Exactly Paul, well said mate. People seem to be reading a lot more into things that are happening than they need to. A couple of recent setbacks has sent some into panic mode!!!

Getting a month at Huddersfield will do Brad the world of good and we will benefit from that in the long run

and well said, Walter. The voices of calm are making themselves heard.

I was referring to this when commenting. Hardly sounds like a vote of supreme confidence and neither does loaning out a player when we have games coming up he could play in.

What I'm struggling with is why have Huddersfield taken him? They have Shaun Lunt and if he got injured I'd have thought Robinson would revert to hooker. So Dwyer is unlikely to get first team action, in fact at the moment he's more likely to get it at Wires.

The obvious conclusion is Huddersfield want to have a look at him with a view to a permanent move, and Wires are happy for them to do so which I think is a great shame ................. can't see any purely footballing reasons for the move, personally.

This is what I am struggling with;

Huddersfield are a top side this year, and as pointed out, they are not desperate for a hooker. So if they are happy to accept Dwyer, then they must be more than comfortable that he can perform at a high level in SL. Presumably they must have looked at him, at least on video. They are not going to accept someone blind. So why haven't we played him ? Both Monas and Higham played a full game each to see them through the extra game over Easter. Dwyer could have played against London to provide this cover. Then we have Keighley coming up - another good opportunity.

So what is the logic ?

He's in their 19 man squad for their next match - has he been in any of ours this season?

No. Clearly he is more highly rated by others.

What is this love in for Brad Dwyer?

and why are people jumping around it's not like he's the first to go on loan?

Looking through the posts, I think you are the only one who has mentioned a 'love in' with Dwyer. Unless you would like to cite the post where you picked this up from ?

Dwyer is still a fringe player. He may make SL, he may not. His ability is not the issue, it's the rationale behind the move.

How many times have we seen a player loan between two top four sides ? It's fairly infrequent. Would we see Ryan Hampshire exchanged between Wigan and us ?, or perhaps Williams ? We normally loan to clubs whom we do not see as a direct competitor; Williams to Cas or Salford. GOB last year to Widnes or Cas this year. Otherwise you could be strengthening the opposition.

But in any case this misses the point. If he goes and gets game time at SL level, that's fine, it's what he needs. For me the interesting question is why have we loaned him to a close competitor, and why we didn't take the obvious opportunities to play him.

Spot on.
Charnley to HKR, Goulding to Salford worked well for Wigan.

So, this looks increasingly like a 'try and buy' deal between Hudds and Wire on the back of the purchase of us Clarke from Cas.

No. Both Clark and Dwyer have just turned 20 whilst Monaghan and Higham are both going to retire/move-on in the next couple of years. We need two replacement hookers and a combination of Clarke and Dwyer would give us a hooking inter-change better than any other Super League combination for years to come.

Sometimes takes things for what they are rather than assuming there is an ulterior motive behind everything. This is an opportunity for Dwyer to get Super League game time, nothing more nothing less.

Maybe we are very close to salary cap limits. Having to recall Williams as cover meant that we had to loan out others. Just a thought!