Once of London Scholars??

Ooh, don't know about that.

He talks a good game!

Like someone said previously, under Kear's regime we had a good squad and we attracted crowds. His teams play in a very structured way, and you need players like Brough to excite that. Tim Smith is perfectly capable of doing that, if those around him show the effort. He was stymied eventually by the collapse of the Thornes Park ground notion, as that brought about administration. But even with the team that followed, the bunch of kids and lower league try-hards, we did well enough. Was often a bit dull, but with little talent in the squad, we had no choice to play in a structured way. You can only play with what you have.

As someone has said, Kear has enough experience to bring more than just a coaching role. He might bring his knowledge of the game too.

People say why would he or Morrison leave steady jobs. Because they like to challenge themselves. That's why he took the job in 2006. The squad was probably better then, because there seemed to be a lot of unity in the squad, with a lot of antipodean players who socialised together away from the club (look at how Obst and Semi followed JD to Northern Pride), but our current squad is no way a poor squad. It's hard to fathom why it's gone so wrong.

Loves him to bits really, just too stubborn to admit it

He's not the coach though - so we're ok!

Agreed

I think the squad as a whole is far better than we've had for the past 2/3 years and although the comp is harder with 12 clubs (instead of 14), we should be competitive with the bottom 5/6 clubs and not cut adrift after 13 games (albeit with a game in hand)

A bit of belief and some defensive structure and we can start to compete.

Wakefield have had to defy the odds for al of their time in SL and it's no different now.
Stand up and be counted and lets see w hat happens !

Tim Smith - player/coach.

Strange thought. Personally when Mr Carter was talking about players not bothered about losing to Leigh in the dressing room Tim Smith was the first to pop into my head.

If we got JK as the coach he would use the squad directly in front of him, which may stop the younger players getting in to the 1st team. He used the experienced players last time to keep us in superleague & I think he would do the same again.
But there are few coaches around who can get immediate results like JK did last time around.

In Kears defence when he was here players like Walllshaw and Anakin and the rest were not really ready if we are honest.

We can only speculate as to whether Anakin and Wallshaw who were probably cream of the crop would have faired under him in the last few years. It's fair to say that the Academy winning team was a TEAM rather than a collection of young stars so I'd not have expected it to yield more than 2-3 SL players - It wasn't like the Leeds team that produced Burrows etc, they were virtually all SL bound no matter what as they were the best youngsters around at the time - we could never afford that.

What is for certain is that JK combined with Steve Ferres would have unearthed a number of hidden gems from numerous other clubs as well - why because they know the players and where they come from.

The easiest way to rectify Kears perceived weakness on the junior front is to force him to work closer with a recognised youth coach who prepares his players in a way they cannot be ignored.

Sorry vasty but the only thing you've got right here is the bit about Kears perceived weakness, when it came to that winning team he was clueless, besides Annakin and Walshaw there was Tom Harrington, Adam Slater, Adam Gledhill, Matty Wilde, Danny Cowling, Dale Morton, Cain Southerwood, I saw Harrington at Stanningley embarrass Callum Watkins he was that much better, and I saw those players at Cas destroy the much shouted about Cas youngsters including Clark, Milner, Holmes, and the like.
We had a recognised youth coach in Tony Drury one of the best there was who spent 3 years assisted by Rich Hampshire working to achieve their success, unfortunately John Kear was not interested in polishing these gifted youngsters into gems, only the finished article and that's why these lads were left to drift off along, thanks in the main to James Elston who also got rid of Tony as well, they were a collection of young individual stars who only needed taking forward a bit more but unfortunately it did not happen to the detriment of the club.

Cannot agree with that Chissitt.
Wildie had loads of opportunity at Wakefield and is now playing at the appropriate level, as are Morton, Cowling and Southernwood.

No I haven't got it wrong because that's more or less what I said.

It is a perceived weakness because some would argue that Kears use of seasoned players is correct - Kear for a start.

You've hit the nail on the head with Drury and as you say that was Elston. Without correct management a Coach like water will always take the easiest route to suit him. There should have been structured and above all "Chaired" meetings regarding youth selection. Getting rid of your successful Youth coach sends out a poor message,

Again regarding these plays Tom Harrington, Adam Slater, Adam Gledhill, Matty Wilde, Danny Cowling, Dale Morton, Cain Southerwood - Sorry but Kear probably right in most cases, Wilde was never good enough and got plenty of chances as did Morton who is with Kear now isn't he?. The others probably deserved better but again were any ready in 2011? Gledhill and Elston between them pressed the self destruct button there if I recall. As for Southernwood I'm not having that one my friend you and I both know there was a huge attitude issue there even Mopsey states that.

This all goes back to the experience of the CEO. He has to enforce onto JK should he get the gig that long term youth development is paramount and he will be judged on it. Even in the murky world of RL that's possible. Worth noting that youth is always long term and as we are virtually starting from zero again this may take a while.

It really is a shame what happened to that team - but Kear has always been Kear and will remain so unsupervised which of course is why we have a BOD