: Wed Jul 08, 2009 8:37 am  

tvoc wrote:

For Leeds to have lost they would have had to score fewer points or Hull would have had to score more. That was a hypothetical situation but had it arisen Yeaman running at Gibson is where I saw it happening most.

As I have said many times previously Gibson for me isn't big enough, quick enough or explosive enough to make a top class centre. We'll see.

Should Leeds extend his deal further then I think it will say much about their recent recruitment and retention policy which IMO has been lacking that of a top line club. The losses of Toopi, Ellis, Scruton and shortly Smith with only Buderus (not a replacement for any of the above) coming in so far leaves the Leeds squad vulnerable.

When Leeds have their first choice seventeen/eighteen available they are still a match for anyone on their day but the squad overall is weaker this season than the last two Championship winning ones.

How would you compare him to Ablett who was a GF winning centre last season?

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 8:46 am  

finglas wrote:

How would you compare him to Ablett who was a GF winning centre last season?

I wouldn't. Ablett isn't what I'd consider a centre.

Keith Senior is a centre.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 8:59 am  

It always makes me smile when a person is described as "a former MOS" or a "GF winner last season" or the" highest try scorer of 5 years ago"

Past success is no indication of present form, with an admittedly improving Scott Donald a perfect example of this. Nor, I suspect is my 25 yard breastroke certificate from back in the day, any guarantee of a rostrum place in the London Olympics.

Gibson or Ablett? To be honest I don't see a great deal between them at the moment, both have the remaining matches to stake a claim, and good luck to both of them.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:02 am  

tvoc wrote:

I wouldn't. Ablett isn't what I'd consider a centre.

Keith Senior is a centre.

Ok so he's an improvement on a GF winning team then.

I've not seen enough of Gibson this term to draw a conclusion. My guess though is that theclub are probably looking for a better centre. If they can get a deal Gibson will be released, if no announcement on a new centre is made by mid to late August Gibson will be offered a new contract.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:24 am  

finglas wrote:

Ok so he's an improvement on a GF winning team then.

The Leeds right centre is stronger still with Smith left there in place of any other option currently available but the club don't appear to trust Jones-Bishop to fill in for Webb's abscence at the present time.

finglas wrote:

I've not seen enough of Gibson this term to draw a conclusion. My guess though is that theclub are probably looking for a better centre. If they can get a deal Gibson will be released, if no announcement on a new centre is made by mid to late August Gibson will be offered a new contract.

That is a likely scenario. Having failed to land a replacement Gibson could well be retained. That to me is the club settling for second best though which is unfortunate.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 10:22 am  

tvoc wrote:

That is a likely scenario. Having failed to land a replacement Gibson could well be retained. That to me is the club settling for second best though which is unfortunate.

Whilst I can understand your disappointment about second best players for the money you're going to be paying you have to be sure that the replacements are a vast improvement on what you already have.

The club seem to be planning for the future by signing Ambler, Coady and possibly Amor to supplement their underage sides.

For next season (assuming no replacement for Sinfield is required) I think the priority is a prop with a centre somewhere behind given the players and squad depth available. ( I'm assuming Eastwood will be a no-show at this stage)

The other problem is that quality Aussie imports are becoming rarer with the new visa rules (You won't be able to sign any Roosters soon)

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 10:30 am  

finglas wrote:

Whilst I can understand your disappointment about second best players for the money you're going to be paying you have to be sure that the replacements are a vast improvement on what you already have.

The club seem to be planning for the future by signing Ambler, Coady and possibly Amor to supplement their underage sides.

For next season (assuming no replacement for Sinfield is required) I think the priority is a prop with a centre somewhere behind given the players and squad depth available. ( I'm assuming Eastwood will be a no-show at this stage)
The other problem is that quality Aussie imports are becoming rarer with the new visa rules (You won't be able to sign any Roosters soon)

I don't think they will sign another prop imo. Unless they decide Burgess or Bailey are no longer required. We have, Peacock, Bailey, Burgess, Leuluai, and Kirke or JJB who can fill in there. They also have Ambler for the coming seasons hopefully. 2nd row as GH has already said is a problem where we are short, and so is the right centre position.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 10:31 am  

tvoc wrote:

As I have said many times previously Gibson for me isn't big enough, quick enough or explosive enough to make a top class centre. We'll see.

An opinion we share on this occasion. Not going to run over or around people with size, pace or footwork, which means his winger is always going to be struggling to get the sort of space Hall gets outside Senior and the side is going to be unbalanced.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 10:40 am  

Andy Gilder wrote:

An opinion we share on this occasion. Not going to run over or around people with size, pace or footwork, which means his winger is always going to be struggling to get the sort of space Hall gets outside Senior and the side is going to be unbalanced.

I agree also. Spot on there.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 10:41 am  

finglas wrote:

Whilst I can understand your disappointment about second best players for the money you're going to be paying you have to be sure that the replacements are a vast improvement on what you already have.

The club seem to be planning for the future by signing Ambler, Coady and possibly Amor to supplement their underage sides.

These type of signings suggest there's something of a failure at the Academy level at present. I can see the merit of speculating to accumulate through the lower leagues though and have advocated doing so.

finglas wrote:

For next season (assuming no replacement for Sinfield is required) I think the priority is a prop with a centre somewhere behind given the players and squad depth available. ( I'm assuming Eastwood will be a no-show at this stage)

The other problem is that quality Aussie imports are becoming rarer with the new visa rules (You won't be able to sign any Roosters soon)

I can agree with those priorities for team strengthening.