But they'll all have lovely nails.

And exceptionally coifed hair to boot.

Francis Cummins has been badly done to. You draw a parallel between Leeds and Bradford but there is a difference. Dean Bell’s record in 1996 was pretty similar and GH stuck with him. Huddersfield stuck with Tony Smith when they were being beat left right and centre and were relegated. Subsequently they came back stronger .The Bulls panic management seem focussed on a quick fix. They have missed a great opportunity with Francis Cummins to re build from nothing and invest in youth. IMO Cummins Leeds connection has worked against him and from the start he was behind the eight ball He would have needed to work a miracle to win over many resentful Bradford fans with such a poor quality squad. After last nights results they would be better off blooding more youngsters in preparation for next year because Hope has defiantly fled Pandora’s box.

The bulls should have stayed with cummins,as normal they have carried on with the bulls tradition of making the wrong decisions. Starting with the Harris saga and inviting ownership bids from various parties who should not be anywhere near a super league club.
Credit to Cummins he kept a dignified silence amid the comedy capers that surrounded him.

Cummins at no time ever as a player showed anything to indicate he could make a coach.

The Bulls were right, he was never going to take them forward, regardless of their other problems.

Cummins been badly done to?

He's been abysmal this season. They've played without any desire and motivation this season. Even with no coach they improved against hull kr.

I dare say if they'd canned him sooner they'd have a fighting chance of survival.

Can you explain what you mean by that?

I dare say the same could be said for big old props McDermott, Wane and Anderson. They've already all done better than the likes of a Schofield or Goulding or Harris, players noted for their skill and rugby brains.

On the field yes.

Off the field? Hmmmmmm.

Goulding was a terrific player, but I don't recall "brains" being a word that people used to describe him very often.

I still think Iestyn Harris will make a good coach. Early days in his career yet.

It does seem that some of the Big Daft Lad props some of us grew up watching were not quite as daft as they looked.

Similarly people like Tony Smith and Graham Murray didn't have the most illustrious careers or display traits that would make you think they would make great coaches. What would have made Wayne Bennett stand out as a potential coach from his playing days?

Similarly you might have thought Schofield would make a great coach.

It's why I wonder what Gotcha was meaning.

A strong case can be made that the better a player was, the harder it is for them to be a great coach. The best explanation I heard was that great players tend to find it very hard dealing with 'normal' players when they become coaches - they could do things by instinct and ability by themselves and didn't need telling what to do, and so they find it very hard to emphasize with someone who does need that support. The opposite then being true for more average players moving into coaching.

Its clearly not a hard and fast rule, but it does seem to generally bear out in the RL world.

The huge arrogance that is often (and to a degree understandably) attached to greatness on the field probably doesn't help with man management either.

I am not sure why you think anyone was alluding to any coach only been good if they were a good player?

The best coaches have always been leaders, players who put their bodies on the line for team mates, show passion, show hunger, good drive to work, call the move. We see those players today at the top coaching in our game. I can't think of one that didn't possess those traits, and had a pea for a heart, who is succeeding.

Really top coaches seem to be great man managers - Bennett possibly the greatest of them all. It does help if you have the talent to coach, would Tony Smith turn Wakefield into league leaders?

Lowes is possibly what Bradford need right now, Cummins definitely not.

That was my prediction right from the start. There was a brief period last season when I did question my view though. There are other players I would add to the list of 'never be a coach in a million years' such as Tony Smith Jr & David Plange. Unfortunately I also had James Lowes in that group.

I thought no such thing. I asked you to clarify what you meant, that is all. However, what you type in the very next paragraph appears to infer that is exactly what you are saying.

Again I'll ask, what of the qualities listed above were displayed by Wayne Bennett or Tony Smith in their playing careers?

I have inferred nothing of the sort in either post. So is this another of your personal crusades? as I see you are not asking others who have said the same thing.




I don't comment on things I have not seen, whether that is a game or just players. I never saw Bennett play, and I can't really remember Smith either. Then again as they are in a completely different country and competition, that would be the same for most.

I did however see Cummins play, so I am in a position to comment on that, which I did. I would be surprised if Bennett and Smith had the same failings.

I seem to remember Tony Smith playing for Workington (I think?) sometime in the 1990's but he didn't come across as some sort of brave heart.Although he was playing with/in a beaten pack.

I can't see what special qualities Lowes has displayed in his coaching career that give the impression he will do a better job than Francis Cummins.

That would depend how much credit you see in McDermott. Because nothing won since he left McDermott's side from Leeds. Could be argued he played a big part in the success. He certainly seemed to improve Carnegie a hell of a lot, and a different sport to go with it.

I am not disagreeing with you, but think its worth considering the above. And perhaps that is also what Bradford have considered.

He certainly showed a lot of qualities in his playing days that would give the impression he would be a better coach than Cummins.

So did Schofield and Goulding but not so much Paul Anderson and Wane possibly. Look at how that's worked out.

My argument falls down in 2 quick words though: 'Lee' and 'Radford'

Don't think we are talking of the same qualities. I would certainly have put Wane down in his playing days as a potentially a better coach than Schofield and Goulding.

Great players are sometimes good coaches. Mal Meninga always seemed to do OK, for instance. Brian Clough, from another sport would be an example. Kenny Dalglish too, arguably. But they do seem to be the exception.

Ellery Hanley is an interesting case. His coaching career seemed to end for reasons not entirely related to his ability to coach a team (I'm actually not altogether sure why it ended).

I'm not sure there's a single formula to define what qualities make a great coach. As such it isn't all that easy to predict which players will manage it.

All good coaches have something in them that is clear.

You might see a more of "great" players we see today becoming coaches, than in the past. The problem with players like Schofield, Goulding, Crooks, is that they always had other influences, baggage that shouldn't be there. There was always extra baggage. With that you can not move on. Today's top players, and there are exceptions, in the main seem much more mature and keep the outside influences to a minimum.

For purest reasons i believe, he coaches / gets involved when he fancies it. Rather than doing something for the sake of it. Look how he came back out of no-where for the Cas gig.

(think he also has a few fingers in a few pies with business ventures)