Pearson made the wrong call after the 'get Gentle sacked' surrender at Huddersfield.
Defensive coach - Radford and our tough tackling centre who resembled a turnstile that day should have paid the price.
Gentle could have been given an enforcer to balance his laid back, nice guy approach - our attack was looking good under him - seeing him in the EELS dugout just shows what a bad decision that was.

Agree. First time I was really disappointed in Pearson's decision-making and judgement. What was he thinking and who was he listening to? And why?

Like Bones - I'd like a pint (well, glass of wine in my case) with Andy Hay.

Let's say this is true and there is no cash. There are no other interested parties. No money to pay off Radford, let alone spend big on a new coach. No cash to replace outgoing directors. Let's say this is true. Whatever the rights and wrongs of it, how, in his scenario, will staying away from games help Hull FC survive in the top flight? This isn't a question about previous decisions which have been discussed ad nauseam nor a defence of them. But a simple question. If there is no money and no alternative, how will withholding financial support help Hull FC?

The simple answer that you clearly know is that it won't.

It's one of those issues where there's no 'right' answer. Stay away and it causes at least short term, and in possible circumstances permanent damage to the club. Keep stumping up and you're subsidising Pearson's stubbornness and/or stupidity and simultaneously giving him little reason to change anything.

It's similar to people who complain at the declining quality and originality of Hollywood films and still queue up for the next Transformers etc.

Best to just decide whether or not you still enjoy it and want to go. You shouldn't feel like you have to out of some sort of obligation.

Fair points. In the scenario of no money, what specifics could Pearson change? IMO humility and transparency in communications is one. I'm not suggesting there's any obligation on anyone BTW. But in the scenario we're on the financial brink, there'd be a real risk that staying away could contribute directly to not having a SL team to support. Clearly there are other factors that may have led to this, but that doesn't change the choices in front of us.

Well first off, I don't actually believe we're at that point. I think Pearson did a bit of scaremongering to try and drum up some more sales out of fear because too many were/are getting fed up of and wise to buying jam tomorrow. If things were so tight I don't think we'd be flying Motu Tony to the other side of the world for signings to fill our cap for next year, especially when there's a chance of the Championship.

But in answer to your question, if Pearson can't afford the necessary changes he has 2 options: 1) Cut the wage bill as contracts end. We're not really any better at full cap than we probably would be at lower, we play such a basic, dull style we could do it to pretty much the same standard with cheaper players. 2) Reduce the selling price by however much is necessary to find a taker. He'll lose money, but the harsh truth is that that would be the price of his own mistakes. He was possibly on the brink of some financial success before he set fire to his own production line.

Aye.
Uncle Peter has managed to get the Eels up to the heady heights of 15th out of 16 thus far on the NRL ladder since contributing his expert coaching qualities

I'm not sure we're at that point either, but it was a response to a post suggesting we are. Not sure about scaling back squad quality. We'd have takers for Shaul and Lineham for example but without their contributions we'd probably be 4-6 points worse off - we rely heavily on individual plays as the structure's so lacking. Taking out the calibre of players who can do this might further weaken our grip on tge top flight.

Not sure about reducing the price to cut his losses. Although Sky money's gone up, most clubs lose money and will want to participate in the marquee signing market and the situation with the SMC gives a buyer a headache in terms of security and cost of tenure at the KC. I think FC was up for sale for a long time before AP bought us. Are there willing suitors our there? I haven't heard whispers of any.

Quick question Mrs. B. If you had the money (and obviously I don't know whether you have or not) would you consider investing it in the shambles that is Hull FC.

I'd rather spend less on players and more on a proven top quality coach if that's the only way we could afford it. I don't believe it is for the record though. In a sport controlled by a salary cap the biggest difference can be made by spending on the coaching set up and yet we gave the job to an ex-player with less than 2 seasons experience as an assistant coach. Ridiculous decision.

Exactly! How teams play at any club is down to the coach, he is the one who is responsible for success or failure. The coach/manager will take the team to the level of his ability. To prove this theory take the classic example at Man Utd. Ferguson winning everything possible like he did at his previous clubs and making sure they were a top club every season, never out of the top 3 in the league and qualifiers for the Champions League every year. He leaves and the club employ a coach (Moyes) who year after year only manages to achieve mid table positions and never qualify for the Champions League. Guess what? United suddenly become a mid table side and don't qualify for the Champions League.
Now, we have sacked a coach (Gentle) who got us in the top 6 the both seasons he managed us (and a cup final) and replaced him with a coach from an amateur league, if my theory is correct we should now be bottom of the league and heading for the amateur leagues! Having watched us lately and looked at the Super league table and stats could anyone argue that we would look out of place in those leagues??


Some say it was time for Peter to go after the Cup and Huddersfield fiasco BUT it was leaked to him that Pearson was going to sack him 2 weeks before Wembley by some of the players and thats why the team played badly during those 2 games. I know this because he was lodging at my mates house in Swanland and believe me he got a raw deal and was extremely upset with Pearson. So yea the buck stops with Pearson.

If I won the Euromillions for sure. But not to make a return, to try and buy success. The end of franchising IMO makes it a much less attractive investment also as it makes planning for the future far less certain. And dealing with the SMC on the stadium would be a big negative for an investor as signals must be that we're at risk of being evicted.

I agree completely with Robbo4 that in a salary cap era the coach is the biggest potential differentiator. I wrote to James Rule on exactly this point re Agar and he told me it was nonsense. With unlimited funds this would be my priority, from a cultural as well as technical perspective.