: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:01 pm  

IMO it's too much to expect James Donaldson to become starting loose forward next season.

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:01 pm  

chris20 wrote:

Isn't Hall primarily a backrower? I may be wrong.

he plays prop/2nd row for manly. we're planning on using him at prop. Same transition peacock made really.

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:03 pm  

mat wrote:

he plays prop/2nd row for manly. we're planning on using him at prop. Same transition peacock made really.

He plays more games in the 2nd row than at prop. SO IMO he's a second row that can prop at a push.

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:04 pm  

redeverready wrote:

IMO it's too much to expect James Donaldson to become starting loose forward next season.

I dont expect him to be starting LF next season. He hasnt got the physical size yet. But If he carries on the way he's started I wouldnt be adverse to giving him some game time there when appropriate, Maybe with a view to him being starting LF for 2011 season.

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:06 pm  

I will be very disappointed unless we sign at least three more players - 2 half backs and a centre or wing. In fact, looking at the players we are losing, I will be demanding an explanation of our use of the salary cap...

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:06 pm  

mystic eddie wrote:

Well if we are losing.....

Morrison, Solomona, Newton, and Jeffries, as has been either confirmed or strongly rumoured and probably also Matt James and Matt Cook, then I would hope that they are not all being replaced with only Glen Hall, Heath Le'Strange and A Halfback (you suggest a good one in Brough)

The fact is that our backs were not good enough for this season and your line up, with the exception of the yet unsigned Mr Brough, is practically exactly the same as this years, except for the fact that they are all a year older.

Our backs need sorted out and if we were to line up with your backs for next season then it is a complete joke.

However, I expect that Semi will be off anyway, Crookes will get a shot but he is untried due to his injury this season, Sykes might make a half decent back up half-back but we need specialists in this area and Sheriffe should be nowhere near a shirt because, quite frankly, he is rubbish.

The forwards should line up as.....

Lynch
Le'Strange
Hall
Menzies
Worrincy
Burgess

assuming we do not sign any more of them. The bench can be taken by the likes of Scruton, Kopczak, Langley, Donaldson, Godwin, Whitehead.

Langley has been gash for long enough now and really needs dropped to the bench at best.

So, to sum up, our forwards are fine but we NEED at least one (preferably TWO quality halfs) a winger to replace semi and another to shift Sheriffe anywhere but on our pitch and a Centre.

Halley and Nero are fine, Sykes will do a job in a number of roles but we need a quality backbone that we do not have.

Agree with pretty much everything here other than the comments on Sheriffe. I don't think he's amazing but I equally don't think he's any worse than, say, Gardner. He's quick, he's actually a pretty evasive runner on the wing, and he doesn't miss a great deal in defence. However, he's not a good broken field runner and doesn't often beat the tackler in midfield. With a decent centre inside him though, who knows?

Personally my absolute dream signing would be Vatuvei - Bradford has been built on huge tackle busting wingers in TV and Lesley, and signing the new one would be a) great for the team and b) great for the marketeers

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:10 pm  

Block5Bull wrote:

Agree with pretty much everything here other than the comments on Sheriffe. I don't think he's amazing but I equally don't think he's any worse than, say, Gardner. He's quick, he's actually a pretty evasive runner on the wing, and he doesn't miss a great deal in defence. However, he's not a good broken field runner and doesn't often beat the tackler in midfield. With a decent centre inside him though, who knows?

Personally my absolute dream signing would be Vatuvei - Bradford has been built on huge tackle busting wingers in TV and Lesley, and signing the new one would be a) great for the team and b) great for the marketeers

tend to agree with that. sheriffe often looks poor defensively because he's been left in a two on one situation when sykes goes missing. When menzies has played alongside him that wing has been much stronger.

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:22 pm  

mat wrote:

tend to agree with that. sheriffe often looks poor defensively because he's been left in a two on one situation when sykes goes missing. When menzies has played alongside him that wing has been much stronger.

Sorry but Sheriffe is gash. The Pennine league is even a too high a standard for him.

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:26 pm  

Can't agree with either Worrincy at starting SR next season, that would be appauling. In my books he'd be lucky to even find his way onto the bench after some of his recent showings. As for Burgess at loose, no way, he's very poor in that position. What is people's gripe with Langley? OK he isn't the greatest offensive player, but he makes ground, and he tackles all game long. He's been nothing like gash and I think people are expecting him to be an Ellis or a Watmough, when he clearly isn't that type of player.

Langley is far more worthy of a starting spot than Worrincy and Burgess is not a loose forward in my opinions.

: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:41 pm  

The beef I've got with Langley is that he seems to have slipped into an awful habit of stopping running as soon as he gets close to contact which means he busts nowhere near as many tackles as he did a couple of seasons back.

I do rate his overall effort though, and defensively he is a stalwart for the team. I just think sometimes he needs a bit of tenacity, although he's not on his own in that area!