With all due respect JS I'm not putting any words in your mouth. I asked for reasons why you thought he wouldn't make a centre and you offered none. It was therefore reasonable to conclude that you had none. If you think he would make a centre; then what are we even arguing about?

With regards to the number of wingers we have you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of (although that's common place on this board so I'm not exactly shocked!). Nowhere have I said that he should be given a run at centre now. Quite the contrary in fact. I have stated on several occasions that it's a decision for the future so our standing regarding wingers currently available is, to use Dave's favourite phrase, a complete straw man argument.

I'll reiterate. Down the line, having signed Marshall and Davies long term and with Manfredi's possible return, plus a couple of junior players coming through we are likely to have a surfeit of wingers. Currently the same can't be said of centres

One more point. Saying 'if we use Budgie at centre we will also have 3' is yet another straw man argument as I have never said having 3 wingers or centres is a bad thing. In fact would you please quote where I have? There is nothing wrong with having 3 just as there is nothing wrong with having 3 wingers. The simple fact is, however, that the current squad (when fully fit) is heavy on first team wingers and light on first team centres. Or do you disagree?

Well, apart from there being lots of inaccuracies in this post relating to what I did or didn't say and then being called pedantic for actually pointing out that I hadn't said the things you said I had, there's not much else to say I suppose.
I'd just rather be criticised for something I did actually say rather than what I hadn't

Numerous times I've pointed out that Budgie's best position is Wing - I personally believe that will be the case for most if not all of his career in the main.
Whether someone else or the coaches see it that way only time will tell & to be honest IMO it's not really a debate for now that interests me.
Manfredi is out of anyone's plans for now - So that makes it 2 centres & 3 wingers in the 1st team - We use Budgie primarily as a Centre and we have the same problem but only with 2 wingers only. So I don't see that as solving a problem (Touch wood if Manfredi comes back at some point that may beg the question - for now, for me, it's neither either nor there).
Although I again didn't say that you said it was a bad or a good thing - I just said that I don't think having 3 x primarily wingers on the books (With 2 not being on top dollar) is excessive.

Currently he's one of our best 2 wingers (Davies being my option on the right)
Currently if Sarge/Gildart are fit they play centre for me & Marshall misses out on the Wing.
Sarge not fit I'd play Bateman
Gildart not fit I'd possibly look at Joe and bring Marshall in on wing (Assuming both wingers are fit). If one of the wingers not fit I'd be tempted to leave Budgie on Wing and look for other centre options.

Let me know if this is ok?

FWIW I think Burgess has the rugby brain and physique to make a very good centre. At the moment he is only able to fill in there. To make the transition it would probably need a couple of pre-seasons with a full season in between and a lot of patience, in effect he would be learning a new (albeit similar) trade.

If we signed him up long term with no NRL clauses imo it would be worth putting the effort in. As he has previously said he’d like to go back to Australia I’d say it’s not worth the effort.

Well summarised

Unfortunately all points relating to Budgie moving to centre NOW. I have never advocated this. As I said previously, quite the reverse in fact. I also would rather discuss what I actually said so I guess the discussion is over.

Just for clarity though (and feel free to PM me rather than clog this thread up any further) would you mind letting me know where I have quoted you as saying something you haven't? I've just reread the posts and I can't see a single example .

Fair point mate. Why do you think it would take a couple pre seasons though? Changes like this are usually made over the course of a single preseason and, as you say, Budgie seems to have a good rugby brain.

Just a couple recent examples to illustrate the point: Sam changed from half to fullback in the preseason following Madge's appointment. You could even argue that JB made international centre with just the pretournament as preparation.

I'm not saying you're wrong, necessarily, but I am interested as to why you think it would take Budgie longer?

He was tried at centre for a run of games last season, he looked a million miles off, in attack and more evidently in defence. The role is massively different. Reminded me of how Pat Richards was when tried at centre.

I don't get this obsession with moving Burgess to centre. (I know it's not you mate) It's like someone's looked at his size and pace, saw his hand off and breaks v Cas, factored in that we have Davies and Marshall and come to a conclusion he could be a centre.

It's as if people don't get how different the positions are.

Long term it’s something I’d consider but in the shorter term he needs to stay on the wing where he’s just started to get back to something like his best. He’s benefitting more then most from the competition for places as I feel he’s the type of lad that needs to be pushed and there’s improvement in him yet.

Ultimately he’s our best winger both in regards to natural talent and current form so I wouldn’t rock the boat. In saying that I also wouldn’t rule out a future at centre for him down the line because he has the size and the skills to maybe be a success in that position but the time isn’t right to try that currently imo.

I agree with this NK. An additional benefit, should he make the move successfully, would be at international level where the dearth of quality is arguably worse than at club level.

Of course we get that the positions have differences! I'd say more defensively than in attack. If you think he'd struggle at centre in attack you need only take a look at Friday. He attacked through the centre channels, beating the opposition centre with a man outside him (you know.. like a winger!) and on both occasions showed the awareness to set up his winger (sic) to score! This was against one of the top sides in the league generally noted for their tight defence. This is far from the first time he's shown such awareness in setting up others for tries. What part of the blindingly obvious are you struggling with there?

As for defense, I agree he hasn't shown the same natural propensity for the position but in mitigation we've only seen him at this level in an injury ravaged team with inexperience outside him. As has been said many times about bringing youngsters into the team, it's a completely different proposition when there is a full team of experienced players around you. The same argument is equally applicable to positional switches.

I am certainly not advocating a move now but, down the line, a simple look at our playing roster would suggest it's something worth looking at. You could argue that people's obsession with not considering positional changes, even when it would plainly benefit the club, is the unfathomable one.

It's worrying how you watched the game on Friday and from that came to the conclusion that Burgess could be a good centre. The highlights of his tries could be attributed to centre play, I get that, from his position and how he dealt with Webster was it? But a 10 second snapshot falls very short in comparison to his spell, game after game of watching him at centre. You mention how the skills of a centre in attack, these are a million miles away from that of a winger, how you're positioned, ball skills the lot.

And for defence, you mention he had an inexperienced winger outside him, that winger was Marshall, who do you think would be playing outside of him if you moved him into the centres? That same winger.

I'm not against positional play, but only if it makes sense. Trying to covert our best winger to a centre doesn't.

Wakefield complain about the size of Castleford pitch and what do they do bring in Wigan must really have some grudge against us.


Wigan Warriors play on a field that is not legal according to RL laws. They play on a ground measuring 105 metres which according to the RL law should be a maximum of 100 metres, with a 6 metre in goal area behind the posts.
The minimum requirements are 94 metres between posts, Castleford play on an legal pitch, and always cheating Wigan play on an illegal pitch. Will Eddie or his mates ever pick up on this.

By ‘Wakefield’ do you mean one of their supporters or the club itself. Assuming the second paragraph is a quote I’d be very concerned over the language used.

Interesting point though, I can’t be bothered to look up the RFL rules however on google maps the distance between the posts does measure 104.95m. So assuming the above is correct and the maximum length is 100m then we are indeed over.

To be fair, although legal, the Castleford pitch is laughably small.

I was thinking "No wonder Gale kicks loads of 40/20s". We kick way fewer, but the pitch we play on is huge in comparison to Castleford's.