Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:19 am  

ComeOnYouUll wrote:

An unsettled 'want away' back rower out and a quality (hopefully experienced) back in sounds good in principle.

Depends who the back is, of course.

It does indeed. Can't think of anyone available/unsettled that would fit the "high profile" tag, particularly British.

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:27 am  

Mrs Barista wrote:

It does indeed. Can't think of anyone available/unsettled that would fit the "high profile" tag, particularly British.

Isnt Sargison ooc???

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:27 am  

If we could bring in a high scoring outside back who is still in contract and make a bit of a profit on the fees paid and received for Joe that would be an excellent outcome. I would still say as I did in last weeks Diary Westerman is a big risk at £150,000 for Warrington.

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:37 am  

Mrs Barista wrote:

It does indeed. Can't think of anyone available/unsettled that would fit the "high profile" tag, particularly British.

Let's hope it isn't the ginger turnstyle. Maybe charnley

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:41 am  

Charnley is a good call Jake, think he is a bit overrated, but still a decent winger who would add to our backline with his pace.

Another one could be Rhys Evans, lots of potential but a bit injury prone.

There was a rumour that Cas were after Adam Swift, again he would be an excellent addition.

I think with Logan, Carlos T and Fonua fighting for the centre spot, winger should be our priority IMO.

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:43 am  

Mrs Barista wrote:

I think it was a mistake renewing Michaels. Could have done with the quota spot now to get a more senior overseas back.

Certainly was, has he gone home yet? Maybe he isn't able to come back?

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 6:49 am  

Dave K. wrote: Certainly was, has he gone home yet? Maybe he isn't able to come back? Don't know about Micheals but alot of the arrested players got charged or case dropped. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/c ... ed/6836698

Dave K. wrote: Certainly was, has he gone home yet? Maybe he isn't able to come back? Don't know about Micheals but alot of the arrested players got charged or case dropped. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/c ... ed/6836698

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 7:15 am  

Dave K. wrote:

Charnley is a good call Jake, think he is a bit overrated, but still a decent winger who would add to our backline with his pace.

Another one could be Rhys Evans, lots of potential but a bit injury prone.

There was a rumour that Cas were after Adam Swift, again he would be an excellent addition.

I think with Logan, Carlos T and Fonua fighting for the centre spot, winger should be our priority IMO.

If we signed another winger,could be detrimental to Lancaster... or a player swap ..Atkins?

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 7:30 am  

Cardiff_05 wrote:

I've got lots of thoughts about this Westerman saga. Ultimately, if he goes, I think it'll be a good thing for us, albeit not ideally wanting to see an England player of 12 months back leave us.

Just to break it down:

Westerman himself: He's proved that he can be a 'good' Super League player. That's all well and good, and he's played well while he's been with us. But for me, we need him to be a 'very good' Super League player. And he needs to be playing 'very well' for us. Consistently. Consistency is a key factor, and this is something he has lacked in my opinion whilst being in a Black and White shirt. We may get a very good game from him, followed by a decent game, and then an uneventful one, plus the odd poor showing (Leeds this season). He needs to be hitting the 7/8 out of 10 mark as a bare minimum EVERY match.

And if Westerman doesn't actually want to stay, then the whole move works out well for all of us. If this is the case, everyone should get off Adam Pearson's back; when he made 'that' comment, the club was happy to keep him and make that long term commitment. If, a few months down the line, Joe (like Tom Lineham) decides he wants to leave, that's not Pearson's fault. Circumstances change, it happens in sport. It's how you deal with those changes that makes you what you are, and is what makes the difference ultimately.

The money: We paid over the odds for Joe in the first place, but it was a statement signing of the club at the time to go for one of the rising stars in the English game and have someone to build a team around for the future. Admittedly, this hasn't quite worked out, partly down to Joe's inconsistency but also due to the lack of a settled atmosphere in the club over the past few years. If we are being offered the rumoured £150,000 from Warrington for a player who has 12 months left on his contract, who has struggled for consistency and hasn't exactly set the world alight for us, then we should definitely snap their hand off for it, regardless of whether we need the money or not. We've got plenty of options for a plan B, C and even D for the 13 position, and we'd be £150,000 better off for it.

The 13 role: With the signings we've made for 2016, and being heavily weighted in the back row, Westerman leaving could be a sign of a shift (in the short or long term) to us moving towards using the 13 shirt as an extra second row forward, rather than a pivot. We've got Pritchard, Manu, Minichiello, Ellis, Whiting, Hadley, Turgut, Downs, Washbrook and Abdull vying for three positions, and one (possibly two) places on the bench. We could go with Abdull at 13, and use the bench for impact second rowers. We could use Pritchard at 13, and give him free reign to hit whatever lines he wishes. Washbrook could play there, against middle to lower ranking SL sides as a relief player. There are plenty of options for us, and as has already been mentioned, it would give Sneyd total control over our attack as the main pivot in the side, something that we, and he, desperately needs.


Jordan Abdull: I've heard it said so many times on this forum (and across other sports, in discussions with friends, colleagues etc) that a player can be too young for first team action, or should be introduced gradually at first. We've all seen what Jordan Abdull can do so far in a Hull FC shirt. His performances to date have been exciting, mature and selfless, showing how he can influence the team in attack and add a different dimension to our game.

My argument is that we should give him the chance from the off in 2016 to showcase what he's got. Give him the 13 shirt. Tell him it's position to lose. Tell him he's been rewarded for his potential, his commitment and his performances in 2015, and that the club have faith in him to be a big player for us. Tell him it's ok to make mistakes, the big guys around him have got his back. But let him know that he's important to the team and if he gives it his all, he can be a focal point of our team for a decade. We've seen so many young players with vast potential come and go at Hull FC, being told they didn't have what it took or they didn't show enough in their few fleeting appearances. Let's see what Abdull can do by actually starting him, playing him regularly and giving him an 8-10 game stretch to learn, grow and develop.


If Westerman does leave, which seems to be quite likely, then I think we could be looking back at it in 12 months time as a clean break for us and a fresh start, the chance to shift momentum in the team and allowing us to play more to our strengths, be they the forceful second rowers we possess, or the prodigious talent of Jordan Abdull. I think we can manage without Westerman, and we may actually be better off with him going. We've just got to have faith in the future.

Excellent post. A rare bit of quality and rational argument whether people agree with you or not. I do agree with you incidentally.

Re: westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 7:43 am  

Jake the Peg wrote:

That question will be easily answered when we find out if a wedge of salary cap has suddenly become available. if it has then I've no issues with us selling him. If we've already spent it on manu then the owner has been lying out of his ass

Without wanting to be cynical either way here, an announcement on the lines of "we have now got some cap space and we will monitor player availability, when a suitable player is available we will pursue" could be interpreted either as we have space or we are making it look like we have space.