Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:25 pm  

OFFTHECUFF wrote:

He never hardly stood out at hooker in the reserves and wont be ahead of the new signing at hooker or Coyle.Get over it he has gone now.People at Wigan could have moaned when Ben Davies was standing out in the reserves.

I think, in the few games Hulmey played in the first team at hooker, he did OK. His ball distribution was good, as was his dummy half scoots. He just needed to be a little bit bigger in order to mix it with the forwards. That would come and, given his lineage, he'll be tough enough.

There is certainly enough about that lad to see that he could have been moulded in to playing several positions, given the time. He looks like a natural RL player to me. Would have counted on the homegrown quota too.

Hey ho, they know best.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:27 pm  

vikingsmurf wrote:

ahh yes, i didnt consider that pepe. Again, i think i overheard them both saying something about a meeting or conference/announcement at 10 am. They were on the other side of the changing rooms and i was trying to not be too obvious in my listening, so i could be wrong. but as nothing seems to have happened today they may have been talking about tomorrow.

Nice bit of snout there. I'lll be glued to my phone tomorrow in anticipation.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:11 pm  

Pepe wrote:

I think, in the few games Hulmey played in the first team at hooker, he did OK. His ball distribution was good, as was his dummy half scoots. He just needed to be a little bit bigger in order to mix it with the forwards. That would come and, given his lineage, he'll be tough enough.

There is certainly enough about that lad to see that he could have been moulded in to playing several positions, given the time. He looks like a natural RL player to me. Would have counted on the homegrown quota too.

Hey ho, they know best.

I do like him as a player and nobody will know how he develops to be honest.Craven,Brown,Owens,Gilmore,Gore,Mullaly we have a chain of youth mate.Whoever plays i will support my team.I am just bored as it going on as if we lost a young Lockyer or Thurston.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:14 pm  

Pepe wrote:

I will, however, be looking at the performances of those they have deemed good enough to be kept on ahead of him, with a very critical eye. They really do have to perform in order to justify the release of such a promising youngster as Danny Hulme.

The problem you will have there Pep is that you won't know which player playing which position to compare to Hulme.Our coach doesn't know what he is so the solution to this dilemma is to get rid.Genius coaching that is.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:20 pm  

GSF wrote:

The problem you will have there Pep is that you won't know which player playing which position to compare to Hulme.Our coach doesn't know what he is so the solution to this dilemma is to get rid.Genius coaching that is.

It does look like a complete cop-out by the coaching staff, or something even worse - favouritism of some sort.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:36 pm  

But that's the problem, any player with a SL deal has been 'watched closely' but then people only seem to remember an error, not a break or good ball. Seems a natural bias from Widnes fans AGAINST those retained which is ridiculous.

We were poop at Fev but Dave Allen made some good runs and a break where he wasn't backed up, mentioned? Don't be silly, it's easier to say he's poop!

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:41 pm  

J20 wrote:

But that's the problem, any player with a SL deal has been 'watched closely' but then people only seem to remember an error, not a break or good ball. Seems a natural bias from Widnes fans AGAINST those retained which is ridiculous.

We were poop at Fev but Dave Allen made some good runs and a break where he wasn't backed up, mentioned? Don't be silly, it's easier to say he's poop!

What you are failing to recognise is players like Allen and Coyle were not rated before they were taken on, and that makes your point somewhat moot. I was disappointed when we signed coyle, doubly disappointed when we signed him for super league, as he has never for me looked like a quality player.

This has nothing to do with over scrutiny due to a signed contract.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:44 pm  

I understand people who don't rate players, especially on here as usually consistent with it. Buy especially on the other board players who were re-signed with praise at time (Inc IMO Coyle without a doubt) have come in for incredible critiscm just due to those released, that's not really fair ESPECIALLY those in different positions.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:06 am  

Pepe wrote:

I think, in the few games Hulmey played in the first team at hooker, he did OK. His ball distribution was good, as was his dummy half scoots. He just needed to be a little bit bigger in order to mix it with the forwards. That would come and, given his lineage, he'll be tough enough.

There is certainly enough about that lad to see that he could have been moulded in to playing several positions, given the time. He looks like a natural RL player to me. Would have counted on the homegrown quota too.

Hey ho, they know best.

How many games did he play in the first team at hooker though ? From memory it is certainly in the low single figures.

He isn't / wasn't a hooker. He wasn't good enough in the reserves in that position let alone make the step up to the firsts.

Ultimately that was his problem in having no settled position for most of his time at the club. Was a half at 18's until reserves where there where better options in the halves and he mixed between there and hooker. That didn't work out so he went to FB at the start of the year and seemed to settle into it quite well where his natural backing up came to the fore and he got his chance again in the firsts through injury.

I can see the clubs reasoning behind it and I did call it previously on the TIW board. He is unlucky in that it took him so long to settle into a position and make the break to the firsts and look comfortable. If he made the switch to FB a year or so earlier and he would probably be the settled number 1 FB now and in all likelihood have bagged himself a SL deal. We have scraped around with dross at FB for quite a few years since Grix left and now we have found ourselves with three of our own produced talents looking good in the firsts let alone the signing of Briscoe.

Re: Betts explains Hulme exit : Thu Sep 01, 2011 2:28 pm  

J20 wrote:

Really? Craven reads it much better and is more useful in an attacking line whereas Danny is a returner / open field runner.

Better than Coyle at 9? Sorry that's just made up.

Abso... Blooming...lutely

Craven is one of the most natural looking full backs I have seen at the club for a while and he isn't even a full back by birth. He has scored a decent number of tries to boot and he joins the line very well. Terrific support player. If he hadn't been injured DH wouldn't have got a sniff.