We go under?

Wouldn't it be better for the club (board) to invite (with a bit of cash) the likes of M Walker onto the board to be someone that can actually relate to the game and be that conduit between board room and dressing room, much in the way Lowe does at KR.

Why does the board need to be near the dressing room?

They strategically manage the club and have Jimmy Rule to manage Agar. Agar manages the dressing room.

Questionable.

Agreed.

I should have said that he role is to manage the dressing room. Whether he does or not is a different thing and where the issue lies for me.

you mean like sleep with da fishes

If we had someone with the RL nouse watching Dobson in THAT game, then maybe we could have signed him, if we had someone with RL nouse we may not have signed Thorman as a SH.
Its not a case of being close to the dressing room, I didn't say that.
Everybody slams the signings (even Crocker) as we have too many SR and then we sign Lauaki another SR come prop.
It's about having somebody that can communicate between coaches and board to give balanced views in RL terms relating to recruitment and retention and not by what Kath tells Jimmy to do and say.

So you want the board to make the decisions on recruitment rather than the coach?

Hasn't that been the case anyhow, I don't recall Sharp making the statement 'we didn't think that he (Dobson) was what we were looking for' and that was based on their (Kath & Jimmy) observations on 1 game.
They trumpeted Crockers signing as their visit to Oz being a successful mission to get agents on their side, probably was the case of agents contacts for Moa signing.
So yes the board HAVE made decisions on signings.
They have also made decisions to offload players, Brough/Briscoe/Wheeldon etc.

In respect of Thorman signing as a SH it doesn't take an Einstein to work it out that he came on the say so of one of our coaches, and how good has that turned out to be?

You've totally missed what I have said, I 'suggested' that we have a director that can communicate on the coaches level and have an understanding of what is required. I cannot believe that any other SL club would have signed Thorman as a SH, can you?
And with your own condemnation of Agar/Sharp doesn't stack up with your response, does it?

signing Wayne Godwin was always a strange one that made me wonder if it was the boards choice. Until then Swain had always done 80mins, and Sharp always seemed reluctant to play Godwin, then he was allowed to join Bradford after just one year.

You seem to have misunderstood. I was just seeking clarification as most posters seem to be of the opinion that board involvement in signings is a Bad Thing.

I'm fully aware that the board of an RL club is often involved with signings at some level or other, even if only as regards negotiation of the deal. The role you seem to be describing (unless I've read you wrong) has been filled before by a Director of Rugby - normally a former player or coach. I'm not sure if Sharp is supposed to be filling this role as part of his duties or not TBH.

I doubt it would have helped with Dobson as that was almost certainly a financial decision, no matter how it might have been presented initially. It might have kept us away from Thorman I guess, unless JS was the DoR.

I was aiming at the role of Lowe at Rovers, I think his title is Director FOR Rugby rather than DoR, a position that could 'hold sway' at board level on retention & recruitment as opposed to what appears to be at FC, a shopping list reduced to what is cheapest.

Seems like a reasonable idea, although TBF we seemed to function OK when McRae did all the hiring himself.

In some ways I'd prefer that the coach had sole say on recruitment and the board just focused on appointing the right man for the coaching job.

The board should be trying to open doors at a high level to facilitate signings as and when they may need to be made. And I am not saying they haven't done that.

Interesting thread.
The Phil Lowe thing is prudent in the fact that he may not advise on any signings but because he played for Rovers, he can big up the club to potential signings and read their reactions as to wether they are tuned into the routemap of Rovers. The link some have talked of.

The other difference is money. I dont doubt the FC board are as clued up as any as to the availability and talents players could bring to your club but sometimes you have to pay the piper.
FC didnt think Dobson was worth what he wanted. Fair enough. Hindsight is always a kick in the teeth, sometimes you have to speculate to accumulate.

...but we never won anything under McRae/Richardson, and didn't do that well in the league.

They might have SEEMED competent but they also weren't operating in a severe economic recession (see the start of the thread as to why we are not spending money these days)

So when I win the Euro Millions and buy the club for you all, what plans have you in place and who's running the club on a day to day basis, Hutchie??

I'll do it

Deal

Agenda Item 1 : The players calendar

You're sacked

I would be more worried about your chief operating officer and accountant if I were you. I hear he has walked. Another job for Mr Hudge????

if Hull lost the next ten games. There you go.

...and maybe you should be worried about the shop staff cuts and the mountains of unsold merchandise they are desperate to clear