I couldn't agree more. And given that [isome[/i players are capable of turning in a performance it can't be entirely the coaches fault.

I honestly think Radford had no idea what he was taking on. Seems he thought it was just Gentle doing it wrong, and once he was gone the players would buy in to the new regime without a problem. Now he's reaping what he had a role in sowing.

Thats unbelievable, surely the coach should make this decision, also that would juts motivate the players more.

What next, players vote who plays what position, this is a sports club, not Big Brother.

Good idea. Doubt Whiting would nominate himself at centre.

There was a comment from Radford about how he players had worked hard and talked about what they needed to do to win the game.

So why can't they bring that onto the field?

And if it's about talking up their plans and knowing what to do, they had enough time behind the posts to discuss it further in the second half.

All comes down to game management again I've said it for a couple of years now but we must have the dumbest set of players in sl. 12-0 up with a strong wind all we had to do was kick early in the set and feed off bradford's mistakes. For all of Radford's failings these players should be able themselves to do the basics

We said the same. That break from Horney for example led to an absolute horlicks of a play and they scored soon after (I think).

Why on earth we couldn't play sensible rugby and at least keep possession baffles me. They are pro players, not the half time little leaguers.

Our control of the game is so poor at times, hopefully Sneyd and Pryce will help that.

First ..to think letting Pitts and Arundal play was our downfall is way off the mark.If Radford cannot get his side to perform who got them up for Cas and saints? Would Sa being on from the start made any difference? doubt it.This loss was down to a poor performance by certain players making poor decisions ,poor defence and with a very poor kicking game and panic...nothing else.As someone said if Sneyd and Pryce were in the side today we would have won I have no doubt about that.Radford was spot on in his interview

Players make mistakes not only because of brain farts and tiredness, they make mistakes through lack of leadership both on and off the pitch, lack of cohesion as a group which absolutely includes the coach. Also fear of reprisal, being dropped/no contract renewal/being lambasted in public or amongst peer group.
The performances reflect the leader, they feed from him, the buck stops with Radford in every aspect of how we perform, both tactically, physically and mentally.
it's all well and good having talent but if you do not manage/coach that talent in the correct way it just will not perform, some 'people' just won't perform under a leader whom shows they are out of their depth/clueless or just mismanage the situation, 'sportspeople' are no different to any other persons from a psyche POV. In fact sportspersons at the top end of their sport are MORE fragile mentally than comparables in other industries..but our 'coach' wouldn't have a clue about that either...

Pass sales Down Interest down And if we play like this under the Landlord next year FC down. The bloke is clueless and if Pearson can't see this so is he !!!!!!

When Radford took over one of the first things the players asked him to do was start dropping people based on form. It's a bit late for them to decide they don't like it now.

It's astounding how many players seem to stagnate or go backwards at Hull, isn't it? And how they seem to blossom on escape. Such indulgent smiles we exchanged as Arundel scampered over for his second today, and clasped our hands in pleasure as Jay Pitts scored too. Hope Carvell and the rest of the Hull rejects enjoy their trip to Wembley next week.

But that hasn't/isn't actually happened has it? And if through poor management 2/3-3/4 of your squad are performing badly how does dropping said poor performers (ajudged by a 'coach' who hasn't got a clue in the first instance) work out in the grand scheme of us winning games?

Is that the official party line then that the players said whomever plays badly one week gets turfed out for the next match? Because that has worked out hasn't it?
Look at those whom have being 'treated' in this fashion, it's worked wonders for their confidence and performances, in fact the whole squad has being busting a gut week in week out not to be on this underperforming rosta of shame

Actually understanding people & how to get the best out of them & the best methods to do so is the number one priority (after their welfare) if you have any thoughts about being a leader. Sadly for Radford and indeed Pearson neither seem to have an inkling about this subject matter so the technical stuff of playing rugby actually becomes immaterial

Hasn't it?

We've had plenty of players dropped after poor performances.

I find it unlikely that Pearson has had the amount of success in business that he has without knowing anything at all about leadership.

Radford appears to have thought that he could get the best out of the players by including them in the decision making process. Clearly that's only worked for a few. I think he's now struggling to understand why players who say and do one thing in training fail to perform on matchday.

Appeasing the players is not managing them though is it? What the players want may not necessarily be what's best for them or the team. Form is subjective , based on many things including the form of other players and it's often a slow burn into or out of form. Then there's confidence , fitness and the players ability to be honest with themselves about those things. That's why we need an experienced coach with insight and an ability to manage people and communicate with a whole range of different personalities and we certainly don't have that at the moment. What's more worrying is that we are not looking to add any experience in this area. Quite the opposite in fact in that we are bringing in two more inexperienced people to the coaching staff , Tuson and Horne , for no other reason than they played for us. With Horne it's even more bizarre because he has been a common factor throughout the period where we've lacked professionalism in the playing staff. Not necessarily down to him of course but it would seem to me to be incredible that we think he will somehow now be able to do something to change what he's been a part of for so long and like Last and Radford has absolutely no experience of anything else.