I think their pack has been excellent. Their backs are really poor however.

I've been saying for the last two and a half years that Clark would be perfect for Leeds. His attitude and style of play would fit perfectly with Leeds .

I really feel that Clark would complete the jigsaw so to speak. With the way the squad is shaping up for next year the hooking role is the only weak spot and Clark is exactly what we need. With the fast open game that we're playing at the moment he'd cause havoc with his support play and dummy half work.

Ah..... can't fit him in isn't the same as can't afford him.

It won't have escaped your attention that wire at hopeless and our replacement of big name players with sub standard one's has cost us dearly.

Asotasi for Moz
England for carvell
Russell for Hodgson
Obrien for briers

The list goes on but logan Tomkins for Clark would be sensational and would cost Tony Smith his job. ..

.however if you've made an error with your words (like can't afford and can't fit ) and you meant Tomkins for brad Dwyer ......that wouldn't be so bad.

But ill wait an see. ...

Yes, I meant cap space, that is cap in hand with can't afford, as you can only spend up to the cap.

And for your last sentence, no that is not what I meant. Warrington are completely changing their squad, and in order to fit players in the cap, in areas where they mainly need it, they have to change other areas to release that space. I am not saying they have signed Tomkins either, I am saying they are trying to do a deal, as they are looking for a replacement for Clark because if they do, he is coming to Leeds.

While ever you keep reporting gossip as a fact I'll keep reminding young fella me lad.

Why? Or more specifically why do so as a dig?

If this forum has all the gossip stripped out half the posts and half the fun would disappear.

We are mostly smart enough and wise enough to take the 3rd party 4th hand rumours and overheard gossip as speculative. But I wouldn't want to see those contributions stop. At best they generate "what if" type debate and at worst they come to nothing. Where's the harm?

I enjoy reading the contributions of most that post on here including Tad and yourself, I don't take anything as gospel until it is confirmed by the club, but it is good to get involved in some of the debates that result. (But not those that drone on for 40 pages moving in ever decreasing circles, Morning Smokey, Printer and Gotcha).

I agree with Tomcat entirely. Even though he can't quote properly

plus I've never said anything as fact. just what ive been told by the odd person I know in and out of the game. generates discussion but hey, you want to have a pop fill your boots

"Statistics show that Tad's rumours tend to be correct about 37.6% of the time, making him one of the most successful rumour generators on the forum. That kind of performance surely has to put him in the frame for Rumour Generator of Steel come the end of the season" - Phil Clarke.

But how many play the balls did he have?

The rugby gods will punish him for that rumour

Where is Wheels when you need a good rumour putting to bed

They can post rumours about signings and what not. Clark coming to Leeds, whether it happens or not it seems logical that we'd try go for him.

When they post the Brierly one and people say they don't think Leeds would wait until Leigh's fate is resolved....they shouldn't get their knickers in a twist if people explained why they don't think that one will happen.

If you're going to post transfer rumours then you should have a thick enough skin to accept some won't believe it.