This BW sums up the point I was trying to make and where LTS's post falls down (IMO).

We (the Club) surely didn't come to the conclusion that we would all be better off 'just' swapping Clark for Dwyer.

I'm not sure what it is I've said wrong.

Clark leaving was a financial decision. The club offered Clark a 2 year deal and wouldn't give him 3 years. That is 100% true. The club wanted to keep him but not at the expense of a 3 year deal. The same thing happened with Chris Hill.

They therefore, by not offering Clark an extra year, allowed him sign at Saints who were offering him 3 years. When it became apparent that he had agreed a deal at Saints, the club then chose to sign Brad Dwyer.

I don't see how the statement about Walker subsequently then becoming our starting hooker holds any relevance or significance. They still replaced Daryl Clark with Brad Dwyer. Burgess didn't rate Dwyer and then signed Sam Powell to replace him.

At times we have 13 players on the field who are ineffective in defence , such is the hot & cold nature of the squad.

Spot on.

I like Powell but I'm taking Clark all day every day. He was an absolute machine for us who always gave 100% and ran his guts to water every week, often playing through the pain barrier, the ultimate professional and always reliable. If there's anyone that deserved re-signing over the last 10 years it was him.

I'd say that we replaced Clark with Walker, (promoting him to starting 9 or not guaranteeing Clark a start take your pick) and replaced Walker with Dwyer subsequently Powell, it's not quite the same thing

I agree in principle and think I've stated this earlier in the thread but I'm not privy to the finer details.

Whilst any contractual arrangement needs to be fair, it does need to suit both parties, ultimately the Club needs to assess against the needs of others and the squad as a whole salary cap, future recruitment, and player development from the junior ranks.

clark had a good game for saints at the weekend, i've watched all their other games, he's been on the bench, i'm far from a massive walker fan, but i'd rather have walker at the moment, than clark for 3 years.

Also, the usual suspects who are complaining now, would be the first to jump on the club, if we'd signed him on a 3 yr deal, and he was e. as i've said before, with some people, they just can't win.

just to say, powell's better games for us have been when he's been playing 13, as first receiver/link man, and probably a better person shifting the ball than currie has been.

I would have rather had Walker starting and Clark on the bench.

Nah there wouldn’t have been many people miffed off with Clark getting another deal. It’s hardly comparable to Ratchford being offered another deal say.

Wasted Dc at Wire, he had all the necessary tools to be a world class player, unfortunately Wire dinner give him the opportunity to showcase himself. It was the right time to let him go, he had looked knackered for about 3 years now.

One player who my mate reckoned Wire should have resigned was Blake Austin, he said Austin would have been a brilliant 13 for a couple of seasons.

nah, size wise maybe, he didn't want to tackle and he was incredibly rigid in terms of game plan.

And looks a better 13 than Clark is when Walker came on.
At least he seems to enjoy the role when moved from 9.

Jenna asking Nicholson if he's staying or going threw me off, I thought it was confirmed awhile ago he's off to Canberra?

****Ahh just watching it it all now and sam just said he is off, thought it was old news ha ha

Matty Ashton new contract to offset some of the pain, to be announced as far as I know.

Nope hadnt been confirmed by either club just heavily repeated itk and paper talk

Well it’s official now and we have made an offer for Rhyse Martin.