Ahh right, so Pete is defence coach and Winder attack?
Point still stands though, to say its pointless bringing Briers in is garbage.
Prove it
You're a strange bloke.
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage. #18thMan
nathan_rugby wrote:
I assume you know their contracts are being terminated then rather then expiring?
No I am assuming they are expiring. Which is exactly why I said
in my previous post in this thread if IL organised it that head coaches and assistant coaches contracts ran together he’d never have to pay anyone off given he never sacks head coaches.
There is actually no expense if you organise it like this so my point is it’s a false argument to suggest there is.
Quite mis leading to say “the sort IL says is too expensive” because there are two different situations.
1 - assumptions coaches contracts expiring (Warrington)
2 - coaches whose contracts not all expiring at same time (Wigan)
I do agree however that it would make life easier if all the back room staff had contracts in sync with each other but it seems an impossible task. Would everyone have accepted a one year contract when Lam came in?
Well there you have a reason why it’s a nutty idea to have coaches on a one year rolling contract. Once Edwards wasn’t coming they should have offered Lam a two or three year deal. If they weren’t confident he was good enough for such an offer he shouldn’t have been given the job.
There are two situations but what is misleading is IL saying it’s too expensive to do this implying it will never happen when if he got the contracts in sync there is no obstacle.
