I've been listening to the anti sack Flange argument (particular the fluff athon on FB which ive left because I cant handle it). There is one point I find curious. Its the one that goes Flange didn't pass the intercept, or get the kick charged down. I agree cant argue there, but his reaction the following week is within his bailiwick. On each occasion the player in question played the following week. But anyway I think that's all been said already in this thread. But riddle me this? What, if we lose every furgin game in the same manner from round 10 -20 (ie last gasp by a furgin stooopid play). At what point do we say enough and point the finger at the coach? Maybe i'm over simplifying this but everyone is saying yay Flanno is safe for another week because we won. Now we won because of a piece of brilliant play by a player. We lost 3 matches because of an equally stoopid play by a player. We congratulate Flange when a player does something brilliant, but cant pillory him when the opposite occurs because in that scenario its the players stoopidity not the coach. So its simple in my stupifd head, he gets paid to win games. We lose for whatever reason its a strike against him. I mean how else can you judge the coach if you're are always going to blame players and not the coach for losing. Under what circumstances would you ever sack a coach then? If we lose by 20 each week?
