In defence, possibly.
Behind a decent pack, he'll make Billy Slater look slow and clumsy in attack

A post proving beyond any doubt that Happy Hour and Forums should never be mixed!!

Awfully sorry, I was following your lead ... I thought random outbursts on unprovable opinions were today's norm.

Everyone has an opinion and if you believed most of them on RL forums or in the RL press, you'd end up believing that England have the best pack in the world, the best winger in the world, the golden boot best player in the world and a full back who is better than Australia's finest! How can England not be a shoe-in for the RLWC?

OTOH, I reckon there's more chance of another RFL inquiry being set up after the event, just like there was after the 2008 World Cup, and the one before that!

It's not like you to make a grammatical error.

You are saying that star players don't increase crowds - I also like to see some robust that supports that. Why is it that the top sides in any sport command the biggest crowds of the home clubs they visit? People want to see star players

There's a difference between a top team and top players. Top teams are top teams because they have top players, so there will be a link. I'm just suggesting that it's not quite as direct as big crowds turning up to see specific individuals. Wigan are doubtless a bigger draw than most. But will that be measurably less true if Sam Tomkins leaves?

It makes you wonder why Tiger Woods can command such massive appearance money?

golf isn't a team sport. tompkins may be a big player but he's just part of a team

There's also a difference between top players and star players.

So are you saying Lionel Messi was playing in Leeds no one would turn up to watch him they would only turn up to watch Barcelona?

No argument from me. It's their effect on attendances that we're debating isn't it?

And neither of can prove one way or the other so this is just intellectual my dad is bigger than your dad