Stats

Quote: Kosh "I remember the discussions on here about both Kear and Sharp. By the time both left they were no more popular than Agar. Kear's recruitment was patchy at best - he stuffed the side with average players to cover for injuries and to a certain extent we've only just started to recover from that strategy. He also couldn't get us playing consistently in the league and our style outside of the CC games was just as dull as at present. Sharp was a better coach IMO but his recruitment was poor and he seemed to struggle with the style required in the modern game. Overall no better than Agar.

Kear was ousted for reasons not entirely connected with our on-field performances. Arguably the BOD should have squared up to the issue and supported him, but fans on here were split 50/50 on his departure at the time. Sharp I think was sacked too soon, and the decision to replace him with Agar looked like a knee-jerk response.

I'm no fan of Agar, but to say that he is worse than our last two coaches is extremely debatable IMO. And I think that the decision to give him so much time to come good has a lot to do with the way and speed of departure of his predecessors.'"

Spot on for me, Kosh. 71-0 against Bradford and the awful defeat at Odsal in defence of the CC were as hideous as our Cup run was superb. Sharp was probably not given enough time with the big injury list, but I also think his apparent ambivalence towards the fans of the club didn't help him, nor his random press conference performances. I understand the club retaining Agar for continuity, but the issue is that even if we have a disastrous season, Agar will be succeeded either by James Webster or Steve McNamara. The current board do not believe a world class coach is warranted for a club of our size. This is all the more staggering when we're prepared to shell out £120k or whatever it was for a backrower, but there we have it.