Just like you point out with Graham at the Bulldogs, who had previously captained Saints. So leadership within a playing group is as much to do with age and experience as it is "leadership ability". Which is why Thompson isn't captain yet.

That doesn't mean if Graham moved to another NRL club he couldn't do to his new team mates what he did during the playoffs. And doesn't mean that burns coming in to Saints doesn't mean he can't be part of the senior leadership team.

Barrett spoke his mind, just as Green did, and Wigan are missing now ...

You've completely lost me here. Paul Sculthorpe was the Warrington captain. When he came to Saints he [i"kept his head down, played his game and won the confidence of his colleagues"[/i BEFORE he began opening his mouth in any significant way. James Graham was the St. Helens joint captain. When he went to the Bulldogs he [i"kept his head down, played his game and won the confidence of his colleagues"[/i BEFORE he began opening his mouth in any significant way. Neither would DREAM OF blasting a senior player such as Chris Joynt, KC, Paul Wellens, Michael Ennis or Frank Pritchard over a handling error.



Barrett communicated with his players. So did Green. You do understand the distinction, right?

Is anyone else finding the use of bold and underline quite annoying?

Not half as annoying as people's inability to recognise the fundamental distinction between two styles of leadership described in plain English.

Seriously, I can't BELIEVE this thread has dragged on this far.

Maybe your not making your point in a manner that will sway others to agree with you?

Nope. It's definitely because I didn't think ANYONE would think Travis Burns rollocking a senior player over a handling error next week might be a good idea.

Alas, one should never underestimate this universe's ability to unleash novel forms of foolishness.

Excellent post.

And there this "conversation" should end methinks, its not nice to see us squabbling amongst ourselves, especially over something so petty.

Foolishly I read through all seven pages, suffering slow loading of each page due to my dog dirt connection, in the hope of getting to some interesting points about Burns....oh well.

I will, however, support Mugwump's standpoint. What he is saying makes sense. No-one minds the odd bit of shouting, especially as a stand off will likely be moving players around the pitch and it would be unlikely that he would bollock a senior member as readily as he did Vea. In Burn's favour, I have liked his enthusiasm when not directly involved...he looks genuinely thrilled when we've scored or made a special effort in defence...and attitude will take any player a lot further.