Never rated him as more than a good super league player. Not sure why.

If you give me the option of Ratchford in his prime at fullback or Hodgson. I am taking Hodgson comfortably.

Matt King or Chris Bridge in their primes are centre or Ratchford. I am taking King and Bridge.

Theres a reason the NRL have never showed much interest. Just think he lacks the electric pace of a pre injury sam tomkins. Lacks strength, prone to errors and I dont think he has the rugby brain of a Brett hodgson.

But i must be bias against him for some reason because a lot of people seem to rate him highly.

To me if he was the best fullback, centre, stand off available to england. It would highlight a lack of quality in those areas.

Tommy Conroy was a good fullback.

might also explain that gesture he'd do, run past a player who was tackled waiting for an offload that never came.

That thing he'd do with his hands gesturing.


that transfers to a punter expectant of a downpour of ten pence pieces landing on the floor

Nothing sinister meant here, but is Lee Penny still a bachelor?

I'm just wondering if he's ever made a pass at a woman.
He certainty never made one to a team mate.

Personally, I always thought Penny was a great full back.

Lee Penny was made a bit of a scapegoat by Cullen.
I felt Penny was poorly treated and poorly rewarded by the club in his testimonial season and yet Danny Farrah was carried around the ground like some legendary alll time great.

Lee Penny was popular because he played for the club for a while and he gave good honest effort.

But if we're honest, he would never have been good enough for a top side. He didn't offer enough. He was solid and safe, robust tackler and reliable under the high ball. Not a player that opposition teams could target as a weakness. That should be just a bare minimum for a fullback. He didn't have any kind of agility, never passed, his pace was OK but nothing special. He rarely beat a man. I remember one year DVDV started putting Allan Hunte there, and we looked much more dangerous because although Huntey had a few flaws he was much more dynamic and I thought this is how we need to move forwards. After Hunte it was Appo (before he moved to stand-off to replace an injured Briers), who was similarly more dangerous. You could see the writing on the wall because Penny was becoming obsolete as the game moved on.

The other issue with Penny was he never seemed to get any better than when he first emerged. He came out in a good class of players around the time Harris, Scully, Hilton and Roper came through so it felt like the future was bright, and a young Penny ran in a lot of tries. But as his career went on he was just....Penny. You knew what you got. Contrast say to Jon Clarke who I thought early on was a similar level of steady-unspectacular player, but as his career went on he became a better player, in more than one position, and Clarke reached a time when he was probably a top 10% player in the league.

I get why people like LP but for me he was the definition of average, and one thing that rankles about being a Wire fan is that we have preferred to dwell in the realm of average than shoot higher.

To take lefty's critique: "we're too nice". How many years do you think Penny would have lasted at Wigan, Saints, Leeds? Would their fans have regarded him as fondly as ours?