We said the same. That break from Horney for example led to an absolute horlicks of a play and they scored soon after (I think).

Why on earth we couldn't play sensible rugby and at least keep possession baffles me. They are pro players, not the half time little leaguers.

Our control of the game is so poor at times, hopefully Sneyd and Pryce will help that.

First ..to think letting Pitts and Arundal play was our downfall is way off the mark.If Radford cannot get his side to perform who got them up for Cas and saints? Would Sa being on from the start made any difference? doubt it.This loss was down to a poor performance by certain players making poor decisions ,poor defence and with a very poor kicking game and panic...nothing else.As someone said if Sneyd and Pryce were in the side today we would have won I have no doubt about that.Radford was spot on in his interview

Players make mistakes not only because of brain farts and tiredness, they make mistakes through lack of leadership both on and off the pitch, lack of cohesion as a group which absolutely includes the coach. Also fear of reprisal, being dropped/no contract renewal/being lambasted in public or amongst peer group.
The performances reflect the leader, they feed from him, the buck stops with Radford in every aspect of how we perform, both tactically, physically and mentally.
it's all well and good having talent but if you do not manage/coach that talent in the correct way it just will not perform, some 'people' just won't perform under a leader whom shows they are out of their depth/clueless or just mismanage the situation, 'sportspeople' are no different to any other persons from a psyche POV. In fact sportspersons at the top end of their sport are MORE fragile mentally than comparables in other industries..but our 'coach' wouldn't have a clue about that either...

Pass sales Down Interest down And if we play like this under the Landlord next year FC down. The bloke is clueless and if Pearson can't see this so is he !!!!!!

When Radford took over one of the first things the players asked him to do was start dropping people based on form. It's a bit late for them to decide they don't like it now.

It's astounding how many players seem to stagnate or go backwards at Hull, isn't it? And how they seem to blossom on escape. Such indulgent smiles we exchanged as Arundel scampered over for his second today, and clasped our hands in pleasure as Jay Pitts scored too. Hope Carvell and the rest of the Hull rejects enjoy their trip to Wembley next week.

But that hasn't/isn't actually happened has it? And if through poor management 2/3-3/4 of your squad are performing badly how does dropping said poor performers (ajudged by a 'coach' who hasn't got a clue in the first instance) work out in the grand scheme of us winning games?

Is that the official party line then that the players said whomever plays badly one week gets turfed out for the next match? Because that has worked out hasn't it?
Look at those whom have being 'treated' in this fashion, it's worked wonders for their confidence and performances, in fact the whole squad has being busting a gut week in week out not to be on this underperforming rosta of shame





Actually understanding people & how to get the best out of them & the best methods to do so is the number one priority (after their welfare) if you have any thoughts about being a leader. Sadly for Radford and indeed Pearson neither seem to have an inkling about this subject matter so the technical stuff of playing rugby actually becomes immaterial

Hasn't it?

We've had plenty of players dropped after poor performances.

I find it unlikely that Pearson has had the amount of success in business that he has without knowing anything at all about leadership.

Radford appears to have thought that he could get the best out of the players by including them in the decision making process. Clearly that's only worked for a few. I think he's now struggling to understand why players who say and do one thing in training fail to perform on matchday.

Appeasing the players is not managing them though is it? What the players want may not necessarily be what's best for them or the team. Form is subjective , based on many things including the form of other players and it's often a slow burn into or out of form. Then there's confidence , fitness and the players ability to be honest with themselves about those things. That's why we need an experienced coach with insight and an ability to manage people and communicate with a whole range of different personalities and we certainly don't have that at the moment. What's more worrying is that we are not looking to add any experience in this area. Quite the opposite in fact in that we are bringing in two more inexperienced people to the coaching staff , Tuson and Horne , for no other reason than they played for us. With Horne it's even more bizarre because he has been a common factor throughout the period where we've lacked professionalism in the playing staff. Not necessarily down to him of course but it would seem to me to be incredible that we think he will somehow now be able to do something to change what he's been a part of for so long and like Last and Radford has absolutely no experience of anything else.

At last the penny seems to have dropped on here that Radford as a coach is rubbish.
Several of us on here have been blasted for repeated criticism of Radford but its justified as his performance as a coach is reaching new levels of ineptitude.
When a new coach comes in you usually see improved performance and results.
Castleford,Wakefield,Bradford are recent examples but with Radford the club has gone backwards at an alarming rate.
We all know his team selections at times are bizarre but now to admit there will be several changes for the next match just shows how badly he gets it wrong
maybe we will see Ben Crooks back in the side.

Keep cheer-leading, you are a doing a wonderful job for the rest of the teams in the worst SL/1st Division in modern history...and the city of Hull cannot raise a gallop...

