Your right mate its the first thing that comes in to peoples heads when we lose,some people just dont want him here and find it hard to give him the credit he deserves,now we are winning its all to do with webster,long,omeley,fitz,yes dont get me wrong they will be massive assets to helping agar but at the end of the day rich is the first team coach and he picks the team

every week and coaches them.just imagine if we had beaten salford,crusaders,im not getting carried away with this run and neither is rich as he has said in paper,he will be the first to admitt we still have a long way to go,but lets just enjoy it while we can

No halfback, no success, this is the first full season when Agar has had the chance to address this and he has got us the best available.



The player you mention above are only 5 out of 17, Berrigan has been disapoitting/injured/played out of poistion (not agars fault), Yeaman no service (see above) and Horne injured or not fit for Agar's tenure.



So that Tickle and Manu out of 17 who have played well.

bang on wolfie



I am one of Agars biggest critics, but results are proving me wrong, I have to admit the style we play holds no interest for me and I don't feel inclined to make a special effort to watch games, but that is as much about the move to a Friday night counting me out as anything else.



Some things he does still baffle me, but so did McRae, Sharp and most definitely Walsh.



I'm resigned to the fact that I am never going to see a world class Hull FC (on the pitch) with the current board in place, but SL this season has been very mediocre.(in entertainment terms)

Good post.

Do you REALLY think its that simple?



Taking your logic through to its obvious conclusion, are you saying that if all clubs pay the same on player salaries then the best coached teams should be at the top of the league and the worst coached teams at the bottom?



We may pay the same on salaries as Leeds, Saints, Wigan, Wire but are our players as good as theirs?



How many of our players would be an automatic first choice in those teams?



Are you saying that our players are as good as theirs but we don't perform as well because ours are badly coached?



Are you saying that all we need to do to become a top team is to appoint a top coach?

name one player who has improved under Agar.....you can't.

I think it has been for a few years tbh.

Wille Manu, much fitter and more consistent.



Danny Houghton, looks to have a better allround game.



Briscoe, club and Agar woring hard to get rid of his faults, much improved on high ball.



Sam Moa, nothing really to say, gets better each week.



IMO





Saying that not sure how much Agar has to do with any of these players improving, but all are better players now than they when Agar was appointting head coach.

Agree with all of them and would also add Tickle to that list and also Tansey.

Fitz & Ogre

Pretty much yes, if we assume the coach is responsible for player recruitment, development of young players and player retention







No, so ask yourself why we are paying the same amount for poorer players







Dunno, but I reckon the following would be there or thereabouts with any team in SL



Manu

Fitz

O'meley

Briscoe

Berrigan

Long

Moa

Tickle



Conversely, there are plenty of players at those 4 clubs who wouldn't displace their opposite number in our team







I'm saying I don't believe that agar has the knowledge or experience to get the best out of the group of players we have. Similar to noble at wigan, sharp at hudds and cullen/lowes at wire.



Do you believe we are performing to our full potential or that we have for the last 2 years?







No, there are other factors involved, but it would certainly improve our chances

We pay more for lesser players because they have to live in hull.



I'm not knocking hull but it's a hard place to sell.