Agree with you Snoopy. At the last home game (or was it the one before) I constantly saw both Sargy and Dixon having to go right over to the other side to get some ball play. We have never utilised our wingers correctly ever since I started watching Broncos in 1997. I think Dixon would be better at full back. I have seen him play there and I believe he had a good game. Both my nephews from Huddersfield really rate him and they both play prop for Underbank up there so they know what they are on about. Who is doing the defensive coaching because from what I have seen from home games so far, with a few exceptions, we can't tackle for toffee.

I think it takes about fifty games to really tell whether an inexperienced player is going to be of one capable of playing to a consistently decent standard and the years of seasoning also contribute greatly. If a player has good pace, height and a powerful physique that also greatly helps. The mental approach, positional sense and ability to defend are something that develops. Of our younger players Sarginson seems blessed with pace and agility but is yet to develop a physique of equal standard to a 100KG centre but will get to a top standard. Channing seems to be solid and looks like he will be a good defensive centre. Dixon looks like he will struggle against taller wingers in defence and will need to play fullback to play at his best. But all three of these boys have played under twenty games. My belief is that Jamie O'Callaghan has had sixty five plus games at SL level and I am not sure he has more to come. I am nervous that he is not to the standard and more games won't change things. That is also true of Powell of course. But I am not sure as a club we will draw the line and say that someone isn't going to make it. My view is that a player like Karl Pryce had potential and it needed unlocking but some guys have none!

Some lawn chairs on those flat balconies should suffice.



Seriously though the atmosphere was pretty good for a change I thought.

Biggest drawback of Brisbane Road is the ridiculously small pitch.

Maybe the pitch would be something we could develop as an advantage, the Atmosphere I can't remember when it was last like that at the stoop!

Didn't we have a 6 inch in-goal at Brentford?

When we only opened the East Stand and were half competitive. Now we are stuck with 2 stands that are half empty.

But the sun dave....what about the sun

The only reason I can see for the stands issue is cost! with the attendances we currently get what must that cover? not even the rent, thanks for the kindness of BSkyB it is the only thing which keeps rugby league alive!

So those first 90 years were all a myth then?

Are you talking pre Super League, when it was semi-pro and many of them worked down the pit or in the case of overseas players given jobs with companies having good connections to the clubs directors, after working a full day they then went to training and then it was a winter sport, yes also when they had to Win to get the pay which give them a little better life, instead of some of the over inflated wages paid to some average players in the game today? when the big Sky money came into the game, clubs gave away so much to these players instead of being spent on grounds which before Sky were dingy and ready for condemning? Yes that is what I was relating to.

The game is faster now and the players fitter, they play on grounds and pitches much better condition but take away the Sky money and compare the attendances then, I can remember standing on Central Park or sitting on one of the corner crowd terracing fences with 40,000 plus and Station Road for Great Britain matches, so all is not perfect now!

We were both taking about Rugby League. You were talking nonsense.