How dare you mention Hampshire on this Forum, don't you know he has been banished to darkest Yorkshire for a season for not toeing the line ( even though I am pretty certain he is chuffed with the decision ).

So according to the naysayers on this forum, taken as a collective... We need, international class, a hooker, at least one prop, and 2 specialist centres.. How big is the cap?

A very fair and difficult challenge but I will give it a go.
Firstly we were told we made an offer for Ferres therefore, I can only assume that we had the cash and/or cap space to accommodate that signing so let's exchange that for a prop.

My gripe with MM is that he should play 80 minutes if he can't why on earth would you extend his contract and I assume increase his salary? I still like MM albeit that I feel he hasn't played well for over a year. If he can't play 80 minutes then get shut. That's sounds very arrogant but why would anyone pay top dollar for a player who can't play a full 80?
What if ST comes back and can only play 40 minutes per game? Would that be acceptable?
Our second highest earner I suspect is SOL who again we seem to accept will probably play 50% of game time. It's the logic of the madhouse.

Now to the hardest bit specialist centres. Our game is now played by bit players many of whom have had and never will have a specialist position which pardon the pun we seem to specialise in. In the long term we need to accept that centre is a very specialist role that needs to be developed over years and not a pre season ala Joel Tomkins and Jack Hughes.
In the short term I'd give Charnley go there and Gildart. Longer term when SOL retires then his salary can be allocated for a replacement centre.
As I say very difficult but Gelling in particular surely can't be the answer.

I don't pretend to have all the answers and I know that no one person has. My frustration is that we are clearly lacking in several areas but the club seem to pursuing a policy of mediocrity and bit part players.
Last year from a playing point of view was quite painful for me with the odd interlude from Williams, Burgess and Bowen.
I know I can't be right on everything but unless we improve on our performances what I do know is that the atmosphere at the ground will continue to decline as will attendances.
I sincerely hope I'm wrong and will take great pleasure in being told that I'm an Harris if this team delivers any improvement in terms of success this season.

So much of this is speculation and guess work. And doesn't even answer the post.

Sure, in an ideal world every side would have a pair of George Carmonts or Matt Gidleys or Paul Newloves. But in the real world... Leeds have been playing a second-rower in the centres for years. Doesn't seem to have done them too much harm, although I admit they do have two 'proper' centres now... Even plenty of NRL sides do the same. But if Gelling continues as he did at the weekend, with Gildart growing in experience and confidence, and Sarge back and fit, and Bateman clearly able to make a pretty good fist of playing there, I don't see centre as a position of primary concern for us.

Did you miss my suggestion we should have smaller first team squad so we can afford another good hooker if needs be? He'd be an integral part of the first 17 in the same way the two half backs are so I don't see why a decent wedge should not be held over for such a player. We have also had two good hookers in the side in the recent past when the salary cap has been in place so saying the salary cap precludes this is demonstrably not true and it isn't savvy cap management. It's Wane's choice to play Powell as the sub hooker and I am sure you'd agree when MM goes off and he comes on, 9 times out of 10 the opposition get a role on. If he wants to spell MM then it needs sorting out.

He was ok after the game, got a finger in his eye in a tackle.

You can set your watch by sub times it seems as for the atmosphere given how fowl friday night was i thought it was ok to be fair.

Do you mean he prefers sitting in the stands watching Cas than sitting in the stands watching Wigan?

No I didn't miss your suggestion. I think there are merits to having the younger lads part of the squad for their own development and for depth across the entire team, this against having Powell on the bench is a no-brainer for me.

I don't think Powell is setting the world on fire, and I do envy teams who have two very good dummy halves, but I'm also see the value in having a player who can cover 6/7/9 on the bench.

Where was the speculation?
I believe IL stated we agreed terms with Huddersfield and a package with Ferres but he chose Leeds. That ain't speculation and showed to me that IL is prepared to splash the cash and that we have room under the cap or he was to be our marquee signing.

What specifically did I "guess" and what didn't I answer?
There are no short term answers because we have laid our stall out for at least a season.

As I said we don't see Powell playing at 6 or 7 very often and I can't remember the last time either 6 or 7 were injured. It seems a luxury we can ill afford given the negative effect it has on the team when he comes on. It wouldn't be so bad if Wane subbed by the clock during the regular season where we can get away with it against lesser sides but he does it in challenge cup games and finals as well where we can't.

What do you want me to say? I still see the bigger picture, with McM and Powell and how they both benefit and fit into the team. I still see the reasoning and purpose in spelling McM in the first game of the season on a terrible night against a big pack on the first game of the season after a bone graft. Don't you?

If you read the latest (wigan evening news) then it is surprising that McM played as much as he did given that he had little pre-season, only started training fully a week before the Catalan game. I suspect that we will see more of him in games going forward.

It's not just Wigan who do it though is it? So there is obviously a reason. Just watch the tv games over the next few weeks (here and in aus) and take note.