cartoons/WB153.gifI'm not a pheasant plucker, i'm a pheasant pluckers son and i'm only plucking pheasants till the pheasant plucker comes.:cartoons/WB153.gif
Quote: nantwichexile "Think we all agree we have no priority for a back rower with the emergence of Clarkson and the extra cover of Delaney and Senior. Besides is it yet certain Eastwood will leave ?
Prop maybe...but we have Ambler (especially) and Burgess (less so) to adequately cover the first 3 choices.
I [idid[/i think we should prioritise a good quality centre: Senior is still our best but 'knocking on'; Delaney is probably better placed in the back row and Smith will never make a top quality centre (appreciate he made England selection but that's more a refelection of the dearth of quality in SL...although Atkins is vastly improved it seems and Shenton should further improve playing with a similar top quality side).
Watkins might be one answer of course; BJB and/or Hall might be another ?? That still leaves us with a pacy winger then to find of course ??
As the ideal Broughton
Burrow and McGuire have a good few years left has a partnership, signing a another half back for mine would be a waste of cap space.If a half back signed is for cover only then the quality isn't probably going to be that great.If as you hint you want a replacement for Burrow then that signing will have to be top quality which then could see Burrow leaving so we then would be back to the same cover at half back.
I would like another top prop to take some of the work load off JP.
I think centre's a really weak position in Super League. It remains the most obvious mis-match position up against the Ockers as well. Leeds are far from being alone in struggling to find real top class in that position. Top quality English centres are rarer than unicorns at present.
Quote: Abbott for England "Suppose somebody best mention Big Les and Frank Pritchard in order for this to be a proper southstander.com recruitment thread.'"
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.