I appreciate i leave myself open to criticism for posting such thoughts but here goes another one.

Rugby League being such a localised sport filled with basically players and coaches who know each other inside out and given the fact we as a sport seem to relish this fact rather than looking to grow our knowledge and embrace new thinking I guess it is inevitable that successfull players from successfull teams seem to at least be given a shot at coaching.

In the John Monie book he lists or at least the forward list the number of players that have gone on to coach at the top level who played under Monie.

I am a huge believer in the theory that you are a product of your environment, and i think that the Bradford Legacy is very visable.

Wigan, Warrington and Bradford themselves all have coaches at all levels that did there apprenticships or were involved in the successfull period at Bradford, and all these team continue to falter to decieve despite signing on paper quality players.

The skill level of the 3 teams highlighted is poor and rather the emphasis is on the physical side of things. Wire look a huge side this year, having taken on the Bradford Reserve conditioner at the end of last year with Jimmy Lowes.

Wigan have Noble and Foreshaw who cut there teeth in the Bradford era of success/laying the foundations of success, and Bradford themselves have McNamarra and another conditioning coach who came through the same system.

The teams on paper are far superior to the performances on the field, they all play a very basic game plan, and rely on an individual spark to fire them.

I think the Brian Smith and Bradford legacy is evident today and harming the 3 teams in question.

I would also add i do not think Brian Smith is a poor coach, he simply identified a way for the Bradford team to succeed and played to it, he is not limited to this coaching style but those who learned the game under the systems and in the environment he created are.

A well constructed thought; can certainly see where you're coming from.

Well observed.

I suppose Harlequins under Brian McDermott could also be accused of the same thing.

Not seen enough of them to be honest.

I also find it interesting that the 2 teams that are the front runners in the League Saints and Leeds seem to shy away from this policy of recruiting explayers or people with a connection to the club as head coaches.

Leeds has Darryl Powell for a while, but it obviously didn't work out.

Exactly, it seems to me the clubs and indeed coaches that succeed posess the ability to evolve and develop and embrace new direction and ideas, those that cannot simply stagnate and in real terms regress.

Very good observation. Also the reason why I think we should move heaven and earth to get edwards. Plenty of identikit coaches around, but none with the passion and extensive multi-disciplinary knowledge of shaun.

The post match comments from Jimmy Lowes tonight could well have come from the , sorry i mean lips of Brian Noble tonight.


We have a group of little cloans running about SL pretending to be coaches.

Been saying this for a while - add in Karl Harrison who failed at Salford. We have wasted the legacy of Wigan as Farrell, Hanley, Edwards, etc are not involved in the game and the irony is that we have to turn to Bradford and St Helens coaching stock. Unbelievable!

Well imo RL is a simple game.

If you get enough firepower in the forwards, it will lay the foundation for the backs to shine.


Nobby realised this at Bradford and imo it still holds. Now executing this plan, especially under the artificial constraints of the CC is hard.


As RU if taken to the extreme could be won by a well drilled set of forwards on their own, so could RL.

Are our forwards, Wires or Bradfords well drilled? From what i have seen certainly not. I do not either think Bradford in there prime were either.

I may just change my mind about you Jon, i have read 3 or 4 posts of yours today which i have agreed on but this one more than most.