Since this time last year, when it was clear that both Wire and Saints were in trouble and struggling under their incumbent leadership. Both clubs had "legends" as coaches, both clubs had won silverware under them and both clubs were in a similar league position.

Saints - acted early - have since have won 20 games out of 32 (62%) missed the 2017 Super League Final by 1 point and sit top of the league in and currently sit top of the league in 2018.
Wire - vacillated/head in sand - have since won 11 SL games out of 29 (38%) dumped into the qualifiers and currently sit 8th in the league in 2018.

The point of the post? How decisive action yields results. We can blame players and coaches but sometimes the Board need to take it on the chin for where we are.

So do you support sacking Price now or are you in the camp of: "this season its fine to finish mid/lower table, I'd wait till we have another disappointing year next year before replacing him".

I understand your point, but the situations are far from comparable. Cunningham was appointed for the 2014 season* and Smith in 2009. Both clubs had won honours with their coaches, both knew that their managers had had a good run in the top job. We will need this season at least to conclude that Price is not the answer (if he's not, he certainly doesn't have the midas touch for sure).

However, in answer to your point, the board should always have succession in mind and be scouring the earth for playing talent and coaching talent.

My point was really that our issues originate from the actions and inactions of the board of directors. Things got stale, failure became OK, Smith was too comfortable, crowds fell, the playing assets declined, whilst Middleton, Lomax, James, Summers, Broomhead and Moran watched.


[size=85*Incidentally Cunningham won them a GF in his maiden season, Smith a CC in his so both appointments were successful at the time. [/size

Cunningham didn't win a GF he got appointed just after that, Saints last GF win was in Nathan Brown's last season.

TS had won the league leaders' shield and made two major finals in 2016 so the situations weren't directly comparable. Had KC achieved that there would have been a stronger argument for giving it a bit longer.

But if decisive action yields results, why not take it?

If you were to pick up the papers this week and saw the story "Wolves set to part company with Price, with former Bulldogs coach Des Hasler understood to be lined up to replace him" would you be on here arguing that we should give Price more time, or would you like the idea of the move?

Also does Geoff Toovey have a job?

Genuine question- what would sacking Price actually achieve?

Our problems are quite obvious. We have absolutely no pace in the side. This is down to poor recruitment, which has had very little to do with Price.

Truth is, any coach in the world would be struggling with this squad.. as the saying goes, u can't polish a turd....

But we didn't lose against Saints, or anyone for that matter, because our lack of pace was exposed; they didn't rip us to shreds down the flanks any.more than they outmuscled us in the middle.

We are losing because players are making rudimentary mistakes with ball in hand, cannot field a kick off, give away stupid penalties and have a gameplan that consists of 5 drives and a speculative kick.

And that reeks of mental weakness, lack of focus and inability to do the basics which, yes, is the players reaponsibility but also the coaching teams.

How much pace did we have in the side when we were winning Challenge Cups a few years ago?

Other than Hicks I'm struggling to think of where the out and out pace came from. Myler was quite quick for a halfback. Other than them it was Hodgson, Mathers, King, Joel Monaghan, Bridge, Riley. Good players but not really speedsters.

We lost to Saints because our attack is so poor and that stems from the complete lack of pace we have. Most other sides would have had 2 or 3 more tries on Friday night- Saints were there for the taking, the only difference between the 2 sides was that they had the pace and ability to convert their chances.. We have the ability, we don't have the pace.

We have the slowest back division in the league. Our wingers are embarrassing. Mitch Brown is a throwback to the late 90's era of just random mediocrity being given a spot in the side. Lineham is just an unintelligent lump with zero positive attributes to his game.. Our half backs are laughably slow. Brown to be anywhere near useful needs pace running off him - pace we don't have. Roberts looks bored and uninspired and also pretty spineless. He shows no willingness to take a hit in order to get a runner through a gap. He simply acts as a pivot passing the ball onto the next man in the line. His lack of passing skill is half the reason that Masilla looks so lacking in threat.

Ultimately, whoever coaches Wire has a huge job on his hands. I'd suggest getting behind Price rather than plotting his downfall.

Isn’t the very point of this thread that you can? Compare the Saints sides between the 40-18 loss last year and the 12-30 win this year. Ben Barba aside (who had his quietest game of the year) there really isn’t much difference in personnel. The difference comes from a side in the ghost of arguably the worst ever coach at Saints ever to a side being managed as skillfully as I have seen probably* - plenty of genuine competition for places (Morgan and Smith still sitting out, Wilkin and Knowles to come back in the forwards, and a raft of kids behind them) and the freedom to play with a smile on their faces makes a world of difference.

I also think there’s still a lot more to come from them too as we get to the business end of the season. There’s been plenty of room for growth in all of our performances so far (even Cas) - were far from perfect, but very visibly moving in the right direction imo.

*Millward and Anderson in the mid 2000s were obviously massively successful, but I do think they’d have struggled more had they inherited the mess Holbrook did.

Are you suggesting that Holbrook could transform this Wire side?... not a chance in reality.

You had a half decent squad with a poor coach and rightly changed it.. We have a squad with massive inefficiencies. Simply changing the coach wouldn't change a thing.. We are paying for poor recruitment and a poor quality academy.

Honestly none of your players played worse on Friday than Don Peyroux did at times last year under KC - in the tight SC era were in at the moment it’s coaches who can get the best out of the Dom Peyroux’s in every squad who are going to get the recognition (see Powell whose built a team of them). That’s what Holbrook has done at Saints, and it creates a platform for the Robys and the Walmsleys and the Barbas to look good from. Tony Smith was never that type of coach imo, and initially looks like Price isn’t either. But neither is Wane or Radford (but as your said previously, decent looking recruitment/ production compensates for it).

From the outside, what you seen to be lacking is any confidence to push the pass, and any competition to force the pass to stick - that doesn’t boil down to the players you have or haven’t got. Holbrook has done incredibly well at creating “artificial” competition for places (moving LMS back to prop, moving Makinson into the centres), and instilling the confidence to follow it through (dropping Smith for Richardson).

Whether Holbrook would have been able to do this in the same way with the Warrington squad? Who knows.

Out of interest, who would you take out of our side who would improve Saints?... I'd suggest very few and definitely not from our mediocre back division?

That actually confirms my original point of where our problems lie...