Quote: Pie Eyed "You fail to allow for the fact that in any other business, if an employee is failing to deliver, they can be either sacked or managed out of the business and replaced (depending on the severity) on a 1-to-1 basis.
In rugby (and football), you can't just sack them as you need to pay up their ENTIRE contract and pay for a replacement as well, meaning that you pay double for 1 job.
We didn't sack Nobby to bring in Madge - We waited for his contract to expire and brought Madge in for the start of the following season.
Therefore, your assertion is equally disproved/flawed, although I agree with your main point that Lam is the issue here - Not Lenagan.'"
Lam may be the problem, but the fact remains that Lenagan has not sacked him either because he is happy with him as the Coach or as you say, if he sacked him, he would have to pay out his full contract plus have the additional cost of a new part season cost of a new contract for his replacement.
In my opinion, seeing that Lenagan is a business man, he has taken the cheapest option of not sacking Lam which is hardly surprising with the present financial state of the club.
The rumour that that a hardly known inexperienced "Coach" in Matty Peet is to be the replacement for Lam is hardly going to give supporters the confidence that things are going to improve on the coaching level of the club.
