Re: Hardaker : Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:55 pm  

i agree. i think he would make a great 13. a sculthorpe. tough with great hands

Re: Hardaker : Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:46 pm  

If Hardaker is surprised Leeds don't want him back, maybe he should have a look at clippings regarding his incidents whilst at Leeds (including GH backing him up publicly when others wouldn't) and then at his comments when in Australia about how mean Leeds were for not letting him do whatever he wants to, and how he is a poor little indentured servant.

GH knows he won't get much of a fee - that's always been the case. Its hardly GH's fault that Hardaker impressed precisely nobody in his NRL stint. Zak probably thought he was being a star - he has the tattoos and was always involved in the high 5s and backslapping when the Panthers scored, so why aren't NRL clubs queuing up for him?

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 7:39 am  

nottinghamtiger wrote:

I wouldn't see it as that.
It seems to me it would be a deal to suit both parties.
Roberts is a quality player but not as good as Gale or Chase. He's on a large contract and probably won't get in the first choice 17.
Hardaker, likewise, is clearly a talent. However, he's doesn't seem to be in the frame at Leeds.
I'd suggest Hardaker is more of a "cast off" than Roberts given he is currently transfer listed?

This issue isn't as simple as how good a player is. Do you want to take the chance that a harmonious dressing room and fine team spirit could be disrupted by a mentality unstable trouble maker like Hardaker. Clubs like Cas rely heavily on a good bond between the players, so why take a chance that Hardaker "might" recapture his 2015 form and not be a poisonous character within the club.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 7:50 am  

chunkyhugo wrote:

This issue isn't as simple as how good a player is. Do you want to take the chance that a harmonious dressing room and fine team spirit could be disrupted by a mentality unstable trouble maker like Hardaker. Clubs like Cas rely heavily on a good bond between the players, so why take a chance that Hardaker "might" recapture his 2015 form and not be a poisonous character within the club.

Also he will be back in Featherstone surrounded by the very idiots that lead him astray before - a recipe for trouble.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 7:55 am  

I do find it bemusing that ZH claimed to be surprised re-GH saying we were planning the future of our squad without him after all ,despite the wheres & whyfors he asked to leave FFS.
The sooner it's resolved the better we desperately need a HB & a linebreaking BR/Prop minimum & Zak needs to get his career back on track.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:40 am  

When Sinfield retired we put Sutcliffe alongside McGuire which didm't work. Hardaker left which saved GH's embarrassment as he had a new place to put Sutcliffe. So this year who's the halves ? are we going back to McGuire and Burrow ? we had that combination before and decided to change it ??

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:05 am  

cosworth wrote:

When Sinfield retired we put Sutcliffe alongside McGuire which didm't work. Hardaker left which saved GH's embarrassment as he had a new place to put Sutcliffe. So this year who's the halves ? are we going back to McGuire and Burrow ? we had that combination before and decided to change it ??

Without signings it looks set to be McGuire with one of Lilley and Burrow alternating from the bench.

The club are probably hoping that if McGuire has a good off-season and remains injury-free, he will recapture his form, which is not unreasonable. However, not having a back-up plan is highly risky after the 2016 season, which may mean that a new signing is preferred in the end, taking pressure off McGuire in the short-term.

IIRC Stevie Ward was touted as a half-back when he first broke onto the scene. This could be an ideal solution to keep him away from the rougher stuff to improve his longevity/injury-free status, as well as to cement his position as one of the team's leaders? Obviously, it would depend on him having the requisite skill set, training and conditioning for this role instead of second-row, but I suspect it is more suited to his size and skill-set.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 12:01 pm  

I know I am sounding like an old record but I would not be shocked to learn that Moon will play at SO alongside McGuie at SH with Sutcliffe at FB.
Always the cheap option with GH.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:43 pm  

chapylad wrote:

Always the cheap option with GH.

Is it really? He definitely squeezes players on salary but still we spend up to the cap each year. And Leeds are one of the very few clubs who are still willing to pay sizeable transfer fees when required.

Re: Hardaker : Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:02 pm  

The Ghost of '99 wrote:

Is it really? He definitely squeezes players on salary but still we spend up to the cap each year. And Leeds are one of the very few clubs who are still willing to pay sizeable transfer fees when required.

With the "loss" of Achurch this year and by the sounds of it, Zak, we should have a fair amount of cap space. At least enough to sign a HB that suits what we need.