Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:08 pm  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

That journeyman Lee Smith did a pretty good job on us when we faced Wakey in the qualifiers. He is clearly better than our current options now Mullaney it seems is no longer likely to be with us.

Smith did ok in that one game, but how can you say he is 'clearly better' than any of our current options? Have you even seen Thomas play fullback?
All Lee Smith did against us was run through the huge defensive hole left open by Gaskell and Purtell. Any of our current FB options would have had a blinder if they had traded places with Smith that day.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:11 pm  

mat wrote:

wasn't there talk of mullaney having an op in offseason to cure his recuring hamstring issues. Wonder if they found they couldnt do it for some reason and decided to part company. seems odd if hes gone so soon after signing a new deal.

Does make sense. Could be when the surgeon's gone in, he's found the damage worse than it was thought and it's pretty much game over.

Shame for the lad if that's the case. Especially given how'd he'd signed a new deal as well.

However, I tend to not put a large amount of stock in any rumour I hear on the internet.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:36 pm  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

If Mullaney isn't going to be here for 2016 I guess Lee Smith would be an attractive proposition for a club looking for an experienced full back. Makes the signing of a scrum half even more crucial than it was previously though.

With all due respect... Did you see Ben Evans hamstring injury (I think last year) that required surgery? If not, then tap it in google!! That was repaired... So i'm sure Mullaney's will be.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:13 pm  

Nothus wrote:

Smith did ok in that one game, but how can you say he is 'clearly better' than any of our current options? Have you even seen Thomas play fullback?
All Lee Smith did against us was run through the huge defensive hole left open by Gaskell and Purtell. Any of our current FB options would have had a blinder if they had traded places with Smith that day.

Mendeika hasn't impressed. Clare is a better winger than fullback for mine. Campbell is currently crocked with a serious leg injury and how long it will take for him to fully recover is unknown.

Smith has bags of SL experience and has played at international level and at 29 I feel he would go well for us in the Championship. Thomas is a bit of an unknown quantity but I'm comfortable in saying that he isn't a better player than Smith.

Interesting that you mention Purtell, I seem to recall you being a leading voice for him to be dropped in favour of Adam Henry. Purtell was probably our stand out player in the qualifiers.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Fri Nov 20, 2015 11:48 pm  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

Mendeika hasn't impressed. Clare is a better winger than fullback for mine. Campbell is currently crocked with a serious leg injury and how long it will take for him to fully recover is unknown.

Smith has bags of SL experience and has played at international level and at 29 I feel he would go well for us in the Championship. Thomas is a bit of an unknown quantity but I'm comfortable in saying that he isn't a better player than Smith.

Interesting that you mention Purtell, I seem to recall you being a leading voice for him to be dropped in favour of Adam Henry. Purtell was probably our stand out player in the qualifiers.

My point is that we already have plenty of Fullbacks on our books. Why sign another one who is approaching the end of his career? Smith is a former international while Thomas is a current international, scoring tries at that level to boot.

I wanted Purtell dropped because at centre he is a defensive liability. The Wakefield game proved my point perfectly, and there were countless other examples throughout the season. He played well when he was at six and his poor defensive reads were not exploited as much.
Having said that, I still hope we don't end up going with Purtell as one of our first choices for the halves. He tries hard but the agility and pace just aren't there anymore.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Sat Nov 21, 2015 12:34 am  

Nothus wrote:

If it's true and he's gone then we should be playing Oscar Thomas at fullback, not signing some journeyman like Lee Smith. Clare can be a backup until Campbell is fully fit again.
It also frees up some quota space - and maybe some salary cap - to look for a decent 7 and maybe even another 9 to spell with AoB (Beswick?).

Disappointing, but not the end of the world.

I have heard Beswick to Bulls mentioned a few times on these boards recently but I just can't see it. From a Leigh point of view Beswick is comfortably one of the best 9's in the league, been here a few years and is a head down, easy going, hard working type of player who can and has covered several positions when called upon and when Penky got banned he went above and beyond, playing 80 minutes at a great standard for several weeks until we found back up. Higham isn't an 80 minute hooker at his age and the only other 9 on the books is Foster who looks a fantastic prospect but has only got a dozen or so 1st team games under his belt. I think we would find it very very hard to replace Beswick with an adequate replacement and even harder to find anyone better. Don't see any sense in us letting him leave, especially to our main rivals unless Bradford come in with a decent offer for him. I hope/think he will stay at Leigh, IMO we would be crazy to let him go.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Sat Nov 21, 2015 8:15 am  

Nothus wrote:

My point is that we already have plenty of Fullbacks on our books. Why sign another one who is approaching the end of his career? Smith is a former international while Thomas is a current international, scoring tries at that level to boot.

I don't see his age or experience as a negative, in fact I think our squad could do with a few more leaders and older heads. He's played in some pretty big games and that sort of experience is crucial if we're good enough to have another crack at SL. Thomas is a prospect but still unproven and has little SL experience.

Northus wrote:

I wanted Purtell dropped because at centre he is a defensive liability. The Wakefield game proved my point perfectly, and there were countless other examples throughout the season. He played well when he was at six and his poor defensive reads were not exploited as much.
Having said that, I still hope we don't end up going with Purtell as one of our first choices for the halves. He tries hard but the agility and pace just aren't there anymore.

Defensive liability is way over the top. He is a fair defender and his overall contribution is certainly a positive one for our team. He is and always has been a far better player than your suggested replacement.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Sat Nov 21, 2015 10:50 am  

Unfortunately nobody seems to publish any kind of player statistics in the championship, so we'll just have to agree to disagree about Purtell's defensive capabilities.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Sat Nov 21, 2015 11:27 am  

Bully_Boxer wrote:

I don't see his age or experience as a negative, in fact I think our squad could do with a few more leaders and older heads. He's played in some pretty big games and that sort of experience is crucial if we're good enough to have another crack at SL. Thomas is a prospect but still unproven and has little SL experience.

Defensive liability is way over the top. He is a fair defender and his overall contribution is certainly a positive one for our team. He is and always has been a far better player than your suggested replacement.

Well said, it is very true, thought one of our better games was captained by Adrian Purtell.

Re: 2016 Squad Requirements : Sun Nov 22, 2015 6:16 pm  

Nozzy wrote:

I have heard Beswick to Bulls mentioned a few times on these boards recently but I just can't see it. From a Leigh point of view Beswick is comfortably one of the best 9's in the league, been here a few years and is a head down, easy going, hard working type of player who can and has covered several positions when called upon and when Penky got banned he went above and beyond, playing 80 minutes at a great standard for several weeks until we found back up. Higham isn't an 80 minute hooker at his age and the only other 9 on the books is Foster who looks a fantastic prospect but has only got a dozen or so 1st team games under his belt. I think we would find it very very hard to replace Beswick with an adequate replacement and even harder to find anyone better. Don't see any sense in us letting him leave, especially to our main rivals unless Bradford come in with a decent offer for him. I hope/think he will stay at Leigh, IMO we would be crazy to let him go.

Have a word with yerself Nozzer.