While i think Owen can develop into a very good full back i feel sorry with how the club appears to have treated Mathers.

If the club hadn't have been stupid enough to have offered Hudson & Mcgoldrick those 4 year deals we wouldn't have found ourselves in this position

About 3 stone over weight and bone idle....i hope not

Completely agree. I like Mathers, I think he has good organisational skills, something that you need from a full back. He is pretty solid and a safe bet.

However, with regards to your last paragraph, it seems from reading his tweets he isn't training with the squad at all and hasn't even met Millward at all. Youngquest is sticking up for him with regards to people saying he has thrown his teddy out of the cot stating "if only people knew how much you wanted to give"
Says it all for me

Always seems a nice bloke when you read his articles but sentiment shouldn't come into running a rugby club (if it did we should have given wainwright a 5 year deal!). Milward see's owen as the clubs best fb(correctly imo) so he should play him there, the fact that mathers here because he wanted to be first choice fb has nothing to do with milward, milward should be able to build his own team and if he has decided that mathers is to expensive for cover or that he doesnt rate him he would be a poor coach not to try and offload him, especially when we have other areas (centre) that need to be strengthed.

Mcgoldrick and mathers both struggle with defence at fb, 1-1 tackles and high bombs they can make some real howlers with, mathers can organise the defensive line better, but goldy has more aggression and is better with ball in hand, if milward doesn't rate goldy he will be gone in a year anyway, but if he doesn't offload mathers but doesn't want to play him he is stuck with him for 2 more years. Whats more goldy is our hb cover a role that mather would probably struggle to fill.

I think mathers is already gone mate, he hasn't been training with the team and is refusing to comment on any rugby matters on twitter.

All fair points, however, Millward has stated everyone starts with a clean slate. Surely Mathers deserves the chance to prove himself?

The fact that he hasn't even met Millward let alone training with the team strikes as very odd

Mathers is a natural SO IMO, a role I expected him to return to with outstanding success.

personally i cant see him taking on the line and asking questions of the defence and he has no kicking game, he is also defensivly frail so would be targeted alot.

Mostly don't agree with anyone who suggests that a squad without Mathers in it is better - UNLESS there is a marquee signing in the offing, which I think we all agree is unlikely. Richie Mathers is a specilaist full-back, all of our defense was better last year when he played - if I was going to pull players for 1 on 1 defense and mistakes, he wouldn't be the first.

Basil does things his own way, yes - but daft he isn't and starting everyone with a clean slate is logical and the key work is EVERYONE. That would lead me to believe that there are other factors at play if Mathers goes. No point in us all putting 2 and 2 together and getting 18 though. There is always the possibility that this is being drivent he other way, just for balance; that Richie wants out for his own reasons and rumour of club pushing is just speculation, we are all not so naive to think that players don't use their own methods too??

I would be sorry to see him go - he has medals and finals appearances that suggest he is up to a place in our 17 and that IS a fact.

There was a time when i think he looked like he had enough about him to make a good SO, sadly he has shown little since then to make the switch viable.

I agree. Mathers only real problems all boil down to lack of confidence. The only time he has ever looked like he was re-capturing his early Leeds form was in a dominant Wire side. I fear a move to Wakey will further depress his career.

As it would anyones

I appear to have misplaced the WMDC Village Idiot! Anyone seen it?