Those two at least got their success on the back of an Ozzies team.

Not really disputing that, they certainly didn't have to build a team to win the title/Championship/SL as the players were already there. Still doesn't change the fact that only three British coaches have been successful in the league after so many years.

I just dont think there is the coaching talent in this country, john kear is about the best and was given a shot at a bigger club and blew it (he should've been given more time). I think that good Oz coaches are much further ahead of their british counterparts than is true of the players

I think its down to people being given the opportunity. Perhaps Hull didn't show enough faith in Kear. After all he did win the Challenge Cup with them. English coaches in recent yearsincluding Kear, Sharpe, Cullen, Harrison have all had chances and have blown it really.

Maybe more of our young coaches need to go to Australia and learn the skills their. I would accept that on balance the overseas coaches have done better but there have also been some rubbish coaches from overseas. Far too many overseas coaches are creeping into the gave in the Co-operative Leagues also.

I basically agree with what Mcllennan has said.

One of the things that came out of the RL world cup review done by the RFL with the assistance of the players, was that the game was lacking in the appreciation of the scientific aspects of the sport.

For me this is part of the culture of the game in the UK, which belittles itself.

The Aussies have an appreciation of tactics of the game, their commentators give intelligent analysis, they even have a tv programme called NRL Tactics that explains all about the way the game is played.
In the UK we have comedy double acts, who chat about someone having pink boots, who make double-entendres, but who offer only the most simplistic tactical insight into the game.

Your average soccer fan knows about 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-3-3. Many RL fans come across as thinking the game is just about smacking him, or getting it out wide.

As a result from top to bottom, from fans to administrators its unlikely that the game will place enough emphasis on the reality that RL is chess with muscles, not pantomine.

it might be a good idea as you say for coaches ala cullen and sharp to take a step or two down and go as an assisstant in oz for a few years, see how they do it from the inside.

As Chairmaker has just also said we need to improve massively in the technical aspects of coaching if we are going to see more British coaches in SL in the future. I think going to Aus as an assistant or junior coach would be a good thing. It's exactly how Daniel Anderson developed as a coach. Perhaps also some of our coaches don't spend enough time as a junior coach/assistant and step up too quickly and thats why they have struggled.

Coaching is far more than smacking someone or getting the ball out wide and the conditioning aspects of the game are now a highly scientific process too. I just wish we could put in place a better structure for more British coaches and former players wantign to coach to come through the ranks.

Article in aussie press showing changing role of players www.leaguehq.com.au/news/lhqnews ... 97718.html Its of note in how it comments about the loose forward playing like a 3rd prop in many aussie teams. This is in many respects how Cloughie plays. Also back rowers performing like inside centres did in the past. Wilkin and Flannery have very much been in this role.

Article in aussie press showing changing role of players www.leaguehq.com.au/news/lhqnews ... 97718.html Its of note in how it comments about the loose forward playing like a 3rd prop in many aussie teams. This is in many respects how Cloughie plays. Also back rowers performing like inside centres did in the past. Wilkin and Flannery have very much been in this role.

Quote ="The Chair Maker"Article in aussie press showing changing role of players www.leaguehq.com.au/news/lhqnews ... 97718.html Its of note in how it comments about the loose forward playing like a 3rd prop in many aussie teams. This is in many respects how Cloughie plays. Also back rowers performing like inside centres did in the past. Wilkin and Flannery have very much been in this role.'" Tony p also plays centresque. Forwards have to be so much fitter than in years gone by.

Quote ="The Chair Maker"Article in aussie press showing changing role of players www.leaguehq.com.au/news/lhqnews ... 97718.html Its of note in how it comments about the loose forward playing like a 3rd prop in many aussie teams. This is in many respects how Cloughie plays. Also back rowers performing like inside centres did in the past. Wilkin and Flannery have very much been in this role.'" Tony p also plays centresque. Forwards have to be so much fitter than in years gone by.

Tony P played near enough the full 80 against Wigan and Graham regularly plays 60+ which is immence considering hius work-load.

Absolutely.

I despair when Stevo talks about, for example, Leon Pryce 'shutting down' Danny McGuire.

