I don't think compensation was the issue. Him and Woolf were the last two in interviews and they just thouhgt KW had a better background.
Whether or not that will prove corect in the long term is anyones guess. I always thought Watson overachieved at Salford and could have done well at our club, but with the last 2 GF's behind us it's hard to knock the recruiters.
Double post
Would much prefer to take a punt on Longy over Watson, in my opinion Watson is not good enough, he overchieved at Salford and underachieved at Huddersfield. There is more too it than being "nice to the cameras" pre and post match for that genuine image.
Longy did a lot of good stuff at Salford and then Watson took over and benefited from it, Longy did a lot of good stuff at Saints Holbrook took over and benefited from it. This season Longy is starting to do some good stuff at Leeds and Agar is benefiting from it. Leeds now have some of the best attacking stats in Superleague and just need to improve their defence.
Maybe we should be looking at the common denominator here.
I guess no one really knows who would work as the next Saints coach, but I personally think we dodged a bullet not getting Watson. I just thought he is overrated. People are swayed because he’s not a Aussie and talks well. The RL are desperate for another Brit to succeed. Others mention Long. With all his so called RL brain having him as a coach would be awful IMO. He doesn’t have the discipline to keep players in line and work hard. It would be like having Paul Gascoigne as a football coach. Fun to watch from the outside but it will be embarrassing in the end.
But it’s all opinions.
Humans are more concerned with having than being.
It seems Woolf is staying going off the interview on Saints website today with Eammon. He said Woolf wants to stay and they want him to stay and that there will be an announcement soon on that. He also said the Challenge Cup won't be our last trophy under him.
Happy with that, he's got 4 or 5 young players to bring through, I think we should let him complete that part of the transition. Gives us more time to assess a new coach for the next 2 or 3 years onwards from 2023.
From the Podcast, I get the impression McManus is a bit worried over the future of Rugby League, didn't sound his usual positive self.
Im no fan of Woolf but it would be interesting to see him stay on next year. If he can take on the responsibility, own it, and make us competitive next season with so many new faces a few of us (myself included) would have a higher opinion of him.
screaming in the family corner, scaring the kiddies
First of all you have to remember that Watson built up Salford over several seasons and this is his first year at Huddersfield with a much changed side.
Second, there was no expectation at Salford there is a lot at Huddersfield. Different coaches excel in different situations. Being a good coach at Salford doesn't mean you are a good coach at Huddersfield or St Helens. As well as the other way around I.e Ian Milward.
I could agree with you but then we would both be wrong.
The last legend we had in charge was a complete disaster. The team (including Long) who took over delivered some abysmal results too. That Cas display in the cup in 2017 one of the worst I’ve ever seen as a saints fan. We’ve had more success in the last few years than we’ve had since pre 2010s with Aussie coaches proving themselves in the game. I really do not get the clamour to give Long the job. It cropped up on here a few weeks ago too. I wouldn’t be against him actually being in charge of the attack however if he fancied that role. KC having him in his coaching staff but NOT having him in charge of the attack just sums up his reign.
The trio that took over when Cunningham was fired had a huge task. I don't know if it was a brief they were given by the club or they took it upon themselves, but they set about the task of making Saints play rugby again. We had a group of players who for about 2 years had been coached to play one-out, safety-first rugby - with any displays of flair being publicly criticised by the coach. The '3 wise men' had the team passing, running moves, trying to keep the ball alive. It was always going to be a tough transition period and we had a few beatings (along with a few good wins).
What that did, though, was lay a foundation for Holbrook to work with because when he arrived, the attacking angle was beginning to work - hence the MW tonking of Hull in the game before Holbrook officially took over. Holbrook didn't have to start from scratch with the conversion of a demoralised group of players that had had it drummed into their heads for two years not to play rugby. He was able to hit the ground running, which generated immediate fan goodwill (helped by his own personable character and easy style).
How much input within that trio that Long had, we don't know. But Holbrook had him as his attacking coach and we played some good rugby during that time.
He always comes across brilliantly insightful when summarising, too, so clearly sees the game playing out on many levels. Whether he is head coach material remains to be seen. I'd love it to work out for him, especially if he came back here in a fairytale return, but it'd be a real gamble.
Pretty much spot on, the trio tore up the KC ideology from day one and Longy's influence was massive which gave Holbrook an easy introduction baptism into Superleague. Longy was a hyped up maverick as a player and had so much valuable experience on attacking shapes, KC negated all that. So it must have been a joy for him to be let loose for 3 or 4 games to create immediate impact.
Longy has had a fairly long period to calm down over the last 5 years as an assistant coach, for me we should bring him back on board after Woolf's tenure, I,m pretty sure Longy would give it his best shot. As mentioned he was a hyped up maverick player and I just can't see him being a hyped up maverick coach in the same capacity.
I’d argue if you look at the tries we scored that game there’s a lot from kicks/barge overs etc rather than extravagant plays IIRC! They clearly gave the players more freedom (not difficult after KC) but I think laying down foundations is pushing it. I don’t think any of us thought a 45-0 win was coming when cas were putting 50 on us a week earlier. If you did you are more of an optimist than I am.
Exactly.
We played well once after Cunningham left and before the Magic Weekend, which was in beating Castleford at home, although we certainly weren't disgraced in the prior Good Friday game.
The next four games under that trio prior to Hull were:-
A Widnes - L 14-16
H Leigh - W 28-6
A Warrington - L 18-40
A Castleford - L 10-53
We were utterly lamentable in all four of those games.
THIS YEAR LENDING SUPPORT TO:- St. Helens RLFC, Manchester City, Celtic, Alemannia Aachen, Steps 1 to 6 Non-League Football
I'm not claiming we were great under the trio. I'm saying we were trying to play a more open game.
To a bunch of players conditioned over the previous couple of years to not play open rugby, it was like learning to walk again. My recollection is that the number of handling errors during that time sky-rocketed. That of course puts you under pressure as you cede so much possession. I remember groaning at the time when passes were put to ground or were behind/in front of the outside player. It's with hindsight that I realise the valuable groundwork that was being done for the future.
Look also at the teams we put out - partly due to Cunningham's rubbish recruitment; partly due to injuries. Starting for us against Widnes were Rickey Bailey, Matty Fleming, a very green Regan Grace, Greg Richards & Tommy Lee. For the Hull game, Makinson & Morgan replaced Bailey & Fleming, with Roby back for Lee and Walmsley in for Richards.
That trio began to change the mindset of the players from Cunningham's 'stick it up your jumper' approach.
Remember also that my original post was in response to someone saying Long's previous time coaching here was 'abysmal' in an attempt to discredit the prospect of Long every being head coach here. I was presenting some perspective about the circumstances.