: Thu Feb 12, 2009 2:12 am  

Mighty Wires wrote:

Whats next, Rah at full back?

Wing of course! Did we see his run at salford?

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:00 am  

Wire On The Telly wrote:

Why can't Bridge?

He cant play full back, he has no positional sense nor any experience in that position.

If he is full back on friday I will be very concerned about our chances.

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:02 am  

Dan Gosling wrote:

He cant play full back, he has no positional sense nor any experience in that position.

If he is full back on friday I will be very concerned about our chances.

I think WOTT was referring to wing or centre - you said Bridge can't play either. Despite the fact he is some experience at both and actually thinks himself centre could be his best position.

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:02 am  

Dan Gosling wrote:

He cant play full back, he has no positional sense nor any experience in that position.

If he is full back on friday I will be very concerned about our chances.

I wouldn't worry yourself too much. I think he's playing for the reserves at Hunslet tonight.

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:10 am  

JWP wrote:

I wouldn't worry yourself too much. I think he's playing for the reserves at Hunslet tonight.

No chance, he should be on the bench on friday night.

I would love to see, at some point, Monaghan at hooker and Briers and Bridge in the halves.

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:23 am  

Dan Gosling wrote:

No chance, he should be on the bench on friday night.

I would love to see, at some point, Monaghan at hooker and Briers and Bridge in the halves.

What do you mean 'No Chance'. I've just told you.

I'd love to see him in the team, but I'd love to see him in the team for years to come, not just Friday night. I'm sure he's taking & the club are taking the best medical advice possible and ensuring that his comeback is handled well, I'm sure it's planned, with targets in mind and with a view to Chris getting himself fully, 100% fit before he exposes himself to the intensity of SL, which we've seen is as intense as it's ever been.

There's enough people willing to have a go at him for his injury jinx, if he's looking after himself properly & nursing himself back, let him be I say. It may well be before that he's rushed himself back and that hasn't worked so It's good to see that the cautious approach is being taken.

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:29 am  

On a slightly different note ive had a text this morning from a friend of mine who lives in St Helens.

He is not a massive RL fan but knows a few of the players.

Anyway his text said that Martin Gleeson is heading back to Saints with a transfer fee involved, hence the reason why he is not playing on friday. The transfer will be completed next week aparantly.

Its probably just a wind up but my pal doesn't really go in for stuff like that.

Dont shoot me though, im just passing on info/bull.

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:31 am  

JWP wrote:

What do you mean 'No Chance'. I've just told you.

I'd love to see him in the team, but I'd love to see him in the team for years to come, not just Friday night. I'm sure he's taking & the club are taking the best medical advice possible and ensuring that his comeback is handled well, I'm sure it's planned, with targets in mind and with a view to Chris getting himself fully, 100% fit before he exposes himself to the intensity of SL, which we've seen is as intense as it's ever been.

There's enough people willing to have a go at him for his injury jinx, if he's looking after himself properly & nursing himself back, let him be I say. It may well be before that he's rushed himself back and that hasn't worked so It's good to see that the cautious approach is being taken.

What was the point of including him in the 19 man squad if there was no intention of playing him?

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:33 am  

Dan Gosling wrote:

What was the point of including him in the 19 man squad if there was no intention of playing him?

Lowes did say in his interview that a few of the long termers are 'Not quite ready'.

: Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:35 am  

JWP wrote:

Lowes did say in his interview that a few of the long termers are 'Not quite ready'.

I dont dispute that matey.

But you didn't answer my original question.