My team (Saints) have Cunningham in charge, one of the best that has been (or probably will be), but he's struggling at the moment.

I once heard someone say that a top player knows what to do, but they are unable to communicate this effectively to players who do not possess their same ability. As you get better at what you do, your ability to communicate your understanding, or to help others learn that skill, diminishes.

Arguably, the greatest coach of all time, in any sport, is Vince Lombardi. He never played professional football, but was a successful head coach. On the other hand, Johan Cruyff was an excellent player, but did well as a manager.

Back to RL: I could be wrong, but I don't think Wayne Bennett did anything of note in his playing career, but is the most successful RL head coach.

What do you think?

There is no correlation. If someone is a good player then they are a good player, if they are a good coach then they are a good coach. Some might be good at both but that's just because they are good at both, their ability as a player has no bearing one way or the other because they are completely different and unrelated skillsets. It's like a great actor might not be able to direct movies and a great director might not be able to act. They are completely distinct roles and being good at one doesn't automatically make you good (or bad) at the other. The sooner people and especially club chairmen realise this the better, it really isn't a difficult concept.

Well most coaches are of course former players but a lot of the time they tend to have only played for a few years, maybe hot an injury and went into coaching that way. I guess this gives them more time to learn the coaching ropes and what it entails to become good coaches. Im thinking of someone like Wayne Bennett for example.
And then we get onto former players and I'm gonna use one close to my heart: Lee Radford. Great player, won just about everything going, played for a long time, about 15-16 years, and pretty dull and uninspiring as a coach. Into his third year as hull boss and has taken us to two of our worst finishes in super league with an 11th and an 8th and this year with the big money squad are playing some of the most depressing rugby in years. Anyway that's just one example of each side of the point. I'm going back to sleep zzzzzzzz

Of course they can. I posted this on the Wigan forum too. The problem in this country is that top players get fast tracked into the head coach job years before they are ready. They need to learn their trade in coaching working their way up from youth teams, reserves (for those who have them) into assistant. I think they should be an assistant to at least 2 head coaches to give a different perspective on how to do things. Then, as long as they are ready move into the head coach job. IMO it's a 10 to 15 year apprenticeship.

Yes they can but it is difficult to make the transition within the same club coaching some of the players who are former team mares.

Powell was a player at Leeds but struggled as a coach there, he went off and learned his trade elsewhere and is now doing an excellent job at Castleford.

Cunningham seems to struggling at Saints but over the years he has played under some very successful coaches there so has had the opportunity to learn from them, only time will tell.

That's my point. He went to learn his trade. He became director of rugby at Leeds and learned from Smith, iirc he spent time at York and Leeds Tykes before getting the featherstone job.

Yes they can & yes they have. Malcombe Reiley, Johny Whitley, Elery Hanley, Shaun Edwards, to name a few who did, Gary Schofield a classic case of one who has not. It is a matter of being capable & willing to do it. There are few oportunities & I think a lot of clubs go for a known face, I know of a few who have never been players who have managed to coach at pro level Gary Wikinson at HKR is one but in the top league I think it is only London that may have had a coach who was not a player.

Never heard of any of the first three....

Bob Fulton, Brian Noble(?) and one of the best ever; Eric Ashton.

I disagree with your main point/question; it's not a negative correlation between quality as a player and the ability to be a good coach, but you've got the right word in there - communicate!

You've mentioned Cruyff, in our sport there is Mal Meninga, and across many sports there are numerous examples of great players being great coaches too.

But it's all about communication! To be a good coach you need to articulate your point, your tactics, your ethos with the required motivation so that everyone understands and buys into it. If you cannot communicate that then that's where you struggle. That's down to the intelligence and experience of an individual. That's why coaches with little playing experience can become good coaches; they have the intelligence to understand the game without having played it to a high standard and can also communicate their point across but so can coaches who've played the game to the very highest level if they have the ability to communicate well.

This.

If you have not heard of any of the three (despite my rubbish spelling of their names) it proves you know nothing about the game.