: Wed Jul 08, 2009 1:58 pm  

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 139968.stm The former Kiwi international and Brisbane Broncos star could find himself lining up alongside Bradford's Sam Burgess. The England international has attracted the interest of a number of Australian clubs. good for england if he goes to the NRL but IF hes available we should pull out all the stops to get him

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 139968.stm The former Kiwi international and Brisbane Broncos star could find himself lining up alongside Bradford's Sam Burgess. The England international has attracted the interest of a number of Australian clubs. good for england if he goes to the NRL but IF hes available we should pull out all the stops to get him

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 2:19 pm  

Another massively overrated player is Burgess.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 2:23 pm  

[Gareth] wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/super_league/bradford/8139968.stm



good for england if he goes to the NRL but IF hes available we should pull out all the stops to get him

It's very much a case of "if" he's interested too. I'm sure any player in the Wigan side would love to play in the NRL, if Saints came in with an offer equal or greater than his current contract I doubt he'd go.

The key IMO to such deals is where he'll be playing his rugby - continuing in SL he might as well stay at Bradford unless we start signing some real top quality stars and forking out transfer fees (which at the min despite the signing of Gleeson we aren't).

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:46 pm  

RB wrote:

Another massively overrated player is Burgess.

He's better than any of your props.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 3:49 pm  

The Punisher wrote:

He's better than any of your props.

What?

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 4:03 pm  

inside_man wrote:

he's told you about 10 times what he's basing his opinion on, the fact that king was a current kangaroo and SOO regular, and going off reported salaries from other players who aren't even in the aus and soo sides make, i too find it unlikely that king will be on less than 200k.

Don't under estimate those figures now.

you've come on here saying what are we basing our opinion on, have you got any proof? or is yours just opinions and hearsay as well?

I do know that one player who was reported to be earning as much as £70k at one time was at the time only earning £35k.

Added to the fact that if King is on over £200k, and Morley is rumoured to be on well over £200k, and Monaghan and Hicks wouldn't have come over for much less than £150k being Australian, that doesn't leave a lot for the rest of the squad...

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 5:43 pm  

Matt King was not on £200k. In fact, he isnt on much more than Barrett was. However, Barrett gave much more value for money

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 6:28 pm  

Random Male wrote:

Matt King was not on £200k. In fact, he isnt on much more than Barrett was. However, Barrett gave much more value for money

If you're saying that Matt King is on more than Trent Barrett was on, then that's all we need to know. It also explains why Wigan decided not to bother once Warrington had bid up to and beyond that staggering figure.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 6:30 pm  

Random Male wrote:

Matt King was not on £200k. In fact, he isnt on much more than Barrett was. However, Barrett gave much more value for money

Baz by all accounts was on over 200k, if not for the first year, certainly for the second and third year which sadly never happened.

: Wed Jul 08, 2009 6:52 pm  

jonh wrote:

Baz by all accounts was on over 200k, if not for the first year, certainly for the second and third year which sadly never happened.

He was well worth it as well. If we would of had better players around Barrett for those 2 seasons we would of lifted trophies in both seasons. It was a shame he had to carry the team at times and although it was great to see it would of also been good to see him playing around better players working with him better.