I don't think the Burrell signing was anything to do with Price, Simon Moran had been speaking to him about a move before Price arrived.

So, Oasis' concert promoter's preferences trump a RL coach's.
If that's the case, our recruitment REALLY IS ####ed

I don’t know where the idea came from that he was to replace Atkins. We bought a lottery ticket. What has Atkins done since leaving? He was never going to be offered the sort of deal he would’ve wanted, ie one more season at most.

Atkins was invited to leave, when we'd already signed Burrell. Price (I assume, more than likely) had Gelling in the pipeline. Both Burrell and Gelling have not worked out well, have they.

Again, our recruitment (on the whole) stinks

Were -4 with Skybet, which is interesting.

I honestly think we should / could have kept Atkins for another year or maybe two.
Burrell is / was a similar age and had no real RL experience.
I appreciate it was maybe an experiment and that his salary doesn't count on the cap, but it does appear to be wasted money nevertheless - either because he's not up to it or because he's not been given the chance. (If he'd have been 25 then that could have been a different story, but then again we probably wouldn't have got him at 25).

With one or two exceptions our recruitment over the last decade hasn't been up to the standards of many other clubs - or maybe it's that the coaching staff have not been able to bring out the best/develop them. Compare our recruitment and development with that of Powell or Watson to name but two.
Clearly there are some exceptions - Hill, Ratch (although a sizable fee was involved for him I think), Hicks (already established in Oz), Coops and Philbin (developed from the academy).

I think Atkins was a very good centre for Wire but I think the key thing here has to be his injuries towards the end of his career. Not sure recruitment of Burrell has anything at all to do with the decision to move Atkins on.
re. Recruitment: Grass often seems greener elsewhere.

Compare our finals and trophies over the same time periods with Powell and watson

Not denying we've been more successful but on the recruitment front and 'bang for the buck' I think we'd be challenged.

You just know when you see a player for a few games wether he’s going to make it and Burrell wasn’t one of them.Another very bad signing.

On the left is my guess as to the team we would have seen, with the replacements due to the dreaded Covid on the right. It would mean three debuts and a fair bit of shuffling around so I don't think we can really expect more than a hard earned defeat unfortunately. Still, it will give the younger players valuable game time and we can at least get an idea of whether they are capable of making the jump to SL standard.



Ratchford
Charnley
Gelling
King ( Mamo)
Lineham
Austin
Widdop
Hill (Latu)
Clark (Walker)
Cooper
Hughes. (King)
Currie
Clark (Clark D)

Philbin (Johnson)
Akaoula. (Robson)
Davis (Wrench)
Ashton (Longstaff)

Patton may play 9?

Yes, good spot, that may well be the better option.

Ashton to full back & Ratchford no.9.

For a handful of games Luther managed to put himself in the right place at the right time for a couple of tries. Toby only managed to score his first try of the season last week. ,but of the two, King is definitely more creative. Burrell has so far come across as a supporting player but is that all he was allowed to be ,have we seen his best ?

I know Sita was on paternity last week, why is he not in this weeks squad?

On a positive note, at least we may get a glimpse of Latu tonight

Think he's probably playing it safe to avoid bringing Covid into his household.

We've now lost another player to the Covid Testing. 9 missing in total if you include Ben and Sita.

Wire still favourites with bookies, I'd be amazed if we win this game.

Been told the player in question will be noticeable when the line ups announced....not sure who it is though

Can imagine it's Daryl given his level of involvement - but this is just speculation.

My money would be on Daz....although could be Cooper maybe...

Hull are still +4 WTF

The six who were stood down after the match review have all returned negative tests however a seventh player, who wasn't originally thought to be at risk, has come up positive. There's nothing to say that they actually caught the virus during the game - so it could be anyone.

I'd be more concerned that, now the virus is within the camp, we may see other players testing positive next week.

Agreed, If the virus is in camp, we shouldn't be playing tonight in my view. Otherwise we could see Hull FC shielding from exposure to Warrington players next week, and the cycle could just continue throughout Superleague each week with whoever Hull FC play the week after.

It's in our camp, so the RFL should cancel the game to eliminate the risk of passing it on to Hull FC.