The Ellis thing is simply a small issue that some latch on to to prove their point.
There were many things that impacted the run we had. Agar was part of it and so was Ellis.

To say it was all Ellis and nothing to do with Agar is simply illogical.
Sykes had an impact, so did Smith and others

The Washbrook thing is different. I don't think I would have brought him back so quickly but I don't know whether others needed a rest so hard to say.
I do wonder about him though. When he arrived he showed skills as far as I am concerned. I remember the preseason games when he scored a couple of tries and put a nice inside pass for someone else to score. He has shown this since but certainly for a whole season it seems to have gone.

When others blame Agar for playing him (which to imply he has favourites is again illogical to me) I do wonder if Agar is asking him to play a game which is stopping him showing those skills.

I remember Ferris coming to us and topping the tackle count regularly, but everybody was upset that he wasn't the ball player like Solomona. Since moving to play under and onother coach he has shown he has got the international level skills but when you are simply asked him to tackle everything that moves, you have nothing left to give in attack.
For me Agar needs to either give Washbrook a chance to use his skills (changing his individual style rather than shoving him in at stand off!) and then plug the defensive holes with other players, or make him a tackling machine, which also makes him expendable when others can do that, like Tautai and Annakin.

So I don't have a crazy hatred of Washbrook like some do, but I think this should be his last season with us, and we have others who can play his position now.

We signed Lyne at the start of last year.
Tautai and Molloy halfway through last year.
That's 3 extra contracts, whilst other players were out on loan.
Didn't we have to pay a fee to Fev to get Mariano back too?
Cas may well slow up but they have got points on the board that have ruled them out of a relegation scrap and are playing with confidence and no pressure.
We on the other hand seem to be taking two steps forward and one step back.
It's a results business, this year more than ever but cannot afford to change due to length of contract.
I hope I am proved wrong and get my nose rubbed well and truly into the mud!

How is Agar doing for you in regard to giving your young players first team games?

He's already given a kid his first team debut just a week after his 17th birthday. He's hinted at max jowitt another 17 year old playing games this season. The other youngsters people mention such as walshaw trout and wildie (all have played this season) aren't so much youngsters any more and were in the system before agar came along; have been sent out on loan to get some game time. Many cynics believe this is because agar hates them and everything they do, my belief is they aren't good enough for his first 17 just yet but he wants them fit and ready should any injuries occur and they're needed as back up. No good the lads just training and not getting game time they need to be battle hardened and match fit should they be called upon.

The one thing I will say is that we have progressed to a more informed and thought out discussion on Agar.
It proves both sides have a case but equally we don't know all the info.

For example he has clearly said in the press that he wants Wildie on loan as he is a part of the team but needs more game time than he is able to get now. That tells me he does not hate him and still sees him as valuable.
Equally, he didn't say that about Trout. Does that mean he doesn't see him as important or that he just didn't say it this time. People will draw dfferent conclusions but we don't actually know.

It falls to Richard Agar to determine whether or not the players are at a level where they can do a job either as a squad player or a regular starter in the 17.

He clearly saw deficiency in the abilities of some and they have moved or been moved on while in others he still sees something but not enough for them to cement a place hence they get duel registered and the odd game here and there.
I wonder whether those players have been let down by the regime preceding Agar and lots are now laying the blame at Agars door.

I'm no Agar appologise and I'm as critical of his illogical team selections and bench rotation as anyone else, I was baffled by his changes on Sunday and like many others I can't understand his love of Washbrook but I don't blame all the ills of the current youth system on him.

The Kear era is far from blameless but Agar is just as much to blame as the previous regime by not developing the talent he obviously had at his disposal. He is now into his third season here and the juniors he inherited have grown up yet their development has stagnated under HIS regime. For example..

Matty Wildie was our young player of the year in 2011, he held his own rotating with Julien Rinaldi in a team that struggled and to a man everyone on here thought we had unearthed a potential future gem. Agar came in and he has played just ten games intermittently ever since, being regularly overlooked unless it was him or nobody or it was easter monday at wigan. In my opinion he could have done the job Kyle Wood did equally as well if not better but was never given the chance. Maybe now that chance has gone.

Lucas Walshaw was given his debut at the back end of the 2011 season by Kear and looked very promising. We were up in arms when Huddersfield came in for him and relieved and over-joyed when he re-signed. Since then he has played about a dozen games, getting just ten minutes in a variety of positions here or there in some of them. We had such luminaries like Vince Mellars getting much more of a chance than he ever did.

Kear was quoted as saying he but for injury he would have given Chris Annakin his debut in 2011 as he felt he was ready. Yet he has been conspicous by his absence for the majoirty of Agars reign and when he has played most of his games have been as an interchange prop which is not his position. Yet the perennially under-performing Washbrook gets picked every week.

