As a fan of Corrie, I really hope this is not the end for the Gale-Platt combination.

Do you still think he is a 'class act'?

I got slated months ago for saying he was overrated and an average player, looks like more and more fans are now agreeing. If we really do have our sights set on being a top club, he can't be our first choice 7.

NO, he is rated by any given person, however they rate him. All you are saying is you disagree and that you don't rate him much. That's all fair enough but where you are going wrong is then going on to claim that he IS "overrated" - I'm surprised you didn't add "FACT" as if this was any more than just your opinion.


Can you grasp that we DISAGREE on this point? You saying he is very far from this, or not that, doesn't make it so.


Just waffle and guff. We as a team haven't had a good season. No great use singling anybody out.


He is.


Quite, and I'm sure that would be it. Not "being a top club", which would only move into the sights sometime down the track if we manage to halt the slide and make progress in the other direction.


Where they would have been? Well, they're 12th, so I have no clue what your point is. Could they have done much worse?


No, he is in the SL same as Gale. But you forget it was me who gave the example of Chase, as a good scrum half whose team isn't successful as a result of his presence.

To be honest, I don't remember Ellery Hanley "playing behind a beaten pack every week". In the season when he scored 52 tries we finished half way [8th] in a league of 16 and had forwards such as Jeff Grayshon, Alan Rathbone, Brian Noble, Dick Jasiwicz and Gary Van Bellen in the side; maybe not a [iworldbeating[/i pack overall but it had one or two outstanding individuals and pretty much held its own and, let's face it, no pack with B. Noble at hooker ever lacked ball and similarly, before Nobby we had Keith Bridges, so same applied, really.

I think it's also fair to point out that Ellery probably played more at centre than in the halves back then. I think for those who are really critical of Gale and aren't prepared to accept the various [previously mentioned] problems I suggest just watching replays of our scores and see just how often it's Galey who makes the final pass or creates the opening. There have been plenty of games where I've come away thinking he hadn't really dominated much, only to be surprised how instrumental he had been, when I watched the highlights.

Indeed, and one thing that is different about each scrum half is their individual style. Deacon suffered from exactly the same thing. Some people just want to see a 7 zipping through defences and beating 10 men. If they don't have electric pace then for many they are forever crap, it doesn't matter what they do, it doesn't matter what records they break, it doesn't matter what the team wins. In Deacon's case, his detractors will still tell you we won everything [iin spite of [/ihaving Deacon, not because of him - they aren't capable of getting that scrum halves can skin cats in a wide variety of ways. Gale is not a flashy player and he is suffering and will forever suffer from that same perception amongst those people, who will never rate him, ever, choose what he does.

Of course they wouldn't be in the least bit interested in watching any replays, as they already "know" you're wrong.

Your Wiki skills do you proud,but I watched every game live in that season home and away and Hanley played the vast majority of games at Numero 6.The reason I travelled away to every match in that particular season,even though we got many tonkings from the top sides was to marvel at Hanley's skills.He didn't need a pack that was dominating and created many of the tries he scored himself.The point I am making is that I haven't seen even a glimmer of real talent from Gale,I wish I had.You don't need a fast No 7 just one with some vision/guile and a kicking game.Seabourne wasn't the quickest but his rugby league brain was sEcond to none IMO.
Anyway some rate Gale,that's fine and they are entitled to their opinion as am I and IMO I haven't seen anything that would make me jump up and down with anticipation.

All agreed - but there is no comparison to be made between Hanley and Gale. Or Hanley and anyone else. The main point the case of Hanley demonstrates would be that even with Hanley, who is arguably the greatest player who ever lived, at halfback you aren't necessarily a good side.


How many times, home and away, have you watched him? He's been our MoM in 3 of the 11 games he's started this season. If he doesn't show a glimmer of talent, what does that say about the rest?


Again agreed, it echoes a point I made earlier in relation to Gale. I'd only add that - just as in the case of Deacon - you do need the way the rest of the team plays to be built around the particular strengths of your particular scrum half.


But I don't "jump up and down with anticipation" at seeing Gale either, and it's a pity when just because you back a player as not being crap, some folk then upgrade that into a straw man as if I 'd said Gale was some sort of complete rugby god and genius, so that they can then demolish it. What I said I have seen from Gale is that he undoubtedly possesses class which the majority of players don't, and this has been recognised by better judges than me eg his inclusion in the Knights setup. At the same time his career especially in the last 2 seasons has been badly disrupted both by serious injury, surgery, rehab and personal issues, not to mention the disruption of the club's recent woes and disarray.

Whether he can have a great season, injury free and in a settled and progressive squad, behind a much improved pack, and alongside the likes of Gaskell remains of course to be seen. I for one am sure he can and have every hope he will. Others don't think he's got it in him, and they are of course entitled to that opinion.