Never a dull moment, that's for sure:
26/08/14 [urlhttp://www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12207/9441002/super-league-marwan-koukash-pleased-with-salford-red-devils-under-iestyn-harris[/url
to cancelling the Salford Red Devils "Player of the Year" event via Twitter....citing a need to concentrate on the last 2 games of the season and next year. [urlhttps://twitter.com/drmarwanK/status/506765827535040512[/url

Seems that he does wear his heart on his sleeve.....

For a minute there, I thought you were revealing the title of the 'Doctor Who' Xmas special!

More kneejerk reactionary nonsense from the doc.

Yep, I actually quite like the doc, but this stuff doesn't help anyone.

If you decide you are going to take this stance (it wouldn't be the way I went about it) then it has to come from the coach. Surely Harris feels a bit undermined by this? I can't imagine someone like Brian McDermott standing for it.

I don't think there is any doubt as to who is running things at Salford.
Horse racing is a million miles away from running a pro RL club, although having plenty of cash does help.

But if your owner sacks coaches at about the same rate a neutron star spins, that doesn't really work.

Surely motivation should be through positive rather than negative reinforcement?

Something I can't get my head around is the marketing/media side of things at Salford.

He has spent good money buying in some good players, I assume he will have invested in the training facilites, brought in staff etc...yet the main marketing approach seems to be him posting statements on twitter. Sometimes I can see sense in his statements, but more often than not they are bizarre.

I am not a Doc hater, I think ultimately having him flashing the cash can only help the sport but I just find it hard to believe he hasn't brought in a top marketing department or at the very least someone who can sensibly handle his twitter account, giving the club a more professional approach.

I quite admired the way he went about getting Salford in the headlines come what may. But it's just a bit old hat now. He needs a new trick or gimmick as people have started to cotton on to the way he may say something without actually meaning it or believing it.

Like I said worked very well at the start. But personally I would have just dusted off the performance as a bad one off. Every club has them. I would have been drawing attention to the previous good run of results. Especially with season ticket renewals around the corner.

Plenty of teams take a hammering. This year Saints got busted up a few times, probably more so than Salford.

I think it's clear he made a huge mistake in sacking Noble and in putting in the inexperienced and well out of his depth Harris.

Harris's post-match interview was cringeworthy. He looked like a rabbit in the headlights and if I were a Salford fan I would be worried at his capacity, at this stage of his fledgling coaching career, to achieve the instant results the Doc wants.

the thing is, had Koukash left Noble in place, and let him and his team build both the components of a team, and the gelling of a team, over - say- a couple of seasons then without anybody really noticing, Salford would with this sort of financial backing have developed into a force to be reckoned with. That much is certain, but so is the fact that however many above-average players you buy, you need plenty of TIME to mould them gradually into a better and better TEAM.

Noble would certainly have done it. I don't think Harris is the man for the job.

I just feel like Marwan wants to be the focal point of the club - he keeps saying that he only cares about winning, as if it's the only thing he's striving for. I think his addition to the sport is brilliant and we need someone with his aspirations, but he needs to take a step back and let the coach and a decent marketing team take his place.

Well, I'm glad you're not in charge at Salford.

Noble was certainly not the man to take Salford forward. From signings to training, his time away from the game showed. I like him as a bloke, and I think he knows the psychological side of the game well, but that's it these days. The jury is still out on Harris as he's not had a full pre-season yet. However, in the short time he's been at Salford he immediately identified the weakness in the team and remedied it straight away. He brought in better structures, training, and attitude and managed to improve the teams fitness during the middle of a season. Something that he shouldn't have had to do. Barring a few performances, and a handful of games where the team was still adapting I've seen a large improvement in Attack, defense, attitude, and workrate. Our performances have, on the whole, been better and the players that were languishing under Noble have been like different players under Harris. You only have to look at what Noble did with Sneyd. Thought he wasn't good enough. Enough said.

As for DrK, well I'm with bewareshadows post above yours. As Salford fans we feel the same as everyone else. He needs to reel-in his over-enthusiasm a bit and direct it more positively, but it's his toy to play with, and I don't see him changing. This, of course, is a double-edged sword for Salford.

I'm sorry. I'll see if I can undelete the drubbing Wakefield of all people administered to you and if I missed your better structures, attitude, fitness etc. which I must have done, I'll be sure to come back and agree with you.


I have no problems with Koukash, in the sense that it is indeed his money, and he's choosing to spend it on TGG. It is indeed his toy to play with. But he has made huge mistakes, and IMHO Harris for Noble was one of them. Still think you now have the makings of a competitive squad -whoever is coaching it - but only time can blend it into a proper team, and I hope Koukash realises for your sake that some stability is a key ingredient. Oh, and that chairmen giving public beratings never ends well.

