Because clearly a massive influence in style and composition of game play is had when a head coach of a national team gets a week here and there and then a couple of weeks before each tournament, look at NZ and Oz both of whom get sooooo much more time with their guys before tournies..

At the end of the day Steve Mac may not be the answer and frankly i am unsure who would be right now but to compare Domestic football with international is just daft ...

i would also say there is an argument to say Steve Mac could also be too close to our senior players and so the door revolves again ..
We are viewed as the graveyard of coaches so no one will take that hot seat unless payed a wedge.... why would they>

and No smith is not the answer, he may be experienced but way past his sell by date now IMO alone mind...

Arthur Bunting lol (he would do a better job than Radford is now). Wow those were the days, wish we could have them back again. Its all about money now, not passion. Big difference

your not wrong... however that is SL for you, its a business now unfortunately more than anything else
If it was about passion then the owner will act...
I think he still might but oh fkkk i dont know its a damn mess

I am really disappointed in Pearson I thought he would be better than this and have respect for the fans. He dosent seem to be bothered anymore. If he was as passionate as what he says he would be sorting this team and coaching staff out now.

He is a businessman, he hurts when his pockets squeeze.....
He has no love for the club but he knows a sleeping giant when he sees one... i hope he can see the issues and is already sounding people out
He is savvy enough to know he needs advice...

where is bomber now lol

Sorry but this always makes me laugh. Sleeping giant my rse,we are a club who should be in a higher position ,but arn`t. Due to being inefectual,not asleep.

Pathetic post! "Respect for the fans"? He has got more important things to sort out out. Why don't you try and support your team! A bit of confident and encouragement goes a long way!

Firstly you don't seem to understand what hypocrisy means? I gather that because you think I've said some things in retaliation that you think I'm a hypocrit right? Hypocrisy is not simply failing to practice those virtues that one preaches...but whatever



Secondly, you obviously cannot see that in each and every response I've made it is to sling mud back at those that have cussed at me, said I'm talking BS, made inflammatory posts specifically naming me all because I voiced an opinion.
Disagree with me, make a point I don't agree with, expose an obvious failing in my arguement regarding a point I'm making..all fine. What isn't acceptable is the amount of personal jibes (even in threads I haven't conbtributed to!) deliberate berating etc especially when it is the same posters over and over again.

If you or anyone else thinks I'm going to sit back and just accept such behaviour (in the absence of any moderation process) without so much as a wimper you're sadly mistaken, that might seem pathetic but I'm not the one to start slinging the mud in the first instance, I never have AFAIK. I haven't gone out of my way to start naming individual forum members specifically to inflame or have a sly dig at them, making snide comments and the like just because I disgreed with what was said, I've done it as a direct response to their first comments.
So no I'm not being hypocritical in any way shape or form.
HTH

Quote ="knockersbumpMKII"Firstly you don't seem to understand what hypocrisy means? I gather that because you think I've said some things in retaliation that you think I'm a hypocrit right? Hypocrisy is not simply failing to practice those virtues that one preaches...but whatever Secondly, you obviously cannot see that in each and every response I've made it is to sling mud back at those that have cussed at me, said I'm talking BS, made inflammatory posts specifically naming me all because I voiced an opinion. Disagree with me, make a point I don't agree with, expose an obvious failing in my arguement regarding a point I'm making..all fine. What isn't acceptable is the amount of personal jibes (even in threads I haven't conbtributed to!) deliberate berating etc especially when it is the same posters over and over again. If you or anyone else thinks I'm going to sit back and just accept such behaviour (in the absence of any moderation process) without so much as a wimper you're sadly mistaken, that might seem pathetic but I'm not the one to start slinging the mud in the first instance, I never have AFAIK. I haven't gone out of my way to start naming individual forum members specifically to inflame or have a sly dig at them, making snide comments and the like just because I disgreed with what was said, I've done it as a direct response to their first comments. So no I'm not being hypocritical in any way shape or form. HTH'" viewtopic.php?f=34&t=580701&start=160

