Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 10:59 am  

Looking at it from his perspective if I can
Before his first injury he was possibly the best young talent in Super League. He could have been one of the best, the new Sculthorpe or whatever. He could certainly have gone to Australia.
Now he's stuck with us. It might be quite natural to think of what might have been.
So although he's still on contract would it be a positive for everybody to offer him free to another club so that he could maybe rebuild a career. Meanwhile we could promote Longstaff.

Re: Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:07 am  

Ken Parr's Back Pass wrote:

Looking at it from his perspective if I can
Before his first injury he was possibly the best young talent in Super League. He could have been one of the best, the new Sculthorpe or whatever. He could certainly have gone to Australia.
Now he's stuck with us. It might be quite natural to think of what might have been.
So although he's still on contract would it be a positive for everybody to offer him free to another club so that he could maybe rebuild a career. Meanwhile we could promote Longstaff.

Stuck with us?

We stood by him whilst he recovered from 2 knee injuries - 2 years out on full wages.

You think he would be doing everything he could to repay the club, or at least tackle with heart.

Re: Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:27 am  

Powell thinks Currie offers more than Longstaff and from what I hear that ridiculous train of thought is unlikely to ever be de-railed.

Re: Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:34 am  

Been stealing a wage since his injuries. Really thought he would kick on this year under Powell...all ive seen is him poop out of tackles all year.

Re: Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:40 am  

The thing is, he was great in a team playing expansive, fast paced rugby, where he was given time to find a gap or make a play for his centre/winger.

You still see this year, when he has been given the ball with time he has created tries even yesterday he created the try for widdop.

He isn't a battering ram of a second row and won't be taking carries up the middle and making loads of yards that way.

His defense hasn't been up to his usual standards but I wouldn't say anyone in the team is defending well? Especially when we're probably facing twice and many attacks as we're used to due to all the errors, more tackles will be missed as the defense is tiring.

Powell hasn't got the team playing the type of rugby we saw at Cas which probably would suit him, now is that down to the players or him?

Re: Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:43 am  

Ken Parr's Back Pass wrote:

.
So although he's still on contract would it be a positive for everybody to offer him free to another club so that he could maybe rebuild a career.

Finding a club to match his current salary may be a challenge. If he accepts a salary closer to his performance level then by all means I wish him well.

Re: Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 11:47 am  

Longstaff is too small currently, that will be Powell's issue with him. He likes his big bopper second rowers and Longstaff certainly isn't that. Liam Farrell is perhaps proof you can get by without genuine size in the second row and the 6 again era will probably help with that too, but there aren't many back rowers as small as Longstaff. He's lighter than Tommy Makinson according to the stats online. I suspect the gym and bulking will be Longstaff's focus for the next 12 months.

Re: Ben Currie : Mon Jun 13, 2022 10:13 pm  

ratticusfinch wrote:

Powell thinks Currie offers more than Longstaff and from what I hear that ridiculous train of thought is unlikely to ever be de-railed.

If you think Lonstaff offers more than Currie that's a ridiculous train of thought to be honest.

Re: Ben Currie : Tue Jun 14, 2022 7:34 am  

Or thane wrote:

If you think Lonstaff offers more than Currie that's a ridiculous train of thought to be honest.

He can tackle, so that's enough to offer more than currie.

Re: Ben Currie : Tue Jun 14, 2022 7:37 am  

Saddened! wrote:

Longstaff is too small currently, that will be Powell's issue with him. He likes his big bopper second rowers and Longstaff certainly isn't that. Liam Farrell is perhaps proof you can get by without genuine size in the second row and the 6 again era will probably help with that too, but there aren't many back rowers as small as Longstaff. He's lighter than Tommy Makinson according to the stats online. I suspect the gym and bulking will be Longstaff's focus for the next 12 months.

John Bateman is hardly a massive second row and he ripped it up in the nrl. This "too small" excuse is one I hate. If Powell doesn't rate longstaff then fine(although he'd be wrong and an idiot!), but don't get rid of him because you think he's too small.