Wether you rate him as a coach or not to call him a f wit is poor form, if he's not good enough fine let the board sort it out.

But the bloke however talented gives his best.

So its the boards fault?

If he had anything about him whatsoever, he would walk now and give our massive club to someone who has a clue what to do with it.

As far as language goes, I would have probably agreed with you a few weeks ago but I'm now way passed politeness with him now ! I just want rid of this clown from our club and I don't care what happens to hasten his departure.

so giving his best is being watched at half time live on tv walking around the changing room hands in pocket, head down not saying a word, ,a la Wakefield last week then? If that's giving his best, what would be giving his worst. He's already admitted to not doing video analysis, bothering with the opposition in how it plays and the danger men they possess.

And as for the board, well, the reason Agar is in charge is because if the board were actually forced to go and find a proper coach who knew what he was doing , then they wouldn't have a yes man to boss around. Agar must be thinking, this coaching is an easy life, no matter how crap I am at it, the board will still give me a 2 year extension.

Did you say it about all the other players that have been injured as well ?

I've seen worst reactions off better coaches.

Why would he leave a well
paid job he believes he can succed at?

Kear was sacked after winning a trophy. Agar is rewarded after a poor start to the season with a new deal!
The mind boggles!

has he gone yet?

One thing is perturbing,

When Kear was sacked, we didnt 'head-hunt' a specific target.

If my memory serves me right, we put an advert in RL publications.

Instead of, making a shortlist, and then trying to entice the right man for the job.

I think 'The Brother' or 'Carl Spackler' said, you would be amazed who had applied,

Names such as Peter Roe and Andy Kelly.

Teams such as Warrington,St Helens and Leeds, have always got their preferred choice.

no the subject was about Sean Long, y would i talk about Calderwood or one of the others injured, when the thread was about Sean Long

Fair enough it was just that if I understood you right Long gets injured because he is old ? It left me wondering why younger players get injured that was all.

Older players are more prone to injury, and slow down considerably. All players get injured. I dont doubt for one minute how good Long was, but was is the opertative word. Just my opinion of course

to be honest Sharp wasn't that bad of a decision, at the time, he was highly rated in the game.

his main downfall was Cooke leaving and some poor signings.

for every Manu, Tickle or Berrigan he signed there was a Maivia, Sing or Dykes.

The pros and cons of Long's signing, particularly his [ipotential[/i fitness problems, were discussed at length on here when it was announced. Maybe you've forgotten in your haste to appear better than everyone else? The consensus was that it was a risk, but on balance one we probably had to take. I assume that the club made the same assessment when considering his signing.

Nobody suggested that Long was the complete answer to our half back problems. Nobody.

I see the bigger picture here and the long term succession plan. 2 more years of Agar, trotting out the "building his own team/injuries" lines. Meanwhile McNamara steers the national team to 2 more years of dismal failure and then recognises, as all those who've gone before him have, that it's not a proper job and he wants a club role again, ideally not too far from Walkington...