00/01 were the teams best seasons of that time even though we arguably underachieved. Might not have been Kohe-loves personal best but outside of Langer Briers had his best two try scoring seasons, think he hit 17 one of the years and Kohe Love and Smyth was it? hit over 40 between them both seasons IIRC.
We certainly scored some points but we also shipped them. Kohe Love arrived in 96/97 didnt he and those two seasons plus 98, we were a joke of a side..I cant really remember 99, tbh i'd forgot that London actually finished second.

London didn't finish second in the league in 99, Saints did. London were runners up in the Challenge Cup (to Leeds), that might be what you're thinking of.

We finished 7th in 1999 and 2001, and 6th in 2000, but I would have said overall 1999 was a better season for us. We went into the year with low expectations, had been near the bottom throughout 98, and we played some good rugby and scored a lot of tries with Kohe-Love having the season he finally came of age after all the early expectation, and Hunte who was a new signing. It was also the year we had Simon Gillies as captain. We were fighting for the playoffs (top five in those days) most of the year then at the end when we missed the playoffs we lost a run of games at the end of the season which meant Gateshead finished above us.

2000 was the opposite, we went in with massive expectation after signing Langer, Gee and Nikau, most of the year we were struggling down the table and well short of the playoffs. We reached a low point with that Hudds game where Smyth made his debut and scored 4 tries, we were well up at half time and Hudds who hadn't won a game in months put on a comeback to beat us and there was that major sit in in the Railway end. At the end of the year, with the playoffs gone, we managed to start winning games which meant we climbed up to 6th - all that did for us was give us the harder fixtures for 2001 when they started splitting it so the top teams one year played each other for the "extra" fixtures at the end of the next!

Toa's career for Wire was basically 96 - looked promising, 97/98 injured a lot, 99 top scorer in the league, 00 off the boil at first, came back strong at the end, 01 matured into a top centre and signed for Hull.....05 not quite the player he was, 06 made a few contributions and tried hard

Your memories certainly better than mine
Thinking about it I can't hardly remember a thing about the 99 season other than I think Cas or Fax did well and London reached the cup final.
I mainly remember him in 00/01 outside Langer/Briers and in his early days, still remember his debut.
Anyway, I still reckon both at their peaks Gleeson was the better centre even if I cant remember 99

You ask why people would like back average scrum halves, yet you pick an average utility player.

Nat wood would be a good addition to our current team. However, Alfie langer would have to be the one player over the past 10 that you would want in our team

He was a god. Nat Wood isn't fit to lace Monaghan's boots and that is saying something!

Behave!!

How many times has Monoghan took the game by the scruff of the neck from scrum half? His best work has been at hooker.

Comparing the two as scrum halves from what we've witnessed in wire shirts Nat wood was the more effective.

Lefty, I do believe you are talking out your ass.

Are the sands of time playing tricks with your memory?

when Richie Myler Puts on a number 7 shirt next year it will be the first time Warrington Rugby League club have had a scrum half since Nat wood Left.

why People choose to rubbish a player that was an absolute 110 per and a big influence on the team is beyond me. if monaghan left the club today he'd be vaugely rememember for two halves of good rugby league.

anyway Langer all day long for me

No you can rubbish the guys natural borne talent all you want but the guy had a massive heart was always determined and ran his blood to water every time he played in a wire shirt? Can the latter be said about a sulky Monoghan who has only seemed interested since moving to hooker?

But if the 5 million post brigade say Nat wood was average he must be! Roll on the day when we get a team full of Darren burns’

No, but you could say it about Burns.

True i'll give you that. However, burns spent alot of his time at the club on the injury table and will for me never be held in the same esteem as Nat.

Your username and avatar pic in conjunction with your argument relating to "average players" has been duly noted.

How many times did Nat Wood? He was a rubbish scrum half that couldn't pass.

As with Monas he was a better hooker. Monas is also twice the hooker he could ever be.

I clearly stated scrum half because I agree Monoghan is the better hooker.

Do you not find it funny how 6 wire fans have chosen him as the 1 player they would have over the past 10 years? What would they know hey? Must have been rubbish…