Listen to various interviews it was WP getting his marching orders one minute and MA was in the next being offered the job. The justification for not going further was the fact due process in terms of who was out there was undertaken the previous year before WP was appointed. We knew who was out there and there was no one we wanted who was prepared to take on the role in the first place. I can imagine most coaches of note will have taken one look at the task and thought 'Not for me'.

If they went off info and candidates that were a year old then that is negligent at best, a year is an awful long time especially in sport and a lot can change.

Really?
In RL?
Still waiting for you to come back with your suggestions.

Yes it really can, 2006 Salford finished 4th, 2007 they were relegated. This Time Last Year Tony Smith was Coach at Hull KR, now he is at Hull FC. Last year Warrington finished below us now look at where they are and where we are. I could go on if you like????

In terms of suggestions I can only judge by peoples CV's on paper but one example would be Danny Ward who proved with London that he can get better performances out of a squad than it looked like it could produce on paper.

I feel that MA got the job because he was the only candidate that was seriously considered not because he was the best candidate for the job.

The poor planning around the decision to lay a pitch in the middle of winter continues to pay dividends https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... tv-8258238

The poor planning around the decision to lay a pitch in the middle of winter continues to pay dividends https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... tv-8258238

Egg Banjo wrote:The poor planning around the decision to lay a pitch in the middle of winter continues to pay dividends https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... tv-8258238 Can't wait for the rose tinted brigade to come out and say that the club is not to blame...

Egg Banjo wrote:The poor planning around the decision to lay a pitch in the middle of winter continues to pay dividends https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/sport/r ... tv-8258238 Can't wait for the rose tinted brigade to come out and say that the club is not to blame...

There are no new concerns regarding the pitch. Hudds had no complaints.

Prior to the Hudds inspection which passed it was stated that it would be monitored and possibly inspected again at a later date. If you’d cared to pay attention.

This is also precautionary due to pitch inspection. There are no fresh concerns reported. This is just precautionary as the pitch progress is being monitored.

This has been gone through all ready and calling out ‘rose tinted brigades’ labelling fans who may have a different stand point to your own achieves nothing than I suspect a desire to start an argument.

The club are doing what they can. It’s an issue and it’s already been well talked about and addressed.

It's an issue that through the usual poor planning of the club, we have yet again lost valuable revenue and advertising through not being broadcast.

Huddersfield did have concerns, but they were balanced by them just wanting to play the game so they didn't end up with too many games in hand later in the season.

I have pointed out on another topic that Sky have used the doubts about the pitch to move their coverage because basically they believe showing us would not be good for viewing figures based on our performances. The fixture was announced to be on Sky prior to the start of the season and I doubt they believed we would be as bad as we are and let’s be honest we currently do not make good TV.

I think with the game subject to a pitch inspection the RFL/Sky have decided yo be be proactive and ensure they show a game where there is no doubt, however small.

Sensationalist click bait for me.