play for Great Britain.

A bit late iknow, but this is the first chance i have had to get to my computer since the match.

I had to laugh when he made a slow jog from dummy half towards the Slaford goal line. There was a huge groan from the crowd before he even ot there. Maybe he has been watching too much cricket and has seen how effective the slower ball is and has tried to copy them with the bambouzelling slow jog.

Why do people always slate Clarke?



With regards to your question, yes, it justs shows you the lack of good english hookers that we have

Corrected.

He's good in defence, though.

Indeed, in attack though.......

if Clarke did not get his injury do you Ts would have had him as 1st choice in world cup

No because he isn't the best English hooker.

Roby
Newton
Higham

They would all be playing ahead of him IMO.

And Diskin

Because he's not Roby or Cunningham.

Did anyone see how awful Higham was on Friday? Where's the thread for that?

If Higham is a better hooker than Clarke, then why keep subbing them ?

And Hudson.

Being a Hooker isnt an easy Job, They need breaks.

I thought the same, he was shocking. One pass he threw, along the floor, forward & into touch was terrible.

I like Clarkes calmness, his brain at times. He's one of them, that if you get 'six more', he'll happily take a couple of settler plays, where pretty much everyone else in our side looks like a giddy kipper, throwing the ball between their legs, or offloading with six men on them and your shouting "first tackle, calm down, cal... Idiot, you bloody idiot."

Mention no names

What Clarke lacks in Attack he more than makes up for in defence, a turnstyle he most definitely isn't

When considering Clarke, or any other member of our squad for that matter, I find it useful to think "Would they get a game with Saints or Leeds*?". Depressingly we have very few players that would and Clarke isn't in that number.

But in truth, he is no better or worse than the bulk of our "average" squad and his best attributes are when we are without the ball this is why he gets singled out as he is involved in most attacking plays.

*Be interesting to see views on who would from our squad.

ironically given the stick, Kevin Penny.

Plus if we had a team of Jon Clarkes we would have the best defence in superleague by a country mile

Too much club bias and subjectivity to ever get a clear answer. Coming at it from a different slant, if you look at Leeds, I don't see them as a team littered with 'stars', more a cohesive unit.

I am hoping that is what Smith is trying to achieve here, removing those who don't buy into the 'team first, individual a very distant second'.

Yeah, that's my take on it too really. If we signed Carl Ablett, Ian Kirke, Ryan Bailey etc, they'd look distinctly average. At Leeds, they understand their role, carry out their duties manfully, and allow the 'better players' to show their skills on the back of their hard work.

Players, right now that would walk into a top two side (or at least squad, ie, they'd get interest should they be available)

Ben Westwood
Kevin Penny
Matt King
Tyrone McCarthy
Gareth Carvell

I have it as.

Westwood.
Carvell.
Morley (age going against him but would not look out of place).


Penny is too raw as yet to make the first team squad for either, but they would be interested as a mid-term prospect.

Yeah, Morley is probably borderline.

I honestly think King would walk into Saints or Leeds right now. Both side only have one recognised centre, and granted we're playing him on the wing I know, but I still think King has unfinished business with centre, I hope this is just a short term measure to add some solidity to what was, well frankly, a disgrace of a defencer before Smith & including Smiths Harlequins trip.