Which one will go first Mac or Cunningham? 2 under performing coaches who both in recent times have openly recognised that its a results driven business

Given the toxic environment at Langtree Park last night, I am not sure how Cunningham can carry on for much longer

no idea but i can't see either getting past the regular rounds if things continue.

Anderson apparently offered to resign a few weeks ago and the board would not accept it.

I would swap him for McDermott any time

Cunningham will be first to go. The fans have spoken.

Neither will be sacked this year nor will Anderson.

I can't see how Cunningham will last the season, the St Helens fans booed last night when he was pictured on the screen. Even as a Wigan fan that's a great shame for a club legend. As so often happens in this country he was given the job too soon, hasn't served an apprenticeship and is now suffering as a result.

I'd be suprised to see McDermott go before the end of the season, he's earned the right to sort it out if he wants to though I think we may see a new Leeds coach next year.

Strange it's not the players who are failing isn't it? The ones who can't pass, tackle, run etc. Never seen the coach sat on the side on in the stands do that, mind you never seen the match officials do it either, yet according to knowlegable fans its the coach and match officials who cause the probems, never ever the players!!!
Just weird

I think Leeds and McDermott have pretty much written off the season now and he will be given the chance of finding a leadership spine to replace Sinfield and Peacock. For Cunningham he's still in the mix for the top 8 and he would have to lose the majority of the remaining 14 games to have any threat of the sack.
Both coaches have the advantage in that there are no proven coaches going to be available in the short term..

The key to all this is that the RFL has effectively blocked clubs from signing Australian coaches.

Hence Saints and for that matter other clubs are stuck between a rock and a hard place of replacing one substandard British coach with another.

This is one of the main reasons why the standard of rugby league in this country has been in free fall for the past few years.

We are heading back to the 1970's and early 80's of unfit, poorly prepared teams, before the aussie invasion that modernised coaching in the UK.

The only saving grace is that our best players are increasingly heading to Australia where they get a proper footballing education.

How have the RFL blocked clubs from signing Australian coaches? Would be a bizarre move given who the New England coach is.

Bradford have [iliterally[/i just signed an aussie coach, and we had offers from others. If a champ club can do it, I'm sure a SL club can. No idea what you are on about.

And when was this in effect? Wakey signed Brian Smith last year.

Oh dear, for you new guys, you won't have had the pleasure of the chairmaker and his ultra saints fan, everyone else is wrong and the problem isn't our own posting.


Remember when mugwump reappeared after saints won a Grand Final for the first time in ages? This is the second sign of the apocalypse...

RTFB

[urlhttp://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/RFL%20GBE%20requirements%202015%20-%20Approved%2001.12.14.pdf[/url

GO down to the bit on coaching and check the criteria required for a none EU coach to get a gig in the UK

Its not impossible, I never said that, however clubs have to satisfy a lot of criteria, otherwise its a no no.

Quality.From one of those brilliant,supportive St Helens followers who drove out both Mick Potter and Royce Simmons in recent years.

Doesn't seem that difficult to satisfy imo. And look at the discretionary part, almost all of those requirements would be satisfied as part of the general process of recruiting a new coach.

Cunningham, then they will bring an experienced coach in from Oz.

Can you imagine the RFL trying to reject Wayne Bennett on any basis? Or any NRL coach or assistant coach in reality? Following that logic through they should be far more stringent about NRL hacks than they are.

I think too many people bought into the bleating about British coaches not been given a chance (which was probably true up to a point). The reality is just as with players there's a far bigger and better talent pool of coaches in Australia.

Cunningham vs McDermott is interesting. Cunningham was just given the gig too early, without any track record. McDermott had a track record, albeit not a stellar one at London, but at least had been assistant to Tony Smith at Leeds. In both cases they've probably been over-praised when things go well, and vice versa. But that is a coach's lot, and why very few survive more than a few years at any club.

It's always the same in pro sport but, you can replace a coach (1 person) far easer than you can replace a team.
Also, it's up to the coach to have the group of people ready to perform to their best ability and unfortunately they inevitably have to carry the can, when things go wrong.

Both Cunningham and McDermott seem unable to change their respective teams' fortunes.

The question is, just how long do you leave them in charge of a failing team.

There's a lot of evidence showing a change of coach can bring big improvements fast. There's also a lot of evidence to show its rarely sustained. What all clubs should be focusing on is getting the right appointments made for the long haul. Too many caretakers get the job for the long term on the back of a turnaround that would happen regardless of who the new coach is when an unpopular one leaves (or one who has lost the dressing room).

I can't see any of the 3 mentioned getting sacked this season, unless Leeds or Hudds look like they're going to get relegated. Its hard to imagine all 3 being in place next year though.

That would be the players who can't be ar***d then wouldn't it but still want the money for NOT doing their job!!!

Its the coach's responsibility to make sure that players play as well as they can. Everyone can have off days, but over the course of a season the coach is responsible in the end. If they don't want that responsibility then don't become a coach. It really is that simple.

^^^^
Indeed. The assertion that a team is just unlucky because several top players are performing badly at the same time is cobblers.

Totally agree.

Too many coaches get a SL gig without having actually served a decent apprenticeship and are consequently clueless when the going gets tough.

Taking over a well-financed winning team is relatively easy; I remember Basil saying that his sacking at Saints wouldn't affect the players ability to perform because they were professionals and didn't need a coach in the short term. Taking over and keeping the team winning is very much harder. However, turning a losing team into a winning team, or getting a team to perform above it's level, is very difficult, sometimes almost impossible and none of Cunningham/McDermott/Anderson have really had to do that in the past.

The likes of Kear, Morrison, Aston and Powell seem to have the attributes that I would look for in a coach; Cunningham/McDermott/Anderson don't but might develop that experience in the next few weeks.

If I were chairman of any of Leeds, Saints or Shudds, though, I would stick with what I have got - for now - see what transpires and then take action if we dont turn it around by the end of the season.