We replaced Tansey with Buderus and Toopi (who didn't play anyway) with Watkins and Gibson.

This is what happens when you commit to a youth policy. Players come up through the ranks to replace departing players.

We have to accept that sometimes the players coming through will take time to adjust or may not even make it. However, it's a good policy and one that has paid rich dividends so why depart from it?

Yeah I know fella, lets hope it doesn't fall through.

Your second point, agreed although i would have thought given the players released and not replaced we'd have enough room (Ellis, Tansey, Scruton, Toopi) granted Buderus wouldn't have been cheap but still thats 4 out and only one in, unless we are still paying for toopi giving that he had a year left on his contract ?

IMHO there's enough in this squad to see us through the season and to be in there at the end to fight for the big 1 at OT.
I agree with DHM.G1 and the rest that we should keep faith with our system and there's no point signing someone for the sake of it.
Gh has proved beyond doubt imo that he knows how to control the purse strings and they are ready to be opened as and if/when the quality required becomes available.

The buderus deal was signed before ellis rejected his offer and signed for wests.
We had also agreed terms for soliola before his injuries as well as eastwood so we have plenty of cap space.
We will though have to start looking new deals for the likes of smithy,ablett,kirke,gibson,donald off the top of my head and senior may still decide he wants another year.

Agreed. Excellent post. Some very valid points there. Watkins has a huge future we must look after him and not burn him out. The powers that be at hq will no doubt be well aware.

Its' very relevant to this discussion so I will borrow TVOC's post from another thread.

rlhttp://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?t

Yes true, smith and donald in particular should be no1 priorites to keep, i doubt we'll retain all 5/6 though.

have we? i dont think its right to say that Tansey was a rotation hooker, he wasnt, he gave us cover at half, wing, fullback and hooker, buderus is an out and out hooker, a vastly better one but an out and out hooker,

you say we replaced Toopi with Watkins and Gibson but we havent, we have replaced him with Ablett, who is clearly filling in, and it seems to be hampering his progress imo as a 2nd rower imo,



because i dont think we are doing what we did before, when Mathers came through he ousted Connolly, a good experienced pro, when Burrow came through he was at hooker and halfback, but he had Dunneman to learn from, Bailey came through with a big experienced pack, so did JJB, Diskin came through behind jackson and Mears, even Walker came through with Senior, and Behind Carroll,

Watkins is being asked from a very very young age, to step up, giving him a year or so behind a quality player isnt going to harm him, similarly if Ablett is our replacement for ellis ( i dont think eastwood ever was supposed to be, he will probably be more of a replacement and improvement on Scruton) then he needs to be playing 2nd row when he does it

Yes, tansey was cover at those positions but when he played in the firsts he played rotation hooker, the vast majority of the time.

We're not lacking depth in those other positions. In fact, our over at full back is doing a sterling job (Smith) our Cover at wing is going OK and played a big role in our GH win (Hall).

In reality, Buderus gives us what the team has been desperately lacking and searching for since newton/Jackson. Now we may have lost some depth in other positions (I don't think we really have) but we've fixed a glaring weakness in another.

We have. They may not play there all the time due to age and recovery from injury but in most of this season's games Ablett has played back row.

Besides, did Toopi really need replacing?

We're not the same as before though. before we were building to where we are. We needed old heads like Dunneman and Connolly. Now the spine of the team are champions produced from the Academy. Our needs are very different.

Watkins is being asked to step up. He looks like he can handle it. Personally, I think learning his trade in and around the first team will do him (and us) more good than him walking over inferior opponents in the senior Academy.

The coaching staff seem to think the same. They're handling him well by playing him from the bench in some games and the outset in others.

Quote: G1 "Its' very relevant to this discussion so I will borrow TVOC's post from another thread. rlhttp://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?t'" There is a saying along the lines of "the Devil can quote scripture to suit his own needs" forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... c&start=30

Quote: G1 "Its' very relevant to this discussion so I will borrow TVOC's post from another thread. rlhttp://forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?t'" There is a saying along the lines of "the Devil can quote scripture to suit his own needs" forums.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php? ... c&start=30

Buderus will play 9 but he can cover 13 aswell if needs be.
We have hall,donald,broughton,smith and gibson/watkins that can play wing.
The centre's are covered by senior,smith,gibson,watkins,ablett and ratu.
Fb we have webb,smith,bjb and broughton has played acadamy there and donald has been used there in emergancies.
At 6 and 7 we have burrow,mcguire,sinfield plus disko has covered there.
Props we have peacock,kylie,bailey,burgess and young ambler.
At 9 we have buderus,diskin and mcshane.
SR,we have kirke,jjb,ali,worrall,peacock and bailey(don't be surprised to see liam brown used this season).
At 13 we have sinfield,ablett,jjb and buderus to cover.
Bluey stated at the start of the year he wanted more versatility within the squad and we have got it.
If eastwood does come that's another one for back row or prop.
We also have danny allan who covers a variety of positions.
So the squad has evolved imo and the likes of tansey and scruton have easily been replaced,and we will hopefully have ellis's replacement with us if not it's not a disaster or season threatening.

were abit short on 6 and 7 dont you think? what if we were to lose burrow, mcguire and sinfield, then who can cover there?