But it was handled very well on that occasion, and if only we could engineer a similarly beneficial deal this time round, then I'd be doing cartwheels around Odsal. The case of which you speak is a shining example of how a club can turn such a situation to its advantage.

The other thing that hasn't changed over the years is that there is no point in picking a player who doesn't want to play for the club, and Cummins is bang right about that.

Why would you want him back.

Most comments i have read suggested he was a defensive liability

The stats speak for themselves Durham.

Defensive liability

Stats speak for themselves(Oh Dear)--Stats and damn Stats springs to mind.

On that basis the team will be better off without Eliot and surely you don't expect a fee for such a poor player?icon_smile.gif))))

Win Win then innit?

Go you!

Nice and to the point.

But all you have actually said is that he has a deal lined up, which most have already suggested, & that there is more to it than has been disclosed. Hardly Sherlock Holmes.

He's still a young player and has plenty of ability, particularly going forward. It's true to say that defence isn't his forté, but there is no reason why that couldn't be fixed, though his form has dropped a bit recently. Form of course is temporary..

If he apologizes and grovels and earns the trust of his team-mates again then I would have him back based on what he brings in attack. He is a defensive liability but then again so is Sammut. But he would have to earn his place in the team and prove he will give it 110% effort for the cause.

Chevs seems to be abit liable to the rash challenge that he come off worse with and a few missed tackles

I think my point still stands, the players agents have more influence than you think, and if Elliot didn't want to play for Dewsbury, there are easy ways to get round this.

As for making the childish remarks regarding me making "serious aspersions", I don't think anything I have said is either a million miles away from the truth. If a player (not just Whitehead btw) didn't want to play in and fixture, it easy to fool the medical staff, they can only diagnose based on the symptoms. Medical experts would be stupid to ignore a players symptoms (even if they are false).

I think i'm going to pick my future discussions with care, as some individuals are more interested in quoting (and sometimes misquoting) posts, just so that they can happily look down their nose and show all that they are 'The Man'!

But you don't know what I think. It would seem obvious that like any other job, some agents will be good, some crap, and depending on the player may have more or less influence.


But who are you argiung with, I already said players are not slaves, they cannot be forced to do anything.


You know children that have conversations about "serious aspersions"? What, in between neurosurgery classes? Maybe there's hope for Gove's education system yet, then. But yes, it was widely reported that a report as to his mental state had been received and the evidence (whatever it was) had been accepted by the Bulls.

The Bulls stated'There are valid but strictly confidential reasons why Matt Orford is unable to return to the UK ...
'With the player’s permission these reasons have been shared in confidence with the RFL'"