: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:30 am  

rugbyreddog wrote:

Yes it did. Leeds took £2m plus Hape and Les as payment

I forgot that!

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:31 am  

Ewwenorfolk wrote:

He's had some good games and is still a Youngster. What pis$es me off is that he's younger than Cook, Halley, Kopzcak yet alot more rests on his shoulders from us (the fans) than do if (say Kopzcak) had a bad game.

I disagree. I dont expect anything more than good solid work from Burgess. And that doesnt happen that often either. He isn't fit enough. I feel that is the half the issue. He rarely breaks the line and a lot of the time doesnt take as many men to tackle him as Kopzcak or Scruton. It's all well and good playing well against France but he isnt worth keeping if we get a big money offer in.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:34 am  

cieranblonde wrote:

but he isnt worth keeping if we get a big money offer in.

Yes he is. Menzies is more experienced in RL than you, you can't deny that. He said that Burgess has the potential to be the best forward in the world. Why would we sell a prospect like that and one that could "walk into any NRL side"

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:36 am  

Ewwenorfolk wrote:

Yes he is. Menzies is more experienced in RL than you, you can't deny that. He said that Burgess has the potential to be the best forward in the world. Why would we sell a prospect like that and one that could "walk into any NRL side"

Thats fair enough...however Beaver has the chance to see Mr Burgess training. I have the chance to see Mr Burgess underperforming. There's the difference. Until he plays like he can do i'd sell him every time cos he will bring us loads of money

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 12:04 pm  

http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=14603

http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=14603

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 12:38 pm  

cieranblonde wrote:

Thats fair enough...however Beaver has the chance to see Mr Burgess training. I have the chance to see Mr Burgess underperforming. There's the difference. Until he plays like he can do i'd sell him every time cos he will bring us loads of money

God knows.

Lets not sell the only ray of light ib Bradford at the minute, that would be a terrible mistake.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 1:07 pm  

cieranblonde wrote:

Thats fair enough...however Beaver has the chance to see Mr Burgess training. I have the chance to see Mr Burgess underperforming. There's the difference. Until he plays like he can do i'd sell him every time cos he will bring us loads of money

There's an old saying that form is temporary but class is permanent (or something like that anyway. In acknowledging that people with singificantly more experience and significantly better access disagree with you, I really think that you've defeated your own argument here.

Personally I think that Burgess has had a decent enough season. He's been moved around throughout the pack constantly which doesn't help and has not been quite up to the standard of the last 2 years, but unless the club needs the money to shore up off field finances then I think that selling would be crazy.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 2:37 pm  

mystic eddie wrote:

If it did not work for Leeds then it is doubtful it would work for us.

it worked out pretty well in the end for Leeds.

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 2:38 pm  

BradfordServiceCrew wrote:

http://www.superleague.co.uk/article.php?id=14603

Has Sykes signed?
I wish someone would have said earlier...

: Tue Jul 07, 2009 2:40 pm  

I wouldn't like to be the person who tried to explain to the dwindling fan base how letting Sam Burgess go is a good move to rebuild the club. They will be braver than me.