Stop trying to derail the thread.

Firstly there are a lot of could be’s in that paragraph.

James McDonnall “could be the next Mick Cassidy”.

Do we need another Mick Cassidy? No disrespect to Mick he was a great player of his time but I’d say the secondrow position had evolved now. Mick was an absolute grafter and he put his head where others sometimes wouldn’t and was all about work ethic. We have that in spades with Faz and Bateman however they offer more threat with the ball.

Isa offers a similar role to the one Mick played as does Smithies although even at his young age probably brings a bit more go forward to the table.


Nicholson wanted to go, he had been offered first team rugby and a big wage increase. Should we fast track someone into the team over 3 international secondrows to please him? In my opinion no.

Halsall has literally done nothing in the first team to show that he deserved a regular start at centre.

The crux of your point seems to be based around King coming in for Halsall, but that isn’t the case. Wardle a 23 year old international centre has come in for Halsall a reserve player who has been given a few chances at first team level and has yet to take them.

You seem to be an advocate of youth….but then you have a “wish list” in your signature including 2 halves…meaning no place for Smith.

Jack Hughes meaning less of an opportunity for either McDonnald or Nicholson.

Josh Charnley who cannot get a game at Leigh.

Tommy Talau and Smith Shields both centre or winger meaning no place for Halsall.

Josh Schuster…another secondrow….so no room for McDonnald or Nicholson.

You talk as if Halsall is the second coming but he is 21 not established in the first team. Gildart was playing for England and GB at 22!

Halsall looks a good prospect. He is clearly playing at a level above the championship but he hasn’t stood out as anything other than solid in the first team.

He’s joining a club with 4 centres ahead of him.

We could chuck Nicholson, McDonald and Halsall in next year and finish in the top 6 is that good enough? Would certainly see Matty Peet lose his job.

The fact is King may have had a couple of low key years but he has performed at a level significantly higher than Halsall has and as we have seen Peet has an ability to bring the best out of players.

Wardle a 23 year old international established centre is the replacement for Halsall.

I'd have replaced Isa and Partington with McDonnell, Nicolson and Nsemba.

McDonnell is a grafter, a tough one at that and offers more go forward than Isa, Partington and Smithies. As do Nicolson and Nsemba, all 3 are strong running classic second rowers.

Don't look too far into the wishlist, it was done about 18months to 2 years ago.

If King was to replace Thornley then fair enough, Thornley is getting on and is injury prone, if Thornley left and King came in on a 1 year deal in order to help Halsall and maybe even Sumner transition then fair enough but I am genuinely gutted Halsall has gone. There are posters on here agreeing with the club who have probably only seen Halsall play 3 times for the first team and are judging him on that alone. Bookmark this thread and see where Nicolson, McDonnell and Halsall are in 3 years and I'll say England Knights.

Same goes for Tom Forber, Jr Nsemba and Reagan Sumner.

There you are again.

You seem unable to acknowledge King and Halsall are totally unrelated moves.

Wardle is the replacement for Halsall.

King and Halsall have nothing to do with each other in regards business between the 2 clubs.

In simple terms would you prefer to go into 2023 with a centre partnership of -

King right centre / Halsall left.

King right centre/ Wardle left.

I don’t see any way the former is better than the latter.

We’ve got 3 experienced centres for 2023, so that’ll do me. I’d have liked to have kept Halsall as well but it’s not always possible. Everything is a balancing act and trying to get that balance right is a challenge.

I look at the club Halsall has gone to and I’m not sure they’ve got their balance right. They have incredible depth but depth wasn’t an issue last season, I’d say they were just short of one, maybe two real star players to put a huge challenge down on Saints. They now lose Leutele and Levi and they’ve brought in a raft of players but none of them really make you go ‘wow’ and make you think the first 17 quality will be better than last season. It’s the long game they’re playing I suppose, buying young players to keep improving over the next 3 or 4 years and they’ll at least know in every game next season, they’ll be able to put out a really strong 17.

I get what you're saying, but when we traded £100k and Sean Long for Lee Hansen, didn't mean Lee Hansen was going to play scrum half did it?

Hudds wanted King, they also wanted Wardle, don't be naive to think we couldn't have had Wardle and Halsall.

Would you rather have:

Wardle and Thornley/Halsall or

Wardle and King/Halsall?

I think you are being naive.

The Wardle deal was agreed months ago in early June with negotiations starting in May.

The Halsall/Bibby deal was part of that and agreed at the time.

The King deal is a separate deal made much much later with Warrington.

Ok, I'll accept that.

Just for arguements sake, would you rather have :

Wardle and King/Halsall back up or
Wardle and Thornley/Halsall back up?

2022 we got some long overdue props.
2023 we got some long overdue centres.

We do look strong, Wardle and King bot solid centres that make us stronger, I'd have rather kept the young lads and lost some of the first team. I'd have lost Thornley for Halsall, Isa for McDonnell and Partington for Nicolson all day long and we'd have still signed King and Wardle.

Again though, we can’t simply get rid of players under contract.

Giants wanted Halsall not Thornley who is under contract for next year.

Isa is under contract for next year.

Nicholson wanted to go and even if we did replace Isa for him (under contract) he still isn’t in the 17 which Wire have pretty much promised him he will be and bumped his cash up.

And yet you still moan