A successful playing career which included a world cup triumph, 20 years as a professional commentator, and he still hasn't realised that stand-offs don't man mark each other.

Clearly you can't use Stevo as a barometer of the coaching standards, but the game does seem to be much better understood over there than it is here, which may well be why they are always so much better than us at the basics.

Not me, I'd say there's not enough overseas coaches. The Australian coaching is light years ahead of British. They took on sports science way ahead of anyone else. Consequently the Australian players are much fitter but the real difference shows in recovery time. Whether it be just recovery after a game or recovery after an injury the players benefit from the very professionel science based conditioning and coaching.

How do you think the British athletes did so well at the last olympics? I'll tell you. They poached the Australian coaches that's how.

When the British coaches can match the depth of knowledge of the Australians as regards fitness, conditioning, recovery and game study then I'll agree with you.

The ones we need to stop coming over is the players not the coaches.

Quote ="The Chair Maker"Article in aussie press showing changing role of players www.leaguehq.com.au/news/lhqnews ... 97718.html Its of note in how it comments about the loose forward playing like a 3rd prop in many aussie teams. This is in many respects how Cloughie plays. Also back rowers performing like inside centres did in the past. Wilkin and Flannery have very much been in this role.'" I noticed in the article it mentions Fui Fui Moi Moi being used at 5/8 stand off. Isn't this exactly what Saints used to do years ago when George Mann regularly moved out of the pack to get the ball at first or second receiver especially at scrums?

Quote ="The Chair Maker"Article in aussie press showing changing role of players www.leaguehq.com.au/news/lhqnews ... 97718.html Its of note in how it comments about the loose forward playing like a 3rd prop in many aussie teams. This is in many respects how Cloughie plays. Also back rowers performing like inside centres did in the past. Wilkin and Flannery have very much been in this role.'" I noticed in the article it mentions Fui Fui Moi Moi being used at 5/8 stand off. Isn't this exactly what Saints used to do years ago when George Mann regularly moved out of the pack to get the ball at first or second receiver especially at scrums?

Daniel Anderson used to use Mike Bennett as a third prop playing loose forward, and Saints regularly do what it says in the article, about the '3rd prop' going off to be replaced by someone faster - when Clough goes off and Roby moves to loose forward

I concur

I was going to write something similiar myself but you have done it so much more eloquently I don't need to.

Completely agree, Stevo is embarrassing. He is just a cliche machine, who is way out of his depth when it comes to analysing Rugby League these days. You can almost predict some of the stuff he's going to say and when he says it, I feel like throwing a brick at the telly.

I also concur with McClennan and the Chairmaker. Whilst, I'd like to see more British coaches, we simply don't produce good enough quality for them to be involved at the top level.

How many successful British coaches can you think of in the SL era? Noble 5 years ago. Hanley briefly 10 years ago.... er....?

I dont think there are any successful british coaches. Hanley won win Mcrae's team, and Noble with Elliot's. No british coach in recent history has built up a successful team off their own back. Can anyone think of 1?

Eric Hughes built the side for McRae...

John Kear has also worked several major miracles over the last 15 years. He is a superb coach.

That's one decent coach, although he dramatically failed in the 2000 World Cup with England.

Fa'asavalu, Matuatia, Paul Anderson have done that for Saints over the years

Eric hughes is a partial, he built a good side but couldnt coach them as well as McRae.
John Kear is good with smaller sides, he can over achieve, but when given the chance with a great side like Hull with all the resources they have, blew it, he was possibly sacked too early but still underperformed. I think he has found his level at wakey

I have too agree with this. Hughes got the players in but it was McRae who coached them properly with great results in 1996 and defending the CC in 97

He was great at getting players in, maybe best suited to head scout. I believe he had alot to do with getting wilkin to saints.

Dont judge a coach on trophys won, judge a coach on if they can develop a team and players.

The one British coach in recent years who has gained my attention in that regard is Brian McDermott at Quins. He has picked up players from lower divisions and the London junior scene and made them into SL standard players.

John Kear is the only one of the old guard so to speak that still seems to have the ability to improve a player.