Winning at least 1/2 our games against wigan, saints, wire, leeds, hudds and rovers. Winning at least 2 more games than last season. Scoring 50 or more points twice and not conceding more than 30 points in any game. Not losing to any side which finishes in the bottom 4.

Should be a piece of pish for agar

Winning at least 1/2 our games against wigan, saints, wire, leeds, hudds and rovers. Winning at least 2 more games than last season. Scoring 50 or more points twice and not conceding more than 30 points in any game. Not losing to any side which finishes in the bottom 4.

Should be a piece of pish for agar

Not being nilled at home for the third season in a row will be an improvement

Jake the gateway to reality is behind that big bush in west park mate

Mate, you may have no ambition for the club but some of us do. Tell me which of the things I want is unreasonable?

Last year we won 5 out of 14 games against those teams so another 2 isn't a massive leap

Last year we lost to wakey, quins, crusaders and salford. Is it too much to ask to win a couple of those

I don't know how many times clubs topped the 50 points mark last year but I think the majority of teams in SL did so why not us?

We shouldn't be shipping more than 30 points in any game

No reason we should lose to teams in the bottom 4

Not really that stretching a target IMO. I've made no claims we should be winning trophies or even a play off game but I do think achieving those would be deemed as progression

And not my point at all. He showed that over the weekly rounds we can consistently grind out enough results to finish comfortably in the playoffs, BUT, that once there he doesn't seem able to tailor a game plan for the win or change his approach if things aren't going our way.

And 'knock out footie' is not a lottery, as evidenced by the fact that it is the same clubs who consistently get to the latter stages. You don't get the same 3 or 4 people winning the jackpot each week, do you?

So you expect us to do 2 things that even Wigan didn't achieve last year?

I'd be happy with 5th if I thought we were a side capable of making an impression in the playoffs. League position is not necessarily the bottom line.

FWIW I think we'll finish 6th/7th, Rovers the other spot.

If we win the GF I'll let him off on those 2

I tend to agree. 5th would be OK if we don't go out of both the cup and play offs with a whimper again

Don't forget he coached us to Wembley in 2008 with a worse squad than he has now.

I'd be happy if we finished 8th...IF come playoff time we are in top form and look like we are capable of beating anyone.

grinding out wins all year and finishing mid-table is no good if we just flop in the playoffs like we did last season.

We should be expecting our 1st wembley win this year then

At last!....a positive post..........yeeehaaaaaaaaaa!!!!

All fairly reasonable with the exception of the 30 points. Every team will concede 30 a couple of times at least.

Also winning half the games against the sides mentioned would mean just one more win against them than last year. And if it wasn't for Radders I have no doubt we would have achieved that.

But we did have a very favourable draw that year TBH. We put in 1 decent defensive performance to see us home against Bradford, but other than that the only half-decent side we played was Saints. If it wasn't for the combination of Adam Dykes and Matt Peterson's ineptitude under the high ball we may well have lost to Wakey.

You can only play who you have in front of you and we did that to get to the final. That cannot be taken away from RA.

And we cheated

I appreciate that, but my initial point was that you can't win a trophy without a knockout stage and Agar's weakness seems to be devising suitable gameplans against other contenders or being able to change things up when the game's going against you. 2008 was still a similar story, as we lost to the only real contenders we played.

Anyone hear Longy on Humberside? I thought I was feeling negative about the season but he's just as down! Thin squad , problems in the halves if he gets injured , some way behind the top 5 , need a couple more signings , needs the pressure of captaincy off so that he doesn't have to do the off field stuff and can try to keep fit and concentrate on his game. Guess it's pretty realistic stuff really just unusual to hear the unsanitised , unspun , version from an official FC source. Maybe RH recorded it last week before Phelps was announced? If not , he didn't sound very confident.

With respect Tom, I have never really understood that quote.

Going round and beating up little wimps, does not make you a hard man does it?

Good job he never posted his concerns on here he would get slated for being negative

OK, I'll swap the not conceding 30 points in any game with winning at least 1 play off game

He's probably in the agar out crew