board.

Both Price & KFP said "No" to signing Latu, but SM over ruled them both and signed him anyway. That's when SM agreed to never get involved again in player recruitment.

The same happened with the extension handed to Sita by other members of the board including KFP. Hence why Price played him on the wing in one of the games to send a message.

which SM

Powell ruffled the wrong players feathers in some cases, but not all in my opinion. Ie, Mulhern who got way too big for his boots with his new contract demands. But I'm hoping Chambers understands the club & squad better and will target the correct players. Two in particular have already faced the 'hairdryer' (not to be posted on this board though)

Simon Moran

Really don't understand why you'd be poking your nose into signing/re-signing players and going over the head of your coach and CEO. If Latu and Sita were his decisions then thank heavens he's taken a step back.

Interesting to hear about Mulhern, you can't imagine any players getting too arrogant with Sam in charge.

.

So basically you are saying that various board members, at various times, have made player recruitment decisions independent of, and in opposition to, the wishes of the coach at the time.

May I ask.

1. Does this extend to young players being sent out on loan/exile ?
2. When did this stop (if it has)?

All I care about is..............who signed dudson???

If only Moran had ordered a cappuccino instead of a latte during that particular meeting, that misunderstanding could have been avoided.

That's a bet I can get behind it was fun working out which 1st team players it couldn't be

So far I had Ashton, Lynch, Vaughan, Kasiano, Philbin, Bullock, Shingler, Green, Nicholson.

I have always been convinced that Burrell was not a Price signing and now we hear that the head coach was not fully on board with Latu’s signing and Sita’s contract extension.
So from what I read some of the board then agreed to become less involved in the recruitment and retention.
That is sort of backed up by Stuart Middletown recent interview where he says they maybe gave Powell too much control.

“Last year’s results were very disappointing after putting all the resources in place and I think we’ve learned now that in the future we’ve got to ask a lot more questions and not just give someone a free rein and let them do what they want.

“We have to challenge things if we think something is not right, and it’s clear we didn’t get it right last year, we need to make sure we don’t go through that procedure again.”

Depending on how you interpret those comments you could see that as going back to the Latu / Sita days.
I just hope that Sam and Chambers are strong enough to resist any unwanted interference. Clearly the board need to check and challenge but my worry is that “if you don’t get it off your Dad then you go to your Mum” so if a players says he wants £X for his new contract and the coaching team think he is only worth £Y then we can’t have players going to Mum to get what they want. We have to strike the right balance between check and challenge and interfering. I think those comments open the door a bit.

Just seen the extended interview of gary Chambers on Wire TV, I have to say he comes across very well and seems to be as big a Wire as we all are.