Do you just pluck this stuff out of thin air and then state it as fact?

BJB hasn't played more games at full back than Tomkins. Tomkins has played 24 SL games for Wigan at full back, BJB has played 14 for Quins & 2 for Leeds. Playing for Leeds or Wigan at full back with the exposure, attention & pressure that comes from playing in big games in front of big crowds is a lot different to playing for Quins at full back.

I also didn't say we should forget BJB, I said we should ease him in.

So on reflection your post couldn't have been more wrong had you been talking to Phil Daly while driving the wrong way up a 1 way street.

A reference to the Dykes / Cuckoos / whatever they're called ?

Whoops! My apologies.

I thought they'd signed Trent.

But they've re-signed Brent.

Widnes must be gutted.

Or Leeds & district!

Doesn't take long for the old Danny to press the self destruct button does it?

But trying to be funny, check your facts first. BJB has started 4 times at fullback for Leeds and moved into the postion on another 3 occassions. Which when added to the 14 you talk of for Quins, which it should be added he also switched to fullback in on another 3 occassions (but I'll let you off), that makes 21 times (or 24 if you add the quins switch). Hardly a difference with him and Tomkins .

As seem as number of games rather than ability seems to matter most to you, which would you rather have at fullback, Tomkins or Mathers?

A little disappointing, but 12 months isn't terrible for Webb or Leeds (Senior is another matter though, and should NOT be retained in a playing capacity).

I think much depends on the scale of the deal. It was suggested on here that Leeds broke their pay structure to keep Webb when his last contract was negotiated, due to a large bid from Warrington. If this is true, I suspect that the renegotiated deal is on reduced terms given Webb's blunted impact since his serious back injury. Webb on a reduced deal could be a very good bit of business for Leeds, but I have no way of knowing whether or not this is the case. Hopefully this will still free up a bit more space for further additions to the backline - a skillful & athletic centre being top priority.

I doubt he'll ever be the same player again but still has the skill if not the pace or physicality. Perhaps Leeds wouldn't have needed to do this if BJB and Watkins weren't so injury prone and had longer runs to establish themselves.

Hopefully this is not a sign that we'll see a re-run of last year's 'Magnificent Seven' announcement... I have a bad feeling that we'll be keeping more players that should be let go though.

I'm as keen as anyone to refresh the side with youth, and like I said, I would like to see BJB given his chance soon. But there is a tendency to start writing players off when they pass 30 and have picked up a couple of injuries. It's good to have youth in the side but there has to be a balance of youth and experience, and there still aren't many better than Webb in SL. In saying that, It is time to let Senior and Ali go with our best wishes, otherwise we really do become 'Dad's army'.

Is a pattern emerging? It seems that an increasing number of our players are being retained on 1 or 2 year deals, many of which are presumably on reduced terms. At the same time players are being allowed to terminate contracts without the previous demands for compensation etc. Is this merely a lowering of ambition, or could Caddick be hoping to sell? I'm assuming a prospective buyer would be more attracted if they were able to release unwanted staff without incurring exhorbitant costs associated with terminating lengthy and lucrative contracts.

Much ado about nothing I reckon.

I think a years extension for a player of Webb's calibre is good business on the part of GH, and provides quality cover should any of BJB/Watkins/Hardaker actually fulfill their potential next season, and claim the full back position on merit.