Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 2:38 pm  

No1 Saint wrote:

There are people who are always going to be doom and gloom and there are people who just cant see how bad a mess we are in. You sir are the latter, you need to wake up and smell the coffee because we are far closer to Saddened's prophesied relegation fodder than we are to some people's high as a kite 'we can still make the top 4' tripe at the moment.

Hopefully some smart recruitment and a clear out of the crap will fix things up for next year. For me Walsh or someone similar is a start

Absolute bloody nonsense. We need a half (preferably 2), a prop (preferably 2) and some luck with injuries/better conditioning. That's it. Not great at the moment but hardly the major crisis that all you kneejerk numpties are oh-so predictably sobbing about yet again... "Relegation fodder"? FFS....

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 2:59 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

Absolute bloody nonsense. We need a half (preferably 2), a prop (preferably 2) and some luck with injuries/better conditioning. That's it. Not great at the moment but hardly the major crisis that all you kneejerk numpties are oh-so predictably sobbing about yet again... "Relegation fodder"? FFS....

Your forgetting we also need to replace at least 1 wing (assuming we rightly let Gardner and Meli sail off into the sunset) and we need to do something about the dead weight that is Hohaia (hoovering up loads of cap space yet delivering nothing).

So

1 winger
2 halves
2 props
Ditch the utility garbage

With the current circumstances with the NRL and Union this is no easy or I suspect quick task.

Oh and I didnt say we were relegation fodder but closer to it than the top , maybe an exaggeration but we've been beaten and beaten fairly by Widnes who are not a good side , London who are also poor and HKR (twice so no fluke) who Wigan pumped for 80. Who are we better than?

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 3:01 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

Absolute bloody nonsense. We need a half (preferably 2), a prop (preferably 2) and some luck with injuries/better conditioning. That's it. Not great at the moment but hardly the major crisis that all you kneejerk numpties are oh-so predictably sobbing about yet again... "Relegation fodder"? FFS....

exactly, with Robes and J-Lo back we are a decent prop and a halfback away from challenging again. that does speak volumes for the quality of the league ...

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 3:24 pm  

The Chief wrote:

Have you seen Lance do any running in the 2 years hes been here?

No, but with an organiser along side him, I think he could.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 3:46 pm  

St. Rughead wrote:

No, but with an organiser along side him, I think he could.

No chance. He would look better than he does, as would most of our team but he just isnt a halfback and will always be substandard there. We ideally need a 6 with good distribution to help create a link with the backs, Lomax will do some of that from 1 but if we want to be challenging at the top again we need a genuine 6 (Wheeler if fit would be fine) so we dont end up being predictable. Top teams will soon learn to close down Lomax if we have no other go to player.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 3:52 pm  

Realistically, and ideally, Hanbury would be my 6 next year, here's hoping!

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 4:09 pm  

St. Rughead wrote:

Realistically, and ideally, Hanbury would be my 6 next year, here's hoping!

The reason Hanbury excites me so is that he can play 7 or 6 equally well and is a very good allround player, which will help immensley to bring through yougsters like yates or charnock into the halfs when injuries occur. I really hope we get him for next year. REALLY.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 6:28 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

The reason Hanbury excites me so is that he can play 7 or 6 equally well. REALLY.

I agree sh*te at 6, sh*te at 7.

Come on we can do better than that, he has the look of a lot of players we signed in the 80's and very early 90's.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 6:47 pm  

Noel Cleal wrote:

I agree sh*te at 6, sh*te at 7.

Come on we can do better than that, he has the look of a lot of players we signed in the 80's and very early 90's.

The love in for him astonishes me. Precisely the sort of player we DON'T need.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 08, 2013 9:50 pm  

Reporter says he's signed. Doesn't say if he's coming over now. I hope he is. That's the dealbreaker for me i.e. if he's not then we should be scouting for a bit longer given League Freak's feedback on him.