Agree with a lot of whst youve said Sally - particularly how he handled himself when being told he was going on loan - no bottom lip, no dummies spat out.

Not sure about the comparison with Forster though.

As you say not at the Hicks or Monas level (but no other Wire winger in SL has been) but certainly in the next band.

Good thread this.

Looking back at Riley, he did benefit from playing in a good team and with good centres… but he was, at the time viewed as a weak link… which was probably a bit harsh. he was certainly better than a lot that came after him.

As for cooper, let’s not throw platitudes around too easily. He was a good steady prop, who left on a sour note and contributed to the mess of last season, to the point where the current coach couldn’t get him out of the door fast enough.

Hill was one of the top props in the league for a decade and a consummate professional who gave his all. The two are not comparible.

You only have to follow Riley on Twitter to see how much it means to him to have represented his town club and how grateful he is for his experiences. I'm not sure if he has much involvement with the club nowadays but it's the sort of attitude that would surely be a positive influence on the younger guys coming through.

Interesting points, MD. I agree with you about Chris Riley. I never viewed him as a weak link, and actually thought he was unlucky not to remain with us for longer. Was he moved on when we signed Matty Russell? I can't recall. As for Hill vs Cooper, I think it's a bit harsh to say they are not comparable. Cooper played over 250 games for us and was very effective, and let's not forget that he also played nearly 70 NRL games and was well regarded over there, which is no mean feat. However, having said that, I do agree with you that Hill was superb for us for a decade, and was the better of the two in my opinion.

I like both of them, however I stand by my post.
We ought not to be keeping anyone for sentiment.

Going back to Chris Hill, it might be controversial to say it here but I think his career has a bit of "what if...?" about it, and its connected to him staying with us.

In those early years of his career he looked like he could be a Morley/ Sam Burgess type talent and I bet he could have got picked up by an NRL club. Perhaps if he'd gone to the NRL around 2014/15 and played in a top side, he would have really taken off. Could have had a decade as one of the best front rowers in Aus, would have the status as one of the greats of his era.

Instead he played in a Wire team that was never the same after 2013, even though we made a few finals. I think it was a frustrating experience for him. He was fierce competitor and more than any other player you could see the same frustrations that fans had about us failing to win a Grand Final building up year after year and with Hill it would bubble over on the pitch. It felt like for much of his final 4 years with us he was in a bad mood. He wasn't the most cool headed player so I wouldn't have had him as captain but you cannot knock his desire and commitment and there was an authenticity in his behaviour that you knew that he really wanted to win, he wasn't just going through the motions drawing a pay cheque. But also that frustration distracted him and took the edge off his game, he wasn't the same player in those last few years that he was when he joined.

He has had a decent career anyway and he will always be respected as a fine prop forward - for me there's just a nagging thought that Hill was a good enough player to be up with the greats of the game and part of the reason he didn't hit those heights was because he stayed with us.

The point about Hill’s frustration is well made SC.

Yes, imo it wasn't right for Hill or the club for him to be made captain.

I'm not close enough to the team to know, but as an outsider looking in, I wouldn't have picked Hughes either. I'd have gone with Ratch, but maybe it was something to do with him and Price, and when Powell came in he knew he had bigger issues to address without adding a change of captaincy into the mix.

I do think sometimes those in the camp can be too close to make objective decisions.

Hill was a fine forward for us, no doubt, consistently high performances though never a captain in a million years. The one thing I think he lacked in his game (when compared to Morley or Sam Burgess) was the the gladiatorial element that top forwards seem to possess. The ability to intimidate opponents with an on field aura backed up by massive, bone shaking tackles. Morley had this in spades.

i'd sum it up like this, chris hill was a fine prop, but he wasn't your number one guy, but put him with your number one guy and you're gonna have a fearsome front row, same thing with sims, he wasn't a lead prop forward, he's a good guy a good club man, but he's not the one who will lead the line for you

Morley ,one sunny afternoon in Huddersfield. I bet Big Eorl still has nightmares.

I thought Hill was our best prop in his first couple of seasons when we also had Morley, Carvell and Paul Wood so at that point I would have said he was number one even in a fearsome front row.

Chris Hill better than Morley in 2012?

It's true Morley was not the force he was when he joined 4 years earlier but that's a big statement.

It's almost hardly worth the comparison. Morley wouldn't have been as effective without all the grafting Hill was doing, and Hill wouldn't have been as effective without the bashing and bullying Morley was doing. You need both in a top team.