Clarke should be nowhere near the team.

Higham is a better option as an interchange hooker, and we also have youngsters who should be ahead of him as a substitute for the back row positions.

Still can't believe he was given a four year deal, a scandalous decision and one that Tony Smith would never have made.

Again! He picked him to play internationals.

doesnt mean he would have given him a 4 year deal though does it,imo and only mine i reckon even when fit again he would need at least a month in the reserves to get some game time under his belt again,sl is that close this season that anyone not up to speed would have a detrimental effect on the team thus giving the boo boys more ammo.not a great fan of clarkes but i would sooner see him as a fast running second row/loose coming off the bench and there are worse out there (somewhere)!!!!

He got picked for England simply because of the lack of available hookers, i stand to be corrected here but i seem to remember we had quite a few injuries at the time, Newton was injured, i think Higham was injured as well, i think their was a problem with Diskin and if memory serves me right James Roby`s wife was about to give birth and he made himself unavailable. I thought he was average at best against a weakened kiwi side.

Newton was dropped for Clarke wasn't he? Don't recall him being injured.

correct and diskin just wasn't selected.

Thats why i said i stood to be corrected as i wasn`t 100% sure, i think it was the year after that Newton fractured his cheekbone towards the back end of the season. Diskin was an odd one as he had been in good form for Leeds.

My initial thought is that Clarke will be taking up a pretty large portion of the salary cap to play as 3rd, or maybe joint 2nd, choice hooker. Based on that I would rather, if we can find a club and terms agreeable to all, offload Clarke.

However, I prefer to go into a game with a bench consisting of 2 props, a hooker and a utility player (preferabley a forward). On reflection, and having read some comments on this thread, Jon Clarke is an ideal utility interchange. As has been said he can cover halfback, second row, loose and (obviously) hooker.

Given a choice between VAnderson or Clarke as 17th man I would take Clarke every time. The more likely choice between Clarke or Grix as 17th man is far more difficult and I suspect would depend very much on the opposition, weather/ground conditions and probably most importantly, minor (ie players can still play but...) injuries to any of the other 16.

This whole Jon Clarke business is exactly the same as with Mike Wainwright a few years back. The typical blinkered Wire fan cannot & will not see what the player brings to the team, because he doesn't make 50 yard scoots from the ptb or throw out wonder passes to the 3/4 line he doesn't seem worthy of the mentions. What Clarke will bring to the starting lineup is a steadying influence allowing the forwards to build the platform before the backs get all excited spraying the ball around left right & centre. We nearly came unstuck at Cas for having no forward platform and only Lee Briers grabbing the game by the scruff got us out of a big hole. You have to have players who will do the simple things & do them well - and Jon Clarke does that. Let him play the starting role & bring Monas off the bench to wreak havoc after 20 when the opposition are tired of being battered by Morley/Carvell/Westwood & Louis.

And Clarke does actually do very good long passes out to the centres. Just not very quickly from the play the ball area. His 50 yard scoot in Barcelona wan't bad either.

I think the Wainwright and Clarke analogy is quite accurate. Both divide opinion and both would not/did not attract the attentions of more successful clubs than Warrington.

I do not agree that you must be "blinkered" to not fancy Clarke in your side. Some of us I guess want something different from the No 9 position.

In my view he was not worth a FOUR year deal (as I am not sure he had anywhere else to go) but then again some daft contract renewals were being handed out at the time. One telling one was the head coach contract.

Emile Heskey - Liverpool and England. Coaches know what they are doing, fans think they do.

I've defended Clarke for a long time, I thought a numbe rof years ago he should have been our loose forward. Could have saved ourselves quite a few quid on Vinny Anderson.

I agree his play the balls can be slow but he can read a game, his passing game in general play in excellent as is his ability to link into the line outwide (something I would have liked to have seen more of if he had played 13). Also has a good kicking game.

Definately worth a place in the 17.

His Defence is a major part of his game our defence will be even better when he's back in the side.

its quite scandalous given his performance in the Challenge Cup Semi final and then not making the final that Wire Fans still roll out the "ship him out to anyone who will have him" line.

We have no reason anymore to still have the ridiculous Boo Boys moaning about our own players.
but it seems some people prefer to have a squad of their own personal favourites rather than a well balanced succesful side

Are you for real. Smith didn't have anyother option back then as Cunningham, Robey and Newton were not available. That hooker from huddersfield was still suspended and all the other english hookers who are now playing regular SL hadn't even broken through back then.

Clarke got into the england team by default and Cullen was stupid enough to offer him a contract that was two years too long and far too lucrative. As it stands we are stuck with Clarke until the end of 2011. I would suggest that the only way he will get any further extension with warrington is if he takes a rather large pay cut. As previous posters have suggested Clarke will be nothing more than a back up second row, loose forward or third choice hooker - incidentally his play at hooker is far too slow, largely predictable and too many wayward/hospital passes.

Would you say that Clarke, if fit, would get into the England squad now? No he wouldn't, nowhere near.