True we have, but on here criticising the coach is `slagging the club off'
As a club we've had plenty of dark periods, but usually when we've been skint, unfortunately a clueless owner, clueless coach, & a coaching staff made up
of`jobs for the boys' is never going to work, no matter how stable our finances are.
The team is underperforming big time, - poorly `coached', no structure/game plan, poor team selection etc ( all covered umpteen times on here) &
if Pearson can't/won't see it I really don't know where we are heading.
Signing better quality players will improve the team but its papering over the cracks. Radford will hopefully prove he has some integrity & fall on his sword.

Completely agree, I hope Pearson is simply being stubborn about his 'Club Hull' idea and is wanting to save face...if he isn't then he genuinely believes Radford and 'jobs for the boys' is the future and that is very worrying indeed.

and timing wise with the new structure it couldn't come at a worse time, the 'top8' luxury yacht is getting ready to sail off and make its clubs richer, leaving Hull on board the Middle8 pedalo battling to survive and stay afloat financially.

Cheer-leading? I never wanted the bloke appointed in the first place. I'd be overjoyed if he was replaced tomorrow by an experienced head coach. I just can't stand people posting ill-thought-out and inaccurate stuff. The situation is dire enough, it doesn't need help.

So once again, we make more meters, have more sets than the opposition and get beat, halfs are poor and backs no pace or killing instinct.

Our centres made 9 runs between them, 3 from Whiting which us terrible, he should never okay centre again, whilst we have other players who can play there. Sa has to start there next week.

Our Forwards did ok, most made good metres, Main problem is halfs and backs, no skill or pace at all.

Also we made about 60 tackle busts compared to their 22.

These stats point squarely at poor selection from the coach and general ineptitude from the players. It's just depressing, frankly.

We're also the only team in the bottom 8 with a positive points difference. Go figure.

What were the offloads stats? They seemed to be able to do a hell of a lot

Things like this are where I just think it's so difficult to understand/defend Radford's thinking. Whiting had a shaky start to this season, and was fairly left out, but it wasn't until he was moved to centre that his performance descended to terrible. This is where there are holes in his dropping/selection on merit argument. IMO we are not always playing the best options we have, and dropping those most deserving, which is how it should work. What he seems to be doing (halves apart) is basing it mainly on the defensive side of the game. So those who miss tackles are sent packing, even if they offer an attacking threat, but those who bomb chances (or don't even create any) are persevered with as long as they are solid in the tackle. My personal view is that the defensive side of the game should be easier to improve than the attacking side, so if you're going to focus on one over the other it would make more sense to persevere with the stronger attacking players and address their defensive issues. Good coaching should be able to do something about this, and given that Radford was lauded for our improved defence under Gentle, then surely it should be right down his alley to do this.

With Whiting at centre in particular it's compounded by the fact that we signed Sa to reinforce the centre position, but even approaching 3 months in we are still playing him in the back row, instead of Whiting. It seems so obvious to swap them around I simply don't understand why it isn't that way already.

This week he complained about our poor attacking play and said he'll consider changes for the derby, lets see if he makes any attacking changes or still sticks primarily with a 'defensively solid' (on paper, not the pitch) lineup.

What a truly crap season this has been.

What I will say is what was discussed on The Footy Show over here a few weeks back. I'm not saying Radford is the answer, I was never a fan of him taking the reigns in the first place, but far too much emphasis is placed on the coach's downfalls and mistakes rather than the players. The players are the ones who are actually on the pitch and they should perform better. I've thought this for years, the players and teams we've over the past few years should have performed better and more consistently than they have. Maybe this is down to the coach not motivating the team, I don't know, but the players should take far more responsibility than they do. 'Energy' is the big buzz word at the minute, but it's true that it's something we seriously lack in, and that's down to the players not wanting it enough. IMO. Attitude is a massive factor in any sport, and I think it's a culture problem at the club that we don't live and breath as winners, we are constantly the tryers who 'can match the big teams on our day'. Leeds and Wigan breed winners, we are miles behind in this department.

Why were sa and rankin not brought into the game earlier,they made a difference and surely if both were fit shouldn't they have been on the pitch from the off.For me just more evidence radford has no idea what his best side is!!

Radford actually admitted this was a mistake in his post-match interview.

Regarding sa he probably thought his aggression n options for back row where a good reason to have him come on from the bench. Also maybe thought whiting would be looking for a big game due to lack of opportunities this yr.
Whitings been a great servent but going forward I just cant see were he fits in.

That he's making this sort of "mistake" for such , in his words , an important game so late in the season shows that he has learned little since making the same "mistakes" in the pre-season friendlies - what was he trying to do at Featherstone? - and countless games since. There is absolutely no evidence or suggestion that he will be doing anything different next year.