We all (except for one) pretty much agree he should be gone so don't turn this into a discussion about that, but what I fail to understand is why the club have actually persevered with him when it's been obvious for most of his tenure that he's not capable of doing the job.



I do think there was an argument that we got rid of kear and sharp pretty quickly (although neither should have been appointed IMO) so that could be one reason they're showing a bit more patience, however after 3 years in charge he has failed to improve some of the most basic aspects of the game into his players.



So I ask what is the reason he is still here?



Is it because he has some kind of long standing friendship with kath, or is it because there are things going on behind the scenes we are unaware of meaning the current state of things is not down to agar?

Quite simple really, if they sack him they will have to pay up his contract.

Plus pay for another coach to come in, that is the only reason i can see for the delay. Money.

What worries me, is the recruitment for next season, (with so many players OOC) the longer he stays in the job the less time any new coach will have to bring in any new players.

In answer to the OP



He's cheap, but the length of his deal means he too expensive to get rid of!

It's costing the club more in lost revenue not getting rid.

I'm not convinced it's about money. I think there's something we're missing

Like he's got his hands on a home-made Hetherington grumble flick and threatens to post it on youtube if he's sacked?

There has to be something going on behind the scenes IMO. The BOD have invested a huge amount of 'political capital' in supporting him at every opportunity in contradiction to what appears to be clear evidence of his failings. We've even had comments that 'coaches are not that important' FFS.



The other thing that puzzles me is the constant trickle of comment from people within the game (some of them pretty credible) that Agar is actually a good coach. Since we see no evidence of that on the pitch they are either all mistaken (unlikely) or something else is going on.



TBH I'm getting beyond caring. I just want things fixed.

I think there's a big distinction between being a good coach and a good head coach.

When board members at the city's two clubs (or other clubs for that matter) talk about the massive passion of the fans, this has obvious positive connotations - loyalty, etc. There is also, perhaps, a subtler indication that they tend to be overexcitable and get carried away, making their judgement suspect. Agar does now need a run of results and I suspect is on his last chance, but the board's decision to stick with him a little longer is not illogical. Either things'll pick up and the negativity will die down or a new coach will be appointed and a new cycle of optimism will begin.

Undoubtedly

I agree, but some of what we're seeing on the pitch indicates problems with fundamental aspects of our game that any decent coach should be able to address.

It's this assumption that bothers me. I'm sure things [iwill[/i pick up from where they are now. Eventually. But when that happens, we'll still be an average, mid-table side. It's not [ijust[/i the fact that we're currently all but bottom of the competition that's bothering most people, it's the interminable mediocrity we seem destined to endure when that situation eventually changes.



Radford was in the paper the other day saying 'we can still make the top 6'. Well, so what if we do? That's no improvement on last year and, for a club like ours, shouldn't be seen as the pinnacle of achievement that it's touted as. Rule and his staff will probably try to convince us that sixth is a brilliant return given our appalling start, all the while ignoring the reasons for our appalling start.