yeah course he has but it just baffles me to sack the coach and then promote the head of youth development who isnt proven or has any experiance for me i think they should have give vievers couple more games

It's easier to sack a coach than the whole side so Veivers removal was a very political statement of intent .
Alan Hunte is in charge day to day I guess because out of whats left of our already meager backroom staff he's been at Salford the longest and we need to get the week over and a team out on the pitch at Belle Vue on Sunday .
As for the comment off Ed Farish that Huntey will get his chance , it will be a slim Chance . but they have to say that .
Given the opportunity to bag a ' name coach' and with money burning a hole in the Dr's pocket there's a 99% chance the next guy will have a Antipodeon accent.

Have you ever thought that the Dr, Farish, and Lowe etc had probably seen enough flaws in PV'S work to justify their decision. Yeah we know AH hasn't the experience but its only an interim appointment until they get their man. Koukash has been quoted in saying " anyone not performing will be shown the door " obviously PV's wasnt performing in their eyes, AH has probably impressed the Dr to be appointed . TRUST IN KOUKASH what's happening internally now is what we've needed for decades. Great days are on the way just sit back and watch it all happen.

But it isn't a step forward. In my opinion, I'd love to see the flaws in veivers work. He's lost one game in which we probably should've won, so I think it's a bit rushed to sack him so soon.

The flaws are on the pitch all for us to see and to sign murthy for another month was a shocking decision.

Quote ="TheButcher"We must be doing something right because as soon as opposing fans start getting their backs up about something unrelated to their own Club it says a lot. '" Yes some bitter soul on the BBC Sport forum is now even suggesting the Dr isn't a real doctor because he/she can't find any evidence to prove he is. Somebody then decided to post this link to prove otherwise. www.ljmu.ac.uk/GERI/80262.htm#An ... Processing

Quote ="TheButcher"We must be doing something right because as soon as opposing fans start getting their backs up about something unrelated to their own Club it says a lot. '" Yes some bitter soul on the BBC Sport forum is now even suggesting the Dr isn't a real doctor because he/she can't find any evidence to prove he is. Somebody then decided to post this link to prove otherwise. www.ljmu.ac.uk/GERI/80262.htm#An ... Processing

right but he wouldnt have signed him without koukash lowe ect backing on it . and you telling me that a top coach would have got results with the team we had in our first 3 games

Didn't Ashcroft go to Warrington in 1982 and come back a couple of years later? Or was that a different Ashy?

It is not just one game is it.
One win since July tells its own sorry story.
Fridays game was like a horror show in which McRae had returned as coach.
One man rugby and running into the marker just does not work.
That appears to have been Salfords tactic for the past 4 years apart from the odd game when they appear to say fook this lets play how we want to.
It is this that would have forced the management team to act.
Entertainment, winning and bringing in the crowds is the main object here and unfortunately Veivers was not providing this.

I don't think you can discount the last 8 games of 2012 that we lost.

I think the numbers did him. Whereas before we were:



Recently it's been:

but it was practically the same team as last year and we had chances in them games to win or was winning then the team just stopped playing thats not veivers fault then other games the team wasnt playing for anything and you could tell veivers can only pick the team its then upto them what goes on the pitch

Not true. Spine of the team is different. Players on loan. New signings. it's not practically the same team at all. PV has gone. Get over it.

It must be a sad day when his Dad loses his job.

By that reckoning willis you'd never get rid of any manager?

IMO the right decision, harsh but inevitable.

haha quality love it

the only players that arn't here are feka vinnie patten gleeson holdsworth .. and no not at all but i still think he should have got a couple more games with this side then if still not performing fair enough but u right it is done with but then whats the point in having a forum where you cant discuss your opinions

Smith?
Moon?

of that list....

our first choice full back
Both first choice centres.
first choice stand off
first choice scrum half.

I'd say it was a new team myself this year. Given that last year our pack was the weak link and the backs were the one's causing the problems for teams, we didn't really stand much chance at all this year.

feel for PV as he's not had an easy ride with us from the start. He served us well and i thank him for that effort but i do see this from the business side of things. If we are to build and the top table dont see him as being the one to lead us, then so be it. I rather we get the new guy in who they feel can deliver and he be given the chance to build 'his team' rather than get lumbered with players he may or may not want.

Yes Kevin Ashcroft did leave Salford to go to Warrington in 1982 , but to qualify you did say a ' Top level side '

moon was injured and smith had left by then .. this year he hasnt had much to work with lets face it so i just think it was a bit quick but its done .

Why wasn't the decision made to dispense with his services made as soon as the management team was brought together from Down Under ? That is where the playing and coaching side now appears to be pointing towards.
I do not believe any coach could have motivated that side for Friday night and perhaps the players are now too frightened to make a false move or they will also be 'on their bike'.Not only will the jeering and ironic cheers affect their confidence but so will the callous disregard for someone who they may respect - and judging by the time he has spent in the sport and the associated names,I am sure he will be highly respected.

As a side issue - What is the name of the pub where the 'passionate Salford' supporters were when Dr Koukash
and the mayor,Ian Stewart,took a break from the discussions regarding the takeover ?
I am surprised those 'passionate fans' have remained anonymous and not taken advantage of the back slaps and free drinks for their part in the survival of the club.Are they part of the passionate 2,000 who attend the games ?

You may have missed it, but Chelsea didn't win the World Club Cup.

Also, they're suffering from a manager who's snapped at the way he's been treated, player power ruling the roost and supporters who don't seem happy whatever happens. I'd rather any success at Salford came with a bit more stability and club harmony than that.

The bulls head in swinton I think.

I cant answer that purely as i am not sat at the top table with Koucash and his men and only they will know truly why they waited until now / acted now to remove PV from his post.

Applying business logic though for a second, when one company takes over, they dont sack the management team straight away. They asses what they have to see what is worth keeping and what is not. Some people then get made redundant while others stay. Could be that they first thought that Phil was the man they wanted but now after a few weeks of seeing him on a day to day basis have decided he isn't right?

Personally i think Phil has been shown the door so they can get a big name in, who in turn they hope will attract the type of players they want to get us rocketing up the league within the next 18 months.



Agree completly with you on the motivation part. What was put on show the other night was woeful. Most of the local open age amatuer teams would have been more fired up for it and put on a better performance that what they did. But i would not have played McGoldrick in the centres, i would have left him and Sneyd 6 & 7. Foran should have been nowhere near that position for the full 80 minutes. Only Phil could have made that decision and he has to live by that and the other one's he has made which could ultimatly cost him his job.

The players are simply just not good enough. The mistakes that were made were comical. These lads are suppose to be professional but some of the mistakes and decisions that were made are no where near the standard that is expected at this level so i dont buy in to there being pressure, if anything there is not enough and know with the size of our squad and the talent we have, there unlikely to get dropped.

At times last year we were awesome in attack but its fair to say defenceivley we were poor throughout. Long has been credited for the attacking side so surely the blame of the defence has to fall at vievers?

I am not at all anti vievers here. I thought he would see out the year easily and would have been happy for him to remain in charge for the next couple while we rose up the division to see what he could do with us once he actually had a few quid to spend.

Agree with you entirely on your post. He has a team which would at best be in the mix top half of the championships but not clear cut runaway division leaders or anything like that. We lost every influencial player we had last year bar Williams and Broughton. As soon as smith left though, we capitulated as a team and it showed just how much we relied on him in attack. We were not once in any one of those games after he left and have never recovered.