hopefully potter will wave his magic wand and make Worrincy and Hall disappear, up there with two of the worst forwards to play for the bulls in SL! However Hall was in his first season so if he improves my opinion may change hypocritically

Point out what's wrong with what I have said then. I'm obviously not trying to compare the two as players, but Worrincy missed less tackles and made less errors than Westwood, that's a fact.

T&a have just published a provisional 25 man squad, the article says not to read anything in to the numbering, but no reason given for worrincy's ommission :

Provisional squad numbers: 1 Michael Platt, 2 Dave Halley, 3 Paul Sykes, 4 Chev Walker, 5 Patrick Ah Van, 6 Brett Kearney, 7 Marc Herbert, 8 Nick Scruton, 9 Heath L’Estrange, 10 Andy Lynch, 11 Olivier Elima, 12 Elliott Whitehead, 13 Jamie Langley, 14 Wayne Godwin, 15 Bryn Hargreaves, 16 Matt Diskin, 17 Craig Kopczak, 18 Ian Sibbit, 19 Shaun Ainscough, 20 Gareth Raynor, 21 Glenn Hall, 22 James Donaldson, 23 Danny Addy, 24 Steve Crossley, 25 Tom Olbison.

No sign of Shad Royston on that list

Nor Vinnie Finnigan. Jason Crookes or, as mentioned, Mike Worrincy

Hmmm.....

Obviously these aren't the actual shirt numbers that the players will wear next year but it is interesting to see that neither Sculthorpe or Worrincy are included in the provisional 25 man squad but Olbison for example has. When the names are listed like that, you realise just how many players we have for next year. Makes you wonder if we may still have a few departures.

I expect all will be revealed in due course.

Are we only allowed 25 players? Why bother publishing a provisional list if it doesn't mean anything? Mmmmmm...

Yes, it seems a bit odd.

We must be allowed more than 25 because numbers often go higher... into the 30's

There's bound to be speculation as to why Royston, Sculthorpe, Worrincy, Crookes and Finnigan aren't on the list.

As for not reading anything into the numbers, well, that is bound to happen isn't it? If they really wanted the numbers to be insignificant they could have made a 25 man training squad and listed them alphabetically. Why bother putting out what looks like a fairly obvious starting pack in the 8-13 slots if there is NO significance in the numbering.

Perhaps they just wanted to create a bit of a talking point amongst the fans

As I understand it we have to nominate a 25 man 1st team squad to RFL from which we pick our 17 each week. we can make changes to this 1st team squad during year but have to notify RFL of the changes each time.

this shouldn't be confused with the 25 players over 25k rule which is for salary cap purposes and isnt necessarly the same 25 players who make up the 1st team squad. This rule is that we are allowed 25 players on 25k a year or more and then another 50k worth off players on top as long as total is less than salary cap.

I have never known this happen before. Whenever we have announced our squad in the past it has always been with actual squad numbers. I dont see the relevance of this unless like you say they do represent possible thinking. Eg Platt at FB. Seems strange Royston hasnt a nuber unles we just had to include so many home grown players

is this squad actually from the bulls or speculation on connors part? I know it says its from bulls in article cut seems strange that it hasnt gone up on bulls website or any other sports websites.

I wonder if the we have to provide the RFL with our 25 man playing squad by a certain date and thats what this one is, other though I has was that this probably is our 25 highest earners so maybe its the salary cap 25 players over 25k squad?

Platt at FB in itself is strange as the squad lists appears at the end of an article about platt where he talks about playing in .

Unless of course Kearney will revert to FB once we sign this messianic stand-off...?

thats what im hoping. I'd rather we sign an average standoff and play kearney in his strongest position rather than go down route of trying to turn him into a standoff again. And tbh I put royston in at FB before platt if kearney wasnt available.

if this were from the bulls it must have a small amount of what they are thinking for the squad....why would they publish it otherwise?! I know there isnt much point in looking into it but if it was the squad....halley on the wing scares me when we have ainscough and raynor who in my opinion are much better!

TBH, I wouldn't be surprised if there's not some RFL rule about having to announce a preliminary squad. There seems to be no correlation between the numbers given, the signings we've made and where certain players play.

It's probably just a throw away bit of info that'll actually bare little resemblance to the official squad numbers

For one thing, it can't be proper squad numbers as 21 is issued, which is of course a retired shirt. And somehow I don't see them un-retiring Konkrete's shirt for Glenn Hall.