This time last year, quite a few people were saying if Rangi got sold by Cas, they would be relegation fodder.
We blasted Agar for trying to shoehorn people into positions, because he had over complicated things.
Webster seems to be his own man with his own ideas of what works best for the team.
As has been mentioned, we have won the last 2 without him or would you rather had him play and us lose?

I'm happy that we are playing as "a Team" and with some real spirit and determination for the first time in a long time.

If that is because Agar is gone, because Sammutt is not playing, because Smith is back, quite frankly I don't care which it is as long as it continues.

I can't say I would want to change it after last Sunday if Sammutt was available so what's the big deal?

Mathers had his best game for ages at Fullback so not really an option to put him there.
Sykes was probably MOTM at Stand Off so not going to put him there.

Webster has won two from two which vindicates his selections' and at the moment there is no room for Sammutt, in the team, which leaves 3 options', sell him, either leave him kicking his heels' by just training or send him to Fev where he can get some game time whereby if we need him back, he will ready to play, can't see why a statement from the club is needed really no other club does so why should ours', I'm sure the terms' he has gone to Fev will suit us, a good bit of business really.

Smith returns as Salford are unhappy with his form playing with an 'off the cuff' partner, yet people want to waste this opportunity by playing him with another 'mercurial' half, instead of a 'steady' half where he calls the shots.

Maybe, just maybe, one person at the club tried to mitigate the situation by foolishly giving JS an injury to ease being dropped, which JS wasn't happy with.
IMO this does not call for a club staement, but a word with the social media operator to only post facts might be an idea.

Personally, I think trying to cover the lack of tackling from both TS and JS would be big ask, we can't have 2 weak(er) flanks.

I'd play Sammut at full back. although Mathers has been doing ok Sammut has real pace if put through a gap and out wide in a bit of space would be a greater threat. Sounds like he's off to Featherstone next season... www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... e/?ref=rss

I'd play Sammut at full back. although Mathers has been doing ok Sammut has real pace if put through a gap and out wide in a bit of space would be a greater threat. Sounds like he's off to Featherstone next season... www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... e/?ref=rss

If Sammut goes and we bring in a few more I am all for it. However I would also keep him if thats what we plan to do and build on next season.

I find this quite amazing you demand a statement for what, a player being sent on loan something which many of you have clambered for on more than one occasion for various members of the squad. The league no longer runs A teams and therefore this is the only option available to the club to keep a player match fit.
Sammut will get his chance because of injury to others or loss of form he will just need to be patient. We are quite lucky to be in this position after the pre season so in conclusion a club statement is not required for this or any similar situations.

Let's not bag a Trinity player who is not in the 17.

He has some fantastic skill and pace which he has proven over the last few years elsewhere and it's great that he is wearing the red white and blue. Hope we can fit him in the 17 when Webster decides the time is ready.

Just out of interest, has there been any official confirmation about JS going to Fev, either in a dual reg/loan deal?
I would of thought if this was a done deal and the way the Fev like to shout about everything lately, then there would have been something on their website.
Also am I right in thinking that non-fed players can't be dual registered but can go on loan, or have the rules change on that as well
Not even JS has said he's gone to Fev on his twitter, but has been openly stating things about his "non" injury

I don't see the issue; JW is the man in charge and he obviously thought that TS and PS were the better option - 2 wins from 2 rather vindicates that decision.

Could Sykes play centre and let him play alongside Tim Smith and stick Sammut at stand off to create something on the other side???????

Here goes the story as I understand it. Sammut asked not to play against Bradford, wakefield said your joking aren't you!! He was selected and the coaches thought he bottled several tackles against Bradford (I didn't go so didn't see the incidents). He was then dropped for the incident and shipped out to fev on dual reg (they can't afford to sign him this year hence the dual reg).

Or the coach upon resigning Smith believed it would be better in the time available to play him in partnership with Sykes. He probably also feels Mathers is the best option at full back therefore until one is injured why will he change a winning team. This is what you have all been demanding all season and now the new coach is you are all becoming paranoid looking for something that is not there. If correct he is going to Featherstone to keep match fit just like many other SL clubs do with their players. It was not that long ago that Charnley from Wigan was playing in the championship.