Agreed. Our back line looks better with Foster coming in and Blythe who can play centre. Purtell is back from a long time out. Gale and Sammut are more settled. Foster offers a kicking alternative. Whitehead is not starting with a five match ban. Evans and Sidlow offer more than Kopczak and Burgess IMO. Bateman another year older and Donaldson at full fitness is like a whole new signing. We won't concede as many penalties too now that Elima is away.

Add to the fact that the uncertainty is over then I would argue we are a bit stronger. Scruton returning also seems to have been overlooked too.

I wasn't too worried about the forthcoming season, but your unbounded optimism is a cause for concern, I put it down to your burgeoning friendships with TT &FA!

We're considerably weaker in the forwards. We lost 3 out of our best 4 props plus our biggest and best second rower.

We've recruited a kid who hasn't played Super League plus a lad they're happy to release at Salford. There are positives - Blythe and Purtell is potentially very strong on the right side but the pack is a shadow of last year.

you missed from your analysis the superior tackle and missed tackle rates of Sidlow compared to Mason, another reason for preferring him given the pack does look weak but FC commenting in the tna article about Sidlows offloads may be an indicator of his priorities, offence the best form of defence. His tackle bust rate is much much higher than Mason too.

Blotto, I have never waivered. I say it as I see it. Some agree, some don't. It is all about opinions TBF.

We have lost Burgess, Hargreaves and Kopczak, not Fielden, Peacock and Anderson in all fairness. Hardly irreplaceable. More game time from Scruton will more than make up for Kopczak, Sidlow should offer more than Burgess and we also have the addition of Evans too.

As for Elima best second row? Matter of opinion of course but I cannot agree. Penalty machine cost us more yards than he made last season. Bateman is a more than capable replacement.

I think a lot of this season will come down to luck on the injury front. We've got a decent starting 17 but a few injuries, particularly in the pack and we'll struggle. That said we're in a better position that I thought we would be in after last year, which is a credit to the efforts of the club.

Elima and Hargreaves will be big losses to our pack in my opinion. Overall the pack is weaker but we're probably slightly improved in the backline with Blythe and Foster replacing Ainscough/Pryce/Crookes. Get our strongest 17 out and we look well in the mix for the 8, but 3 or 4 injuries to the key players and we look in trouble. Lets not forget BJ either, he was in superb form for us at times during last season.

Ideally I'd love to see another Prop brought in and perhaps another option at halfback but I just don't think they quality is out there right now. Perhaps some players will unexpectedly become available but if not we'll just have to be patient and get through the season the best we can.

Tend to agree with that. Lets face it we're in a lot better shape than we could be given wht we've been through. Other thing that people are overlooking is likes of Bateman,whitehead,Olbison,addy etc being a year older and more experienced. IMO their all better players now than they were at start of last season and that can only help us.

I think that will be the crucial element to our campaign next season. Overall our starting seventeen is not [ithat[/i dissimilar in quality to last season but we do seem to have a thinner reserve strength.

In the argument about whether we're better with or without Elima, I agree he did give away more than his share of penalties but on the other hand he provided a lot of the 'mongrel' in the side, I feel we'll miss that, since looking down the side, I can't see where it's coming from next year.

Attitude wise I'd say Bateman will be main contender but he doesn't have the physical size to back it up yet.

We still may have the option to get a couple of players during the season, we also are twinned with dewsbury so the option is there if we are struggling for players.

Don't think that will be much of a help TBH. The players who would be available would be those who can't get into dewsburys team. No offence to dewsbury but they aren't likely to be much use at SL level.

Agree with that.

The system does work both ways but was clearly (and rightly, imo) expected to mainly benefit the lower league club and also to provide some games for SL contracted players who weren't getting a game under the new junior and A team set up in SL. Though, if we get our normal luck with injuries it probably won't bring much value to Dews either....

I thought we were Warrington's feeder club?