"if I missed your better structures, attitude, fitness etc. which I must have done, I'll be sure to come back and agree with you."

good : watch AGAIN the match on Sky v Leeds or try to get any other match bar Wakefield (agree: poor) or Wigan (team affected by a virus).
That's if you can bother admitting you are wrong.
Only one fan I've spoken to does not feel that serious improvements have come with harris' appointment.
Noble was good at Bradford.

Neither of us can be right or wrong, as neither of us can ever know "what if". It's just an opinion. Even your opinion that Noble was good at Bradford. Start a thread and half the replies will tell you you're an idiot, he's rubbish, he had no Plan B, anybody could have coached that team, they were boring, the style was rubbish, etc. etc.

I've seen the televised games and my point re the Wakey match was that both Salford seem to have gone very much downhill, and that in his comments and demeanour afterwards, Harris was very unimpressive.

Your problem with any "recent improvements" is that however neither of us can say whether similar or better improvements may have been brought about by Noble if not sacked.

What I can say is that getting a shellacking against a poor Wakey side is Harris's most recent achievement, and you have to make excuses for that performance to make your point. I recall that Noble's last game in charge was in many respects your best performance of the year. But hey, it could all just be coincidences!

I only read the title of the thread and a cold shiver ran down my back

Of course, all teams should be judged on one particular performance. Bell-end.

If that's the sum total of your logic, then it doesn't matter what I write here. Your opinion is obviously more valid than someone who watches Salford all the time. It's funny, in that I wouldn't dream of going on another Club's forum or the VT and make obviously ill-judged, illogical assumptions based on little to no evidence. I'd have to be an arrogant of the highest order, or numb as a -stone. Yet it never ceases to amaze me how many RL Legends-in-their-own-lunchtime seem to think that their opinion based on nothing will be received with open arms.

Eh, you can't beat intelligent and civilised debate! Run along now, and come back when you've grown up and grown out of responding to a post about rugby league with puerile abuse, you total embarrassment.

He reminds me of Cellinio at Leeds Utd - other than picking the team and giving a half time talk to the players....oh - wait a minute.

I don't bother reading his mad ramblings any more - it's clear that he knows naff all about the game and will say whatever is on his mind without fully understanding what it is he's talking about. He's a one trick pony who needs a new trick, and fast; as it is, despite his immeasurable wealth, he's becoming a joke.

Bit strange coming from a Wakefield follower about knowing 'naff all about the game'.You lot didn't rate Richard Agar but those running Warrington do - as does your chairman and Mr Carter said some very good things about him.

The Salford one-trick pony has been brilliant,again.Another defeat and he takes the focus.Announces a couple of signings.Hock has assisted and the below-par performance forgotten about while the hard work goes on in the background.

It's usually the Cas lot who fall for it.



Check back after every defeat.There's been a few.

I have literally no idea what you're talking about.

The quality of reply is directly related to the quality of post it's directed at.

If you want civilized debate, you're better off writing something that resembles thought-out and sensible opinion. What you did, was give an opinion based off little knowledge of the subject and based your whole argument on judging a team, it's players, and staff on one performance. Which most sensible people would think to be an ill-informed judgement. As a Salford fan I can see the difference Harris has made in a short time. I can see this because I watch them every week and you don't. So on the basis of evidence, I'm supposed to concede that a one-off opinion like yours is somehow equally valid? When it clearly isn't.

So, you've made a spurious claim, I've responded as to why it's spurious, your counter-argument? Jumping on the form of language used as a way to avoid trying to show how your original point has merit...

...And you call me an embarrassment?

No, you're not getting away with that. The perceived quality of any response is no excuse for descending into abuse.


You misunderstand. My preference is for civilized debate but I don't care what you do. If you post abuse like a puerile halfwit* I can point it out, but if that's the best you do, and it makes you feel clever, hey, crack on! really, I don't care.


A poor straw man, but I also think it's ridiculous to suggest that any post needs to contain a full historical dissection of the team's and individuals' history and record. Don't you?


Then here's a tip: you might in such a case say - for example - "That is an ill-informed judgment, because..." It works quite well.


You aren't supposed to do anything. The only issue we have now focused on seems to be whether you are capable of articulating any response coherently, or whether you choose to descend to abuse.





Very funny! But to remind you, you wrote:

[size=85=#BF0000* "puerile halfwit" - this used above is not abuse, but my accurate assessment that the abuse The Butcher used in the above quotation is, objectively, language "like a puerile halfwit".[/size


I'd be embarrassed if I'd posted that, but vulgar abuse is not, and never will be, a "counter-argument", nor is it conducive to one. It just shows you up.

Quiet morning in FA's office then, not much to do?