Leighs chairman has publicly stated that the clause allowing Brierley to leave is illegal and cannot be enforced.

As a matter of course all player registrations are held by the RFL, aren't they? So even if Brierley were to walk he couldn't just turn out for another team unless Leigh decided not to contest it.

Been told Brierley is going to sign for Leeds & Sutcliffe going to spend the season at Fev

Hey ho! Here we go

Im sure Sutcliffe will be extemely happy with that

But wasn't blindly believing "the horse's mouth" the reason you gambled away your house?
And knowing now that your predicted done deal was no such thing why believe Mr Ed again now?

With the injuries we are getting recently there is more chance of:

6 Lilley
7 Brierley
9 Burrow
13 Sutcliffe

With Falloon coming off the bench.

He was a bit bigger when he played 13 every game if you remember, he struggled a bit when he played there last year
Also when he played 13 we basically just played with 3 halves, which is why in many big games burrow or Mcguire would start on the bench so our forwards could get a roll on
the roll of 13 is completely different now, if we were to play Sutcliffe there we would need 3 props on the bench plus a big second row to stop the opposition getting a roll on
For me our best starting 13 option is Singleton- basically a prop with quick feet

Times have changed re the loose forward position. Especially if we're playing Burrow at hooker, we can't have 4 halves defending at the same time. When we had Sinfield at 13 we had Diskin at 9 most of the time doing some cracking defensive work.

Why would Hudds be trying to negotiate with Leigh anyways? You said he was a Leeds player now and was merely on loan at Leigh this year so surely they should be asking us not Leigh.

Because deals with other clubs are not known about, just like when Leeds went in for Clark even though he'd already agreed to go to Warrington. Things are put in place and not public knowledge.

Times have changed, and why Burrow is no longer suited to the modern game.

Personally don't like the changes with the 13's, preferred the old ball handlers. But for now I actually think it will be Mullally who might claim that 13 spot for us. From what I hear, he has exceeded expectations at the club, and coaches and players alike are very impressed with him.

Maybe Mullally might get a run on Sunday?

I think Burrow can still have an impact in the modern game but off the bench. I still think there's a place for him but it means you can't put another ball player at 13. We can't go with, for instance:
6. McGuire
7. Lilley

9. Burrow

13. Sutcliffe

There's just too many light defenders in there to cover.
If people want Sutcliffe at 13 then you've got to have a strong defender at hooker. Even then it's still a stretch at times to cover 3 players when most teams are only covering 2.
I'm 100% for attacking, skillful, passing/offloading rugby. But that has to be balanced with enough attacking and defensive grunt, or all that skill won't get used. I think some people forget that our pack was fantastic last season and it was having that fantastic pack that enabled the likes of McGuire, Moon, Watkins, Hardaker etc to show their skill. I think people are focussing on the loss of Sinfield, whereas I think the combined loss of Leuluai and Peacock will be just as big.


I agree, I also preferred having another ball player at 13 but I suppose that role has been taken by the full back now instead leaving 13 free to be either a workhorse or a battering ram.
I've heard the same re Mullally. His attitude seems to be good from what I've heard.