Kyle Trout is another that has been overlooked consistantly whilst Agar went out and wasted money on a player like Jon Molloy to do a job Kyle coud have done himself. Yet he found himself shoved out on dual reg and further down the pecking order.

Hopefully Agar will treat the next batch better than the talent he had available which has gone to waste under his watch. I remain convinced that given a proper chance then these players would have proved themselves to be superleague standard and above. It strikes me that if you are not one of his choices you are going to stuggle to get a look in.

You forgot Jordon Crowther of course too.
He gave some of the other kids a run in the friendlies to prepare for the day they will be ready.

I'm not saying you are right or wrong, but i do think it is a one sided view.

I have to agree on that one; Andy Ellis' contribution to our short-lived play-off appearance has taken on mythical proportions, only because it is regularly cited by those people with an axe to grind against Richard Agar.

Ellis was a decent ball-playing hooker who played his own small part in a run of enjoyable, hard-fought games; he isn't Cameron Smith or even James Roby, and the fact that he's now playing at Featherstone rather bears that out. If he was the superstar that some would have us believe, he'd be at Wigan or Leeds by now.

I'm all for constructive criticism, but it's important to base that criticism in at least something resembling facts.

Poptart your defence of everything the club does is admiral but misguided. Anyway your answers.

McShane isn't an 80 minute hooker. Siejka isn't a hooker, Wildie is and did nothing wrong to get dropped. But he did.

Mellars played 28 games against SL teams, Walshaw 11.

Annakin wasn't injured the whole of 2012 or half of last season yet he didn't get picked. Walshbrook played virtually every game despite being ineffective in most of them.

Molloy played well for half an hour against catalans and got injured again. He was garbage in the games he played last year. Trout is every bit as good as him.

Wood got signed because he got the chance to prove himself, more than Wildie ever had. If he had been given a shot then you may have just found that he could have cut the mustard.

And i didn't forget Crowther, this was a response to the talent Agar had at his disposal when he arrived that he has failed to utilise.

I don't defend the club, i just don't like it when hearsay type facts are presented and then a major conclusion drawn such as Agar Out. There is plenty wrong with the club there is no doubt.
I should also point out that I'm not having a go at you particularly, it's just your post was clearer than most and easier to comment on.

Mellars didn't play 28 games while Walshaw was ready to play. That is misleading with stats. I haven't seen a situation where Mellars kept Walshaw out of the team. We were in a difficult position with Mellars, in that he was costing money for nothing so he may have played more games simply because we may as well play him at times. Certainly wasn't Agar's choice

I quite like Trout to be honest but in the back row he is always going to have limited opportunity. Molloy has had the same limited opportunity but when I saw him this season, he played well. Many fans say Trout is rubbish. I argue with them too as that is used to explain why Agar is a bad coach too. Can't both be right.

Wildie, again I rate him and was calling for him to be the bench hooker for McShane. Agar has explained that he rates him and is doing it for his own development. He can't do that with Siejka.

ok then . FACT - WE WON 7 GAMES ON BOUNCE WITH ELLIS/WOOD COMBO

FACT - AGAR ONLY PLAYED HIM BECAUSE HE HAD TO - THEN GOT RID ASAP

I HAVEN`T READ ANYWHERE ON HERE ANYONE SAYING THAT ELLIS IS/WAS WORLD CLASS . JUST THAT IN THE ROLE HE PLAYED WAS A DAMN SIGHT BETTER THAN AITON .

I'm sorry but one player doesn't affect how a whole team play. Things clicked for us then and we got lucky with the bulls points deduction. Yes Ellis was quick from dummy half however IMO Aiton was the better player. However I now believe we have a better hooker than Ellis in terms of skills from dummy half but not as good defensively as Aiton - something I'd like to think we're working on.
Agar doesn't pick a team to lose, he picks a team to win. As many of the fans I dont know why Washbrook plays and I would prefer he didn't but Agar must see something in him if he starts him at 13 when he's fit.

have to disagree- a good hooker will affect how a team will play more than any other player. not saying ellis was better than aiton overall - but he was a better dummy half , he didn`t turn the ball over 3/4 times a match with a fumble or forward pass. i don`t want to be seen as someone who wants to bag agar at every opportunity - but i maintain that to interfere with the teams structure for the hkr game was CRIMINAL. as for the bulls points deduction - i never mentioned getting in the 8 , just the fact we played terrific rugby and won 7 on bounce. that was after winning 7 of the previous 20 . again for the agar apologists , with players he was FORCED to play

I used to wrong word for the hooker but it won't change the team completely, for me the forwards affect how a team play and then your pivots play on that. Yes I agree HKR was criminal and I was pretty cheesed off about it too. Agar wasn't forced to play Ellis he could of played Wildie instead.