Briscoe got some crap advice off his agent and paid the penalty with us......the way it worked maybe was better choice as his form has gone this season.

Did Peter Sharp sign Willie Manu?

Alot of his overseas signings just werent good enough for a team that was top 4 challenging at the time IMO.

Yes. His signing was announced the week of the 2006 Grand Final.

Quote ="knocker norton"Did Peter Sharp sign Willie Manu? Alot of his overseas signings just werent good enough for a team that was top 4 challenging at the time IMO.'" I had my doubts too (thought it was Kear), but it was Sharp: news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 033047.stm Also must have been Sharp in charge when Crocker signed, as the signing was announced the day after Agar took over: www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby/200 ... -20432999/ Nonetheless, Sharp's signings were a mixed bag at best.

Quote ="knocker norton"Did Peter Sharp sign Willie Manu? Alot of his overseas signings just werent good enough for a team that was top 4 challenging at the time IMO.'" I had my doubts too (thought it was Kear), but it was Sharp: news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 033047.stm Also must have been Sharp in charge when Crocker signed, as the signing was announced the day after Agar took over: www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby/200 ... -20432999/ Nonetheless, Sharp's signings were a mixed bag at best.

IIRC Sharp signed:

Tickle, Sing, Manu, Godwin, Maiava, Head, Dykes, Berrigan, Byrne, Cusack and Crocker. He also gave debuts to Houghton, Hall, Briscoe and Burnett.

A pretty mixed bag IMO. I remember him talking up signing Mason, Sherwin and Soward and ending up with Cusack and Byrne.

Also seemd to have a soft spot for injury prone half backs looking at that list!

The right signings after the 2006 season could have set us up for a successful couple of years shame it never happened.

No we didn't. We only scored 50 points once during sharpe's tenure and that was in his 1st game. We were predicatable under him and won many games by defending well rather than scoring lots of points

So Sharp sorted the defence out....thought that was the whole idea.....what would you sooner have.....38-36 scorelines or 18-4 ones....know which one i prefer.

38 - 36 every time.

My post was in response to kosh who was telling us how good our attack was when we had a settled 1/2 back partnership.

In 2004 we scored 50 or more points 3 times in SL matches. We've managed it only once in the 4 1/2 seasons since. saints did it twice in 3 games recently, even the dobbins have managed it twice this season. We are predictable and ponderous in attack

Last time we hit 50 in a S/L game was in 2006 UNDER Sharps tenure against Wigan...we had plenty of 30's and 40's under his regime.....bet Agar would love to be able to do that.

Apart from the drubbing at home by Rovers, we played some good rugby with Head in the team.

We won 9 from 12 and scored 40+ three times in four games. In comparison in 2008 we only scored 40+ twice (aside from against Rochdale in the cup) In 2009 we never scored more than 40 at all and only scored [i30+[/i twice.

Good thing them history results on Hulls website......we also hit the frogs for 30 as well before them 3 40+ games......End of the day...Sharp had the defence sorted and the attack wasnt too shabby either

True. In 2004 we may have put big scores on very poor super league teams but we always came short when it mattered. Something often overlooked.

I would take a team that knows how to win the big games anyday personally.

2004 team hit a worse injury run than agar has had otherwise looked likely grand finalists

I'd love a team which knows how to win big games. Which one do you suggest?

Injury excuses eh? Sounds familiar.



I would say the Challenge Cup winning team of 2005 found a way to win the big games as opposed to their predecessors!

To a lesser extent the 2006 vintage got their way to Old Tafford and in 2008 we got to Wembley. As said the 2004 team lost every 'big' game they played - Saints in the Challenge cup and Wakey at home in the play offs.

Harsh but true excuses or not.

2005 team played all SL teams on the run to Cardiff......lets face it......all the finals we have been in and won have been with a worse coach than the last one according to some on here.


Sharp got us to the play-offs and won matches with a injury hit squad....the minute the injuries really bit he got the bullet....unlike a certain other coach who got a extension.

So if they saw the light and binned agar you'd welcome sharp back then with him being such a good coach?

I personally wouldnt take Sharp back at all but then I would never argue against his record of taking Hull FC to their only Grand Final in the Super League era. His signings and bad luck after this determined his future IMO.

I don't think there is a single Saints fan who wants Sharp as our next coach.

Apparently there are a dozen contenders and our Chief will announce who has the dubious privilege of getting the job in July. I hope that whoever it is, is a gifted coach, actually has a personality and can also wear shades in a sexy fashion.

Would you take Agar?

Occasionally we looked accomplished/skilful, but I don't think we ever looked to have flair/invention. I could respect the organisation and discipline of the team at the time, but I didn't admire the style we played. Part of the magic of watching a pro side to me is seeing them do things others simply can't, not just seeing them as essentially a bunch of more efficient amateurs being consistent.

Don't forget Civoniceva.

I thought it was Hutchie that raised that name

From that, only really Maiava was an outright failure.

Tickle, Manu, Head, and Berrigan were/are undoubted successes. Sing was great in his first year, and only struggled after a career-threatening foot injury. Godwin was fine in his time here, but was never going to be anything more than back-up to Swain. Dykes was obviously quality and equally obviously injury prone. Unfortunately we were backed into a corner after Sherwin couldn't make up his mind and us having no other options. Difficult to blame Sharp for signing the best available. Byrne again did a good job. We needed someone to cover the back five and I don't think there was anyone better available to do that. Cusack has had a couple of great years, although this season might be one too far. He might not have been exactly type of prop we needed (although Carvell being fit throughout 2008 rather than getting injured in the first game would have dramatically changed the look of our props) but his quality can't be doubted. That the Crocker signing didn't work out is in no way Sharp's fault.

So not too bad a list at all really, as far as decisions to sign go.

On the 'lack of flair' issue, firstly Sharp was mainly the defensive coach, with Agar coaching the attack, as far as I'm aware, and secondly the attack was fine when we had a half in there, although I suspect the competence is mainly due to the individual skill of Head/Dykes rather than anything that Agar instilled into them.