The least-worst option is probably to keep Smith on to the end of the year regardless. If we go for another coach mid season we might see the usual dead cat bounce of a new man, give him a long deal and then discover he's actually useless (see Agar). The only value I could see in replacing Smith mid season is in sending a message to players that what they are delivering isn't good enough. I would only bring in a coach mid season on the basis that unless we win the GF under them, they wouldn't be here next season. I doubt you'd have many takers.

In terms of replacement, just going to Australia isn't enough. Furner was from Australia and was awful, but anyone who had looked at his record at the Raiders would have steered well clear. But GH knew him, so in he came. Smith had a reasonable track record, but how much did the fact he was Tony's nephew have in the decision to hire him? The professional thing to do would be to pay someone who really knows their stuff and is very close to the reserve game in Aus to get us a shortlist of young, hungry coaches in Aus, and pick from them. I'd also think seriously about paying someone like Gus Gould to do an independent review of the playing and junior development side in the off season, as its clearly a complete mess.

Regardless, our next coach is not going to have the room to manoeuvre that Smith had this off season. I would expect them to look at the pack in particular and try to get rid of some midgets and bring in bigger forwards, and take some obvious decisions like not renewing Fusitu'a. Martin might also have to be sacrificed to get the cap and quota space to bring in what we need. But we will be stuck with the majority of the squad we have for a couple of years.

I thought Smith's press conference was better today, mainly because he was being asked some of the questions they seem to have been avoiding. I'm not sure why none of them push back on his comments when he suggests a poor performance was good/acceptable though.

The issues with a new coach are very valid. It would be far better if Smith can turn things around. But some of these opportunities to reboot things need to be taken. Huddersfield was a chance after a 2-week turnaround, Hull was a chance because they're a really poor team, London is chance because they are a Championship team in SL. After this we play some decent teams in consecutive weeks. Another sloppy win against London followed by two defeats - potentially big ones - would really leave us in the mire almost halfway through the season.

I imagine it's more likely they will beat London, possibly less convincingly than might be expected, and then come up with a pair of creditable performances after that. Assuming the team has a few players back from injury anyway.

It's not a unique phenomenon but Smith's teams really do perform much better when they are underdogs.

He got soft-soaped on that presser for the large majority of it.

He really needs putting under some better scrutiny because some of those answers were giving off major "Jesse Marsch Vibes"
This is RL and I suppose you dont want to be blacklisted from stuff I suppose but I found myself shaking my head at some of the "answers" he put forth to questions.

The nature of being underdogs is that you generally need to be not winning and playing poorly to get the moniker.