Not as simple as that though Kosh, Agar must have been doing something, even if it was giving the team more freedom. The fact was we started winning and playing decent rugby and whislt players attitudes will have contributed to it so will the little things that Agar did.

The players realised they had to start playng as they needed to impress the new gafar, they also knew Rich who they had a lot of time for.

You will find evidence on most threads (even I admit to questioning his ability whilst still sulking after a match)

According to Agar himself at the time, all he did was go back to the basics. Which is fine, and worked OK at the time because the players were highly self-motivated following the exit of Kear.

I'd also argue that the rugby we played wasn't hugely different to how we've played since TBH - just better executed. We won a lot of scrappy, low-scoring games in that run, sometimes by the skin of our teeth.

IMO it doesn't work. Both have ambitions of being head coaches and surely it will cause conflict both having their input into the team

Not for me!

I for one totally agree, our style has changed very little, the difference is we are losing games now by the skin of our teeth.

we had players who could change a game like Cooke and Swain then though, and even some of the others like Mcmenemy could kick and do something other than just one man plodding into the line

if we were drawing a tight game with 10mins to go, I know which team out of the 2006 and 2009 teams I'd put my money on.

I agree with most of that but Agar added something to the running of the side even if it was encouraging them to play and concentrating on basics, it helped us to start winning games. The PS came in and tightened things up defensively. The main thing is we had players of real quality who could change/win games and any coach needs the right calibre of player if he is going to be successful.

No

I don't think we're too far off a competitive team. For next year, I'd like to see:

1) Horne
2) Raynor
3) Yeaman/Briscoe
4) Whiting
5) Calderwood

6) New Stand Off
7) New Scrum Half



Dowes
9) Berrigan
10) Thackray
11) Tickle
12) Burnett/Yeaman
13) Washy

14) New Impact Prop
15) Lauaki
16) Manu
17) Houghton/Lee

I make that three signings. If those signings are of the right quality, we have the potential to do pretty well.

what about fitzgibbon?

we're not gonna waste a quota spot on a reserve surely?

Yep whereas now we're losing a lot of scrappy, low-scoring games by the skin of our teeth (IMO).

To imply that an assistant coach has nothing to do with the sucess of any team is ludicrous. You can't think that all players in the squad wanted kear to go? Therefore even healing any niggly squabbles within the club agar must be attributed with sorting out.

I asked cookie 6 months ago who the best coach he has worked with was and he said peter sharp. He has worked with some good coaches aswell.

Forgot about him. Maybe he can have a spot in the second row.

I personally think that Sharp was very unlucky during his time with Hull and that he was made a bit of a scapegoat in the end.

He certainly made a huge impression when he first came, especially with discipline, although granted, he may not have seen that through to the end of his tenure.

He also had a lot to deal with in a short space of time. He lost his two best players within six weeks of each other in Cooke and Swain. Say what you want about Cooke, but Sharp had built his attack around him and of course, his entire side around Swain. I personally think that losing Swain prompted the beginning of the end for him, although he should have been able to overcome that loss.

As for being poor with the media, I disagree. He had a dry manner, which I don't always think came across correctly, but he was certainly not poor with the media and if anything, was one of the more entertaining coaches. His greatest downfall in this respect was probably that he didn't say what the fans wanted to hear from time to time, especially in relation to Derby games. But I don't think it was intentional.

I agree. Made me chuckle many a time with his press conferences.

How about.

6.Finch
7.Orford

We can but dream!!

i agree.

and funny enough agar thought it was the wrong thing to do at the time by getting rid

TBH, I agree with Kosh on this one. The players did not want to play for Kear any longer. I think that then was the overiding factor in our upturn. It angered me at the time. Players should have more respect for the fans. Its what got on my nerves earlier this season as well, as there were (potentially are) signs of this again, IMO.

Maybe hes just being modest

No.

Players of the calibre that Hull require will not be drawn to the club - what can they realistically learn from Agar and Sharp when the reality is that they'll have already worked with better coaches?

The sad truth is that there is nothing at all to offer new signings to our club. We have terrible coaching staff, our ground is an atmosphere vacuum, we don't really sing anymore, our squad is distinctly average, we have no genuine leaders on or off the pitch, our youth system is the worst I can remember it being and even if someone promising does come through, we'll turn them into a 2nd rower, our off the field facilities are staffed by idiots and the produce is e. I can't see anything to suggest we aren't embarking on a massive decline over the next few years. Unfortunately, me and most of you that read this (agree or disagree with this rant!) will be here to witness it all!

The thing with our tactics at the moment is that they're so uninspired/negative. I never get the sense we're on the front foot with tactical ideas, never raise my eyebrows and think how something we tried was unexpected but effective (maybe the Whiting/Calderwood football effort last week, but don't think that was a set move

).

Compare with some of the little things Morgan does. Apparently Cooke is now doing the kicks for touch because he gets greater distance than Dobson. Wouldn't that be something to try with Tickle doing the same? Morgan will see opportunities like moving Lovegrove to prop and training him there in the off season, which everyone (Rovers fans included) thought was a bit odd to say the least. Turns out he's been their top metre-maker in this role. James Webster alluded to the same in the derby build-up - Morgan is very specific about each individual's role and how they execute it as he knows how to harness individual's strength and optimise the team performance. I can't imagine him waiting for several matches before waiting for Richard Horne to suggest a move to FB. Not saying it's the case, but what we see on the pitch would suggest we do plenty of defensive work, have a "one size fits all" gameplan and then basically just tell the team to "give it a good go" and make standard substitutions at pre-scripted times.

Good post.

Pretty much how I see it also.

We are in a position where playing percentage rugby and standard tactics isn't going to cut it. We need to try something inventive, different, off-the-wall... whatever.

Sadly I don't think that our coaching staff are capable of thinking outside the box.