Ah Andy, that's not fair and you know it. Nobody is expecting to win it every year but what's happening to us isn't just "not winning it" is it.

Do you think GH actually looks on here? I know somebody from the club does occasionally.

I've always had GH down as a clever man. He surely must've known how the signing of Moore would be received? As many have said, he's not actually a bad player, he's just so far from what we should be signing it's untrue.

It's obvious for most to see that, challenge cup win or not, we're going backwards. Surely GH can see that too? I just don't know what he's thinking. It has got to be the case that there's something we don't know that means it is his best interests to have a quite season or two? That's the only thing I can think of. Let's face it, the man knows HOW to run a Championship winning side, it would just appear that, for whatever reason, he's choosing not to.

I'll ask you a similar question I posed yesterday to someone else (nantwichexile I believe).

If Leeds were of the opinion they needed to recruit a front-rower for next season, who should they have signed that would have been available without a significant transfer fee?

Bearing in mind the way the club has had its fingers burned with overseas recruitment in the last couple of years, where should they have been looking other than at a player of proven SL ability who was available on a free?

Rather than saying what the club shouldn't have done and constantly carping from the sidelines, give us your informed opinion on what they should have done instead.

This one is easy...

I totally agree with what you're saying about picking up Moore, who I've said isn't a bad player, for free.

What Leeds SHOULD'VE done instead, is marketed Moore as such, and NOT introduced him as a "replacement" for the better & younger Burgess.

Headline similar to... "Leeds bolster the pack with experienced Moore", then use words in the article like "squad", "depth" and "injuries".

The problem that most people are having, is that we've lost a 24 year old, improving, best years ahead of him prop (albeit for reasons uncontrollable by us) and gained a 30 year old, best years behind him prop INSTEAD. That's the key bit there. INSTEAD. That's where the "going backwards" bit that people keep mentioning is coming from. Had we signed Moore, cos he was cheap wages, and free transfer AS WELL AS replacing the aforementioned 24 year old, improving, best years ahead of him prop with similar, then that would be going forward.

At risk of labouring the point - does this improving, 24 year old, available prop we should have replaced Burgess with have a name?

That's not my job is it?! I don't watch every game of rugby with the intention of deciding who to recruit.

Can you really not comprehend why replacing an outgoing player with somebody older, and not as good is seen by many as a backwards step?

Kyle Amor fits into all your categories.

My mistake, I thought you were speaking from a position of supreme knowledge and authority.

I'll know better next time.

Give over!

who decides if a players best years are ahead or behind them?

Wasn't JP 29 when we signed him? Didn't Darrell Powell make his Leeds debut at 33?

Given the improvement Amor has made at Wakey wouldn't you of given him first shot at Burgess' squad place AG?
Maybe 1 yr with a 12mth option for Moore with Kylies clear intentions to retire but 3 yrs??
I hope he turns out to be a great signing as i do with all our recruits but at this moment in time with the imminent arrival of Griffin (who i rate much higher than Moore)i don't see why we've signed Moore for 3yrs.

Another easy one...

Me. I decide whether a player's best years are ahead or behind them.

Moore - Behind.

Ask me another.

Haven't seen enough of Amor while he's been at Wakefield to form an opinion, but he looks to have done ok in a poor side. Is he any closer to being ready for a side with ambitions to challenge for honours than he was at this time last year (when I don't think even the most ambitious of his followers would have been campaigning for him to be in the Leeds side)?

People keep talking about Griffin as if it's a done deal - for the time being at least, it isn't. There's still some work to be done between the two clubs, and potentially between the player and the Giants AFAIK.

RE-Amor i think he's improved out of sight from the "rabbit in the head-lights" we saw last year and the Wakey fans want him FT.
In terms of him being ready for a team with top 4 ambitions i'd rather give him a chance as 5th prop before signing Moore because as it stands i see us lining up with JP ,Bailey ,Kylie ,Griffin(AFIK he's still coming)
then of course we've re-signed Kirke and have the potential in Singleton and Syron.
All this and still no apparent room for Ambler so again i don't see why we've signed Moore and even considering kylies retirement next year i'd stll look within the squad before spending money on Moore.
Maybe IF Kylie left at the end of the year and kirke was moving on it would make more sense i personally just don't see it.

I'd rather have Moore than Griffin. I suspect we are getting both. Meh.

I'd rather have either than Ambler, but again - meh.