: Wed May 13, 2009 7:18 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

I don't mind him being arrogant if he has the skills to back it up, but it has been suggested he is not happy to play in the reserves and wont put the effort in. Which is a concern.

It is. If he isn't a team player then no matter how much talent he has - and he does seem to have it - he is going to struggle to make it. It's a shame that he hasn't been given more game time (he must be ready for it now?) as we would then have had chance to see just how he peforms at first grade on a regular basis. It could do him the world of good and knock off the edges a bit. It would also allow the fans to see what he is really like rather than just seeing him in passing doing some dramatic stuff, like 40 metre drop goals.

As for Long, he is past his best now and while he may have a year or two left in him, I don't think it would do Saints good to keep him on. Either we call Smith back, give Eastmond a shot or give Wheeler a go. But we shouldn't still be relying upon Long in the future. He's been fantastic but I reckon it's time to move on.

: Wed May 13, 2009 10:30 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

thats my point, the allowance doesn't help us retain long if we can use it on another player, as we would use it if he stayed or not.

Which is why I put the ? at the end of my post. I wasn't sure of the ruling, you and RG have put me straight. Thanks.

: Wed May 13, 2009 10:36 pm  

jonnythesaint wrote:

Which is why I put the ? at the end of my post. I wasn't sure of the ruling, you and RG have put me straight. Thanks.

No worries

: Thu May 14, 2009 9:12 am  

Although I`m more supportive of long than most a 2 year deal is not the right deal for us.

We've had his best years and we need to give our talent their head but we arent sure if they are up to the job.

A one year extention on reduced terms is the ideal, (especially if their are doubts about eastmond) but I dont think he would have any shortage of takers on a two year deal and a new club often freshens up a player.

Just looking at the local clubs

Although they wont admit it, He would be an ideal replacement for tim smith at wigan, could help tomkins develop and pressure would be taken off him kicking wise.

He would be a good short term replacement for Myler if he leaves.

A good short term replacement for Monaghan, especially if briers is cast aside.

KC is a different matter , he wont play for another club and it will be his decision to stop playing.

If we can get another year out of him in the squad, he could be the insurance policy against eastmond being a dud as we can play roby at 7 short term with cunningham moore rotating at 9.

: Thu May 14, 2009 9:42 am  

Doseymarker wrote:

Although I`m more supportive of long than most a 2 year deal is not the right deal for us.

We've had his best years and we need to give our talent their head but we arent sure if they are up to the job.

A one year extention on reduced terms is the ideal, (especially if their are doubts about eastmond) but I dont think he would have any shortage of takers on a two year deal and a new club often freshens up a player.

Just looking at the local clubs

Although they wont admit it, He would be an ideal replacement for tim smith at wigan, could help tomkins develop and pressure would be taken off him kicking wise.

He would be a good short term replacement for Myler if he leaves.

A good short term replacement for Monaghan, especially if briers is cast aside.

KC is a different matter , he wont play for another club and it will be his decision to stop playing.

If we can get another year out of him in the squad, he could be the insurance policy against eastmond being a dud as we can play roby at 7 short term with cunningham moore rotating at 9.

It was discussed on the Wigan board a few weeks back. Surprisingly there were quite a few in favour ( I wasn't one of them).

Wigan need to decide when they replace Smith, do they move Tommy to hooker. If so then we probably need a quality 24 - 27 year old experienced half back, and then what do we do with McIlorum (he may have to go out on loan)

: Thu May 14, 2009 9:53 am  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

It was discussed on the Wigan board a few weeks back. Surprisingly there were quite a few in favour ( I wasn't one of them).

Wigan need to decide when they replace Smith, do they move Tommy to hooker. If so then we probably need a quality 24 - 27 year old experienced half back, and then what do we do with McIlorum (he may have to go out on loan)

I'd move tommy to hooker, if you look at his stats without knowing he was a hooker, you'd think he was a hooker not a 7. That said you've got 2 hookers already and are about to loose a 7 so who knows

: Thu May 14, 2009 12:26 pm  

I think people are going overboard about Long's form this year. He's had a couple of shockers but other than that I think he's been fair to very good.

That said, I think the end of this year is the right time to let him go. With Eastmond, Wheeler and Lomax all waiting in the wings it would be daft to keep on a player who is going to keep them out of the team and take up a huge chunk of salary cap.

Regarding Eastmond's attitude, I don't mind at all if he's arrogant. Every great scrum half is arrogant. If he's liable to act up he might need a bit of careful man management, but he seems to have everything, so I'd be looking to get him in the side asap.

: Fri May 15, 2009 8:01 am  

Saint Simon wrote:

I was quite drunk, so the details are sketchy at best

i suggest sir that the person who told you this was also intoxicated!


no further questions your honour...

: Fri May 15, 2009 8:11 am  

chris_joynt's_barber wrote:

i suggest sir that the person who told you this was also intoxicated!


no further questions your honour...

Quite possibly