Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:46 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

I have no real opinion on how good he is, the point is that he did what was best for him. My point is why could we not secure him before Leeds even made themselves interested.

Surely if we want a prop as Pete says then we could have got one average prop in the off season. Unless Royce thinks that our young props are better than an average SL prop. But if that is the case will he use them???

I know for a fact we was actively looking for a prop. We tried hill from Leigh but he went to wolves, we tried griffin but he went to leeds.

So it's clear we think we are prop short but if the is nothing out there worth getting then Im glad we've just not brought just any old prop in just to make up the numbers.

IMO we should have brought a prop in instead of a backrow to play prop like laffranchci, it might work out great but it is a risk to be honest.

Jason king was off contract as well as a few other good Aussie props but I'd have gone for Bryce Gibbs.

Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 8:50 am  

St pete wrote:

I know for a fact we was actively looking for a prop. We tried hill from Leigh but he went to wolves, we tried griffin but he went to leeds.

So it's clear we think we are prop short but if the is nothing out there worth getting then Im glad we've just not brought just any old prop in just to make up the numbers.

IMO we should have brought a prop in instead of a backrow to play prop like laffranchci, it might work out great but it is a risk to be honest.

Jason king was off contract as well as a few other good Aussie props but I'd have gone for Bryce Gibbs.

If Royce knew that we weren't getting Griffin, do you think he would have gone for Gibbs instead of Laffranchi? If he was basing his squad on a player who had already committed to Saints, he wouldn't have wanted another prop, laffranchi offered an alternative style of play. Griffin pulling out appears to have scuppered that idea!

Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 10:52 am  

Average player anyway, but having that extra prop would have been nice

If we do need extra cover, we will have to just blood the youngsters.

Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 11:07 am  

How very rude of him!

He is like people have said, a decent prop often average. No great loss but could have added a bit of extra grunt when the going gets tough against the big teams, still we don't look too bad of a team without him eh!

Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 11:44 am  

My thoughts on him are very 'meh'.

Leeds could beat us using the Batley Bullddogs first team if its in a Grand Final anyway.

Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:27 pm  

Does anyone know where Mr Griffins wife works? ive heard she has a job in a ticket office for a well known super league club.....just saying....

Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:56 pm  

SAINT ANDREW wrote:

Does anyone know where Mr Griffins wife works? ive heard she has a job in a ticket office for a well known super league club.....just saying....

well there is a few of them in there Ive often wondered what they all do?

Re: Darrell Griffin : Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:11 pm  

lionarmour87 wrote:

well there is a few of them in there Ive often wondered what they all do?

Sit round and count their money.

Re: Darrell Griffin : Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:08 am  

hmmm would of been nice to see him in a saints shirt, i think he does a job, and up to be probs would of been out best prop.

i know people have put its good we didnt just get anyone but (not really knowing who) there are players in the lowere league who can carry a ball up. might not be a world beater but most would sign a smaller deal for 1 year as a trail which would see us through, look at that big bugger the bradford dulls picked up joesph......not every siging has to be long term

Re: Darrell Griffin : Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:28 pm  

It would be nice to have another prop. But it would be pointless to blow the money on such when you don't have a scrum half.