OK, that's covered the 1st 5 minutes. How will we respond to been 6-0 down from then on?

We're going to fight all the way and come away with 2 league points

we have a strong squad in contention for this game, tuson is injured and lineham is a long way off a return. we easily beat london, a few days after an intense local derby and in poor wet conditions, so 40 points was perhaps worth a bit more under normal circumstances. i've not followed agar's career since he left hull, but if he hasn't changed, you will be playing players out of position and managing the interchanges poorly. wakey score plenty of points but the problem is they also concede a lot (over 30 per game so far this season) Our defence has been spot on nearly all season, and miller and rankin are starting to find their feet at half back. we've had the odd bad game (widnes springs to mind) but i'll go for a reasonably comfy home win, something around 32 - 16. the poorer the conditions the better your chances as we have been guilty of over playing in attack sometimes.

by the way if kirmond isn't right i wouldn't put him in against our big forwards, probably needs a rest

Kirmond will be our Scrum half, he has to play.

Also our forwards are as big as your don't kid yourself, the difference is yours turn up to play.

Normally I'd scoff at Hull fans who can be a touch arrogant before a match - with often ludicrous prediction - and have enjoyed the humiliation we have so often heaped upon them.

But not this time, you'll walk it and any pre match confidence you have is now utterly justified - which shows just how far we have slipped.

I'm hoping for a year zero (fresh start) but it'd fairly forlorn to be honest.

Depressingly accurate.

Sykes or Mathers at loose forward?........

Fairbank at full back or stand off.

I doubt we will "walk it", if there's 2 two games RA really wants to win this is the first one!! He will have your side well up for this one don't worry about that. Unfortunately for you lot he cannot motivate players week in week out, God knows how many derbies we lost under him and he just did'nt seem to care, it was heartbreaking.

I would have agreed with you about no production line a few years ago when we had a coach called Richard Agar who when a player got injured would rather shuffle 4 players out of position than give a youth player a chance who plays the injured position. In his last year with us he never gave a single player a chance.

Since he left us we have given Shaul, Crooks, Bowden, Green, Hadley who are all first team regulars now sent Cunningham to London on a season long loan(who is playing well). We have also 4 or 5 other under 19's that are playing very well and could be pushing for first team in the next 1 to 2 years and one of the best under 16's team we have had for the last 20 to 30 years.

As for the game on Sunday just looking for a good game and a win for Fc of course but as with over the years never quiet works out as you hope.

You've just caught up with his career progression since leaving Hull.

Players out of position, players shoehorned in, and happy to play with 16 for up to 70 minutes, sometimes for the full 80.

Just to short cut this whole "Agar never gave youth a chance" thing, we had the hwole discussion when he came to us and it was blatantly untrue. Youth played under him and made their debuts.
The Hull fans with an axe to grind simply ignored this fact.

And his ironic that he couldn't motivate Hull in the derby but can motivate Wakefield to d so well against Hull. Seems like an issue at Hull not just Agar

So their current ages are 21, 21, 22, 24, 22 respectively so that makes them the following ages when Agar left

Shaul 18
Crooks 18
Bowden 19
Green 21
Hadley 19

I'd say your youth development at that time was pretty good, if Agar was responsible for their development, they came from young teens (was he there 3 years?) to play for Hull first team after he left.
If they were good enough at that age for Hull then so be it, but only just if they were.

You may well be right that Agar isn't the greatest at developing the youth. You'll get lots of debate here about it. But your evidence soesn't show it.

And now that I look, you have not been as successful in number of wins or league position since he left.

Must have missed that, can you remind me?

I remember you were in the conversations.

One guy that I remember is a young stand off that everybody was complaining about not being played by Agar.
When we checked the stats Agar gave him his debut.
And then the next coach didn't play him either.

Beyond that I leave it to you to decide, but this is a Wakefield board so you can pick that up on yours if you like.

I'm looking forward to the game.
Hull have looked good on occassions this year but we have a relatively good record against you compared to most so I hope we spring a surprise.

I was responding to a post that Hull didnt have a youth setup and the fact he preferred to play people out of position rather than bring them in which reading a lot of Wakey posters complaining about playing people out of positions and having his favourites which can do no wrong I am suprised you just tell us its all about having an axe to grind with Agar.

I stand corrected.

don't know if there's been any progression - his favourite trick with us was to name a young player on the bench and not use him at all. we had berrigan and whiting at the time who could play a lot of positions, so it was ideal for him.

agar was not responsible for youth development - the main protaganist was andy last. i do agree that the lack of youth devt was not entirely due to agar though, the ownership at the time of one kath hetherington had quite a bit to do with it was well. adam pearson is on the record as saying how shocked he was at the lack of investment in yough facilities when he took over, just before agar's departure.

not sure where you get the fact about our league position not being any better since he left. agar did get us into 6th in his last season in charge, but before that we finished second bottom and third bottom under him. we've made the play offs every year since he left

Think Agar's team selection may be..

Sammut
Fox
Collis
Lynne
Riley
Sykes
Siejka
Anderson
McShane
Scruton
Ryan
Fairbank
Washbrook

Subs. Moore, Smith, Tautai and Sykes.

Not the team I'd go for.

On youth development, the number of young lads who've made their debuts in the last 3 years would suggest that Agar had actually got your youth system into a good position following John Kears reign. Ironically he's done the same thing here again following john Kear who had zero interest in the youth system and starved it of ANY resources while paying lip service to it during his tenure.

The fact that you reached the play offs in Agars last season and have done so ever since suggests that Agar had manoeuvred your 1st team into a solid position before he left and subsequent coaches have enjoyed the benefit.

so no place for our M O M last time out its strange how RFA makes plublic statements regarding Lubeys fittness but picka Lynne (who cant tackle or pass)even though he suffers alot from cramp

Hang on. That team is not from Agar.
Do we have to go through the. 'Blame Agar at all costs' on every thread?

And I expect you are bang on

You've got Sykes starting in the halves and on the bench. At first I thought it was just a mistake but thinking how the team selections have gone this season it could be possible!

I'd go for
Jowitt
Riley
Collis
Walshaw
Lyne
Sammut
Godinet
Anderson
McShane
Moore
Kirmond
Ryan
Annakin

Wildey
Malloy
Smith
Scruton

my mistake. The squad selections recently have been a little strange though so it wouldn't surprise me that one of these days we'll play with 16 with one player named twice.