Quote ="knockersbumpMKII"Firstly you don't seem to understand what hypocrisy means? I gather that because you think I've said some things in retaliation that you think I'm a hypocrit right? Hypocrisy is not simply failing to practice those virtues that one preaches...but whatever Secondly, you obviously cannot see that in each and every response I've made it is to sling mud back at those that have cussed at me, said I'm talking BS, made inflammatory posts specifically naming me all because I voiced an opinion. Disagree with me, make a point I don't agree with, expose an obvious failing in my arguement regarding a point I'm making..all fine. What isn't acceptable is the amount of personal jibes (even in threads I haven't conbtributed to!) deliberate berating etc especially when it is the same posters over and over again. If you or anyone else thinks I'm going to sit back and just accept such behaviour (in the absence of any moderation process) without so much as a wimper you're sadly mistaken, that might seem pathetic but I'm not the one to start slinging the mud in the first instance, I never have AFAIK. I haven't gone out of my way to start naming individual forum members specifically to inflame or have a sly dig at them, making snide comments and the like just because I disgreed with what was said, I've done it as a direct response to their first comments. So no I'm not being hypocritical in any way shape or form. HTH'" viewtopic.php?f=34&t=580701&start=160

Why is "respect for the fans" pathetic? Any business which disregards its paying customers (in this case fans) or takes them for granted is ultimately doomed.

No coach could succeed with the current atmosphere. He has a point, for the current side to achieve anything under the current regime, the fans have to back the team and the coaching staff. Unfortunately, things have gone too far for that to happen now, so a change has to happen. We (Hull fans) are notoriously fickle, and we demand more than almost any other set of fans. We won't turn around until the team starts winning, and the team won't start winning without the backing of the fans. Whether the current situation is Radford's fault or not is totally irrelevant - any change is needed right now to be a catalyst.

The fans do support the team on the pitch very well, except when their levels of effort fall well below standard such as in the second half against Leeds or against Rovers. The problem is we now turn up at the match with a sense of trepidation. Any sense of optimism has evaporated and as you say only a change of coach is likely to lift the gloom.

Not just any coach either.

Kear
Sharp
Agar
Gentle
Radford

They're all assistants. It's time for a top dog, a head coach who commands respect, to galvanise the whole club, players, backroom staff and fans alike.

The problem is, whos out there that fits this bill, that we could realistically get?

Over the past few months there have been a few names banded about;
Noble - he's certainly had success in his time, but his suggestion was met with a lot of negativity. Would he have the fans on his side?
Brian Smith - Sentimental reasons? Had mixed success since he left.
Daniel Anderson - stated he doesn't want to be a head coach again.
McNamara - I don't think anyone would be too happy about that one.
Tony Smith - Would he leave Warrington to come to us?

I'll throw a few more names in

Mark Aston
Glen Morrison
David kidwell
Steve Foulkes
Stephen Kearney
Paul Deacon

Craig Fitzgibbon

Stephen Kearney is the only name on that list who would make a difference. Isn't he currently working with Wayne Bennett at Broncos

Deacon & Morrison - Possibly in a few years, but not yet.
Kidwell - an assistant, but already built up some impressive experience.
Folkes - been out of the game for years hasn't he?
Kearney - does he have the relevant experience as a club head coach we need? I don't know much other than his stint at the Eels.
Aston - Good shout.

Daryl Powell i'd be happy with too.

Another assistant - isn't this what we need to get away from?

Bobbie Goulding as assistant seems to be a new rumour.

Entirely of his own creation from what I can see.

The way I see it is that Pearson needs to dig into his pockets and spend a lot on a new coaching staff completely before we are going to start to see an progress. I still don't understand what progress we are making which Pearson has seen.

Nothing wrong an assistant, if it's the right assistant.

Tony Smith, Michael maguire and Trent Robinson were all assistants, but did well.

Kear, sharp and gentle all did pretty well in limited time.

It's more than just a head coach IMO, we need a whole new setup.

Another two names Justin Morgan and Mick Potter.

I hope if we do need a new coach , Pearson consults with Ellis, Mini and Pryce.

If I were in charge I'd pick the phone up and ask Wayne Bennett and Craig Bellemy who they thought were the best up and coming coaches in Aus who were ready for their first head coaching role. Unfortunately I don't think this is going to happen.

Another name I'm surprised no one has mentioned yet (at least I don't think they have). Craig Fitzgibbon.

Some will argue that, like Radford, he was a part of the failure that has been the last 8 seasons, and I know there are still a few players here that he played alongside. I think Fitz is professional enough for that not to be an issue however.

That said I doubt he would give up the two very good roles he has now.

Too nice?