I have never met a coach who doesn't put winning as the priority.
Some like to play attractive rugby as well but it is usually a secondary consideration. Some talk about it just to please speccies and press.
Nearly all supporters just want to win the big games but play lip service to being an attractive side it when the side is a few points up or playing a weak side. Coaches want their side to win. Some sides strength is moving the ball around at pace and some sides strength is grinding it out. Every coach I know plays to his strength. As for discussing "entertaining rugby" at interview ... it might be mentioned in polite conversation.

I am afraid I don't know any coaches on a personal basis to be able to ask these sorts of questions. Certainly I can't imagine any coach not setting winning as his first priority, that surely must be a given. Rugby League is certainly tribal and there is always a strong desire to beat your neighbour / closest rival at all costs. Even if the ref made a couple of horrendous decisions that gifted you the game, supporters would see it as a well deserved victory. But outside of all the tribalism surely there is an element of enjoyment ? Compare one game which was a mud bath that prevented any decent moves with constant knock-ons to one which was free flowing with fast moves, great handling, chips over the top of defences that lead to tries etc etc. Would you prefer a 2 nil win in the first game to say a 35-10 win in the second ? And the neutrals that watch TV, which props up our sport financially would certainly vote with their feet / bums. It sounds as though you wouldn't agree, but I would suggest that RL is a business and a big part of that is about entertaining as well as winning.

I get your point. I suppose the big test is when watching two neutral teams. I sometimes lose interest when the score gets to 35-10 but rarely lose interest when the score is 2-0. I have seen some cracking games with no or just one try. I would say best for TV neutrals is a competitive game rather than simply lots of points by one side.
Bottom line though is that if you Coach a side and they keep losing 33-35 ... you won't stay in a job very long. No one would mention your exciting brand of rugby as a reason to keep your job. If you keep wining 6-0 ... you'd have a job for ever.

Last years grand final was regarded as one of the best games for many a year. It was a low scoring game with very few chances to score due to brutal and brilliant defences. It had fans watching on TV going crazy over it on twitter. Other sportsmen like Tony bellew were tweeting how amazing it was and how he wanted to get down to watch a few games when he could. Low scoring games and brilliant defence can be just as entertaining as games that end 40-36!

Very true. The physicality, energy, excellent defences and uncertainty of the outcome all proved an absorbing game.

Suppose you could see into the future and were offered the option of appointing Powell, with a guarantee that we will peak like Cas in 2017 - the highest point scorers, and most attractive team in SL, but lose in the Grand Final, or appointing Wane and peaking like Wigan in 2013 and 2016, picking up a couple of Grand Final wins with gritty rugby and lots of wrestling.

Which would you take and which would make you more willing to be a paying spectator?

You can't guarantee grand final wins with either coach, I would feel more confident with a team that was tough in defence but was very good at scoring points and putting pressure on the opposition. We have watched a team that has looked desperate to hold on rather than absorbing pressure and then taking the challenge to the opposition. We have been poor in attack and the opposition I have always felt grew in confidence the more we struggled to cause them problems.

I would take Powell personally, I think he would view it as his first real big chance since Leeds to have a team that he feels he should win trophies with. I think he will be hungrier to win superleague for the first time than wane who has already managed it. Powell gets his teams to punch above their weight and that's a great prospect with a squad like ours. That said I do like wane, I like his passion for his teams and his honesty, he will demand a lot from the players too.

Who would genuinely be bothered at the end of the year if we had played boringly if we won the Grand Final.......nobody would. Wigan weren't boring as they were still scoring brilliant skillful trys. The games may have appeared boring to opposition as they were frustrating to watch as they shut teams down all the time defensively, and made them look clueless in attack. But they weren't boring attacking wise by any means, if Wane could bring the same mental toughness he did at Wigan i think the missing puzzle to our squad would finally be found

Yes they would, people on here will complain, they have already been complaining and we haven't even won yet.

When we were ripping teams up in the peak of the TS era people used to say the atmosphere had gone stale, the league games had no meaning anyway as we knew we were going to be in the playoffs, what's the point of going watching one sided matches.

If we appoint Wane and win the Grand Final there will be a thread on here saying what's the point of winning if we are just playing drab wrestling rugby, KF has focused on getting a winning team at the expense of everything else and it is ruining the club.

What will really mess with peoples heads is if we beat Castleford in the final and Daryl Powell moans that Warrington win through boring rugby. They will want to slag him off at the same time as agreeing with him.

So, people have different opinions. Who would’ve thunk it.

That's the thing about discussion boards, everybody keeps coming on and expressing their own views.

and whatever happens Wane, Powell, or Kear we will revert to the John Lydgate/Abraham Lincoln maxim.

[size=150JOHN KEAR ???[/size

Yes 'tis wonderful. I look forward with joy to each and every new and unique thought (especially if we lose). We all love the Wire.

The Messiah! According to Chapter 1 verse 1 of The Book of Duck.

Yep, although sometimes it feels like there are more factions than there were terrorist groups in Life of Brian.

Easy now, he'll be mourning that he can't tell us or suggest we're signing Kyle eastmond any more

Chapter 1 verse 2. The return of the prodigal son, Declan Paton

1 game.

Was always going to be the case, wasn't it? People wanted him gone last season and that has only intensified.

It's so, so poor from the club. Right now it feels as though the club is content in wasting a year.

Yes, one game, in fact less than one game was all it took for my enthusiasm to be squashed. Five up forward drives, kicks to King, no dummy runners, no set plays, no support play, no enthusiasm and a defence that was breached with farcical ease.

I watched all the weekend games and we were easily the most predicable, boring, one-dimensional and lifeless team on show.

Hull fan here; having watched the game I was amazed at how a squad with that much talent could play so poorly and predictably. On paper that team makes or narrowly misses out on the finals; in practise though I wouldn't fear them so it has to be a coaching issue and I don't quite know how you fix that with a coach who is going anyway and will have no say in contract offers etc for the next season, other than sack him now and appoint an interim coach, like we did with Andy Last, until your preferred choice is announced.

The preferred choice is Price though.

He's not the preferred choice next year though is he, which to be fair our guest was pointing out?