We have signed up a number of players on long term contracts. Is this an error? Are they all good enough to win a trophy? I think we need a world class half back, ful, back, pivot, and prop, but that's my view.

There are arguments for and against long term contracts - but most professional sportsman I've been involved with in the past would argue that they perform better with a long term contract than without one.

It let's them concentrate on performances, rather than speculation, uncertainty and commercial debates ( for example Nathans situation each year). It helps produce a settled family situation at home too.

Also, don't think professional sprtsmen then take it easy/ can't be bothered when they have a long term contract - personal and professional pride.

Final point - think we'd be worried about other clubs poaching some of better players who we have secured on LTCs.

cant see any problems with long term contracts at all, all the ones who have signed them i would have wanted anyway, dont buy into that for a reason for loss of form at all.

I agree. It must take a lot of stress of a player's mind knowing that his immediate future is secure. I really cannot believe that our long term people are do unprofessional to slacken off their efforts.

Half Back - who, Brough is probably the best in the League on form.
Full Back - Grix is going fine.
Pivot - Simpson should really be playing there I'm thinking, move Brown to Centre.
Prop - Agreed.

once again someone says simpson should be playing stand off, can someone please please please tell me where the rationale for this has come from, he has never played a 1st grade game there so where does this come from? 5 different people have mentioned this now but not one has backed it up with a reason

The Simpson to 6 thingy apparently came up after a cyberspace 'discussion' with South Sydney fans,some of whom reckoned stand off half would probably be his best position all things being considered.Didn't realise he had never played 6 in 1st grade.

Here's a thought for the day,why not move Kev Brown to 13,let him play the ball handling role closer to the ruck much like O'Loughlin does.Put Simmo to 6 as the pivot.Well many have already written Simmo off as an outside back,so he's got to fit in somewhere.

brett at fullback played as a extra 6 in attack . kev is to predictable dummey run into nearst man or flat pass .we need something different why not try simpson . as for big eorl in needs try off loading again our pack looks soft in attack not getting yards in defence giving to many yards

if simpson when fit cannot prove he is better than the wingers and centres we have then why should be be put in a pivitol ( no pun intended ) position for the sake of it, everyone is whinging about us failing to beat the big teams do you really think simpson at 6 is the answer? Grix has played 6 before for wakefield and at the 2008 world cup for ireland, Cudjoe has played 6 and has the skills to play there, if brown isnt cutting it for you we should be aiming to bring in a quality stand off not try simpson because some south sydney fans reckon he could play there, there is no evidence to suggest it would work and while we are experimenting with that we fall further behind teams like wigan wire and saints who have players like gaskell finch and briers in that position all exellent stand offs and not converted centres who they are trying to accomadate

agree we need a standoff but fridays could be our last game i think we need something different winning 4 out of 13 not good . if wood is going where is the cover for our halves next year

so in a must win game against leeds we are going to put simpson at stand off? that is our plan b? cover for the halfves next year would start with robinson ( was a scrum half all career until recently ) and Grix and cudjoe ahead of simpson, im like a broken record with this but please show me evidence of simpson at 6 being a good idea rather than saying "we have to play him somewhere" NO we dont, if he isnt good enough ( when fit ) he does not play, can someone please give me reasoned opinion like he played reserve grade at 6 ( he didnt ) or he played 6 for the u20's here ( he didnt ) or you have seen footage or in real life of him playing that position to a high level

I'd have Brown, Grix, Leroy...even Mcnally at 6 before Simpson .......nowt against the lad but you cant just chuck him into a position he's never played in his life just to get him into the team !!

thank you finally someone talking sense

Mmmmmmmm SS fans who have watched him most of his career so far reckon 6 would be his best option,but some over here who have seen nowt much of him have already written off his chances of doing owt in that position.Maybe the SS fans were on a wind up.

Who decided Grix could play 6,he was a full back was he not,and so was Cudjoe but he ended up in the centres in the end,why then did Leroy get shoved to 6,did someone see a potential in him to play that position or summat.