I don't think anyone has accused Agar of being to blame for everything and I agree that him going wouldn't cure all of our problems, but that isn't any kind of reason for him to keep his job. While there are never any guarantees, given the squad that we have, if Agar was replaced with a better coach it is extremely likely that things on the pitch would improve significantly, along with our chances of success in the future.

I realise I'm leaving myself open to accusations of arrogance here, but there is a common mistake people make about the difference between having a right to an opinion and that opinion being [ivalid[/i. It's like when people make daft claims about the various things the players do wrong that the coach 'can't do anything about', they are entitled to say it in the same way that they are entitled to say black is white if they want to, but it isn't a [ivalid[/i opinion because it has no basis in logic or fact. The same principle applies to the Agar debate, as I explained in my global warming analogy.

It seems that way but I guess it all depends on the performance tomorrow. Forgetting if you think he should or shouldnt go for a minute I think he would be gone after a dire performance tomorrow (i.e. not a battling loss like Wigan). The only reason I say that is we have two big home games (as far as this season goes anyway) in the next couple of weeks. Again like it or not I think crowds/money would then start talking and wouldnt want to see the barrage of "abuse" that would be recieved like at the end of the last home game.

i think the turnip realises that he is about to be shown the door

At least another month.

didnt rule intimate they wouldnt think about a coach change til mid season.weve got agar til at least late may imho

I scoffed when I first read that, but thinking about it you might have a point. If we keep the current losing streak going then it won't get that far but assuming we pick up the odd win, then given the board's attitude up to now, it's safe to assume that one win buys Agar tolerance of at least two consecutive defeats after that.

On that basis it's quite possible that this could carry on until the end of May, unless of course Rich does the decent thing and walks.

Having checked the definition, yes you are.

Really?



I suggest you check it again.

im pretty sure he did say words to the effect that they wouldnt change things til at least mid season.
i dont want him here,he's had 3 1/2 years and the squad we have is capable of better.
i do think agar realises that his job is getting more difficult to hold on to though.thousands missing on the gate should ring alarm bells with the board and agar obviously knows that.
but can he consistently do something about it

I agree with you mate, but Agar's ability to do the job is no longer in question - He's not good enough.

Im sure the board didn't intend to review his position until at least the halfway stage in the season as you say, and they've already shown how much rubbish they are willing to let him get away with. I just meant even [ithey[/i wouldn't tolerate us losing every match from now up until the halfway point of the season. Wouldn't they?

I meant, you are leaving yourself open to claims, not, yes you are arrogant.

Fair enough



Look at it this way though: If after another defeat, someone comes on this forum and starts saying 'oh we don't need to score tries to win games- tries are overrated'... would you waste time debating the importance of tries with them on the basis that the very fact they have said it makes it valid? or would you dismiss them so that you can focus on discussing/debating with people the real reasons that we were beaten?

No I'd say they were watching Union.

dont know mate,they tolerated 7 wins the other year and even with a wembley visit i'd consider that unacceptable for a club with the fan base and resources we have.

Phoney war.

You reckon?

Not so sure myself.