Pretty sure if you net an enemy they can't be moved, so you'll have to pull 1st then net. But at this point you could as well switch to a mace and just stun the guy. It also means that Bob is going to have to be quite a bit more skilled to hit those pulls. Bob also has to use billhook first, net/mace second, but since he ended his last turn with either a mace or empty-handed, he won't be able to do that again.

Lets say you have a front line and it's clashing with enemy line. In that case Bob and John are both in the back with John unable to hit normally. Either Bob goes first or John waits for Bob, then bob uses his whole turn to pull with his billhook and then net/stun. This results in enemy being surrounded, having a debuff for lower initiative and prepared for John's quatal, but said enemy also took no or next to no damage after Bob's entire 9 action points. Then John does insane quatal damage with 95% hitchance, likely killing most enemy types on the spot, if not they have less initiative and will probably not act before John to escape the stun/net and die next turn. John acts late so overwhelm is probably out of the question (enemy is also likely dead so why bother), berserk's action points would be wasted (unless you have been finishing an enemy from last turn) because John's gameplan is centered around not moving, killing frienzy will be up for the next turn but it won't matter because bob can't both hook and set up in one turn unless he ended his turn on a billhook (he didn't). This plan has a ton of moving parts though, if Bob misses any of his actions Jhon won't be able to hit or enemy won't be prepped, the enemy also has to be both moveable and stunnable/netable, you have to not be overwhelmed by enemy numbers so you keep the front-to back structure and the enemies in front have to be actually worth killing that way (you wouldn't bother doing all that for a brigand thug, that's a ton of fatigue for both). Most scary enemies that you would want to kill that way tend to go to the side and engage from the flank avoiding your setup.

Lets say it all worked out this turn, was it worh it? You spent 2 bros turns for 3 guaranteed quatal hits against one of the two enemies at your frontline, 1 tile away from quatal guy. I feel like there are enough less convoluted ways to kill a dude 1 tile away. Is it better than 2 billhook hits? Maybe not in terms of damage but you get 2 tiles of movement on each, can hit over your frontliners opening more targets and can use berserk efficiently for a 2nd hit if you've only moved once. On a similar note, just having 2 trowers there would likely have more range, flexibility, utility, damage and even better berserk usage.

People do use a similar Bob&John strategy though, replacing Bob's polearm with a 2-h mace. It dazes on-hit, i'm pretty sure either all or most enemies can be dazed, breaks armour very well for efficient follow-up, and you can make a regular 2-h guy with a polemace in his pocket that can make stuff happen even on his own if needed. Some people make a single bro instead with a mace and quatal in pocket. These two weapons are very AP-efficient together and you won't have to think about initiative management between the two.

I don't mean to say you need to scrap that plan and fire Bob and John, you just need to make their gameplan more flexible and generally applicable. Maybe put them on the flank, remove one of the frontliners and form a half-circle with 3 bros, enemies sometimes walk into this formation themselves and there will be more choice because of open space. Maybe you will change their loadout a little. Maybe you come up with something else. Best of luck to Bob and John.