That's lame, far worse done by many many Hull coaches in the past & has been said this was as much of Briscoes doing as was the boards.
I seem to remember even the great Arthur Bunting telling the players they were doing against York way back(I know because the players told my aunt who worked at the club back then), when they were cruising at something like 20-0 at half time and the players decided to do just the very minimum & York almost pegged us back. So even the best coaches make mistakes!
So dont go slagging a good coach off for something that was not directly his fault.

Personally I still feel getting rid of Sharpe was a poor decision by the board, people saying he took us back 10 years talk utter tosh as the side of 1996-1997 would never have done what the side under his charge did!

I think getting rid of Sharp was the correct decision, however i'm baffled that a worse coach gets an extension with the club since then.

Would be interesting to see what happened if he went there. IMO he'd have to try a different approach to the safety-first rugby we played under him, as I can't see Saints fans standing for that even if they were winning. Whatever good points he had as a coach, I'd struggle to ever imagine a team of his being tagged 'The Entertainers'.

What would the Saints fans think if he went there and took Cusack, Byrne and Dykes with him ???



Todd Byrne a direct replacement for Wellens ??

And maybe give big Hutch a chance ??

Byrnes faster

Peter Sharpe withdrew the contract that was offered originally. you can't get more direct than that.

My understanding of the situation was he wanted to keep him but a certain person at the top said no to the deal to keep him.

The issue is that since mcrae left we've had progressively worse coaches

Mcrae wasnt that good either......had arguably our best squads but couldnt do anything with them.....never won a play-off match under Mcrae or got to a major final.......the worse coaches since him have took us to Finals and play-off wins.

At least Walrus Chops talked a good game , some of the others that followed never managed that.

Agree.

The contract offer expired while Briscoe waited to see if he could get a better offer. I have no problem with him doing that - it's a short career after all - but all the angst following a simple set of business decisions is tedious TBH.

The safety-first rugby was a direct response to having no playmakers in the side after Cooke walked out. On the few occasions when we managed to have a reasonably fit half back pairing we played some good stuff.

Once we got Head in we had a play-maker again and we looked good.....he took us to 4th that yr after Cooke,Swain and Domic went and we only went out narrowly to Wigan in a game we should have won......Took a risk with Dykes that didnt work.......he was unlucky to go and wouldnt say he is a worse coach...he was betterthan Agar and Kear imo.

Briscoe got some crap advice off his agent and paid the penalty with us......the way it worked maybe was better choice as his form has gone this season.

Did Peter Sharp sign Willie Manu?

Alot of his overseas signings just werent good enough for a team that was top 4 challenging at the time IMO.

Yes. His signing was announced the week of the 2006 Grand Final.

Quote ="knocker norton"Did Peter Sharp sign Willie Manu? Alot of his overseas signings just werent good enough for a team that was top 4 challenging at the time IMO.'" I had my doubts too (thought it was Kear), but it was Sharp: news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 033047.stm Also must have been Sharp in charge when Crocker signed, as the signing was announced the day after Agar took over: www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby/200 ... -20432999/ Nonetheless, Sharp's signings were a mixed bag at best.

Quote ="knocker norton"Did Peter Sharp sign Willie Manu? Alot of his overseas signings just werent good enough for a team that was top 4 challenging at the time IMO.'" I had my doubts too (thought it was Kear), but it was Sharp: news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 033047.stm Also must have been Sharp in charge when Crocker signed, as the signing was announced the day after Agar took over: www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby/200 ... -20432999/ Nonetheless, Sharp's signings were a mixed bag at best.

IIRC Sharp signed:

Tickle, Sing, Manu, Godwin, Maiava, Head, Dykes, Berrigan, Byrne, Cusack and Crocker. He also gave debuts to Houghton, Hall, Briscoe and Burnett.

A pretty mixed bag IMO. I remember him talking up signing Mason, Sherwin and Soward and ending up with Cusack and Byrne.

Also seemd to have a soft spot for injury prone half backs looking at that list!

The right signings after the 2006 season could have set us up for a successful couple of years shame it never happened.

No we didn't. We only scored 50 points once during sharpe's tenure and that was in his 1st game. We were predicatable under him and won many games by defending well rather than scoring lots of points

So Sharp sorted the defence out....thought that was the whole idea.....what would you sooner have.....38-36 scorelines or 18-4 ones....know which one i prefer.

38 - 36 every time.

My post was in response to kosh who was telling us how good our attack was when we had a settled 1/2 back partnership.

In 2004 we scored 50 or more points 3 times in SL matches. We've managed it only once in the 4 1/2 seasons since. saints did it twice in 3 games recently, even the dobbins have managed it twice this season. We are predictable and ponderous in attack

Last time we hit 50 in a S/L game was in 2006 UNDER Sharps tenure against Wigan...we had plenty of 30's and 40's under his regime.....bet Agar would love to be able to do that.

Apart from the drubbing at home by Rovers, we played some good rugby with Head in the team.

We won 9 from 12 and scored 40+ three times in four games. In comparison in 2008 we only scored 40+ twice (aside from against Rochdale in the cup) In 2009 we never scored more than 40 at all and only scored [i30+[/i twice.