i asked mc he said still alot to sort so still only a possibility.

You can't be serious, if Collis is an injury risk Gibson is a disaster.

TBH I think a utility back is of far more value as I don't actually believe that there is a specialist FB any more than I do most position at SL level these days. So long as a back is ok under the high ball then he can play FB just as well as Mathers. It's the attritional nature of the game that most teams simply cannot afford to carry a player who can only play one position. Even Wigan played Tomkins at FB even though he was a S/H - which in turn begs the question of how many games do you need to play in any position to be a specialist? Kirmond has played wing, centre and S/R, which is his speciality?

Thus Tansey is by far the best choice in terms of utility.

Why is Gibson an injury disaster?
Played 87 times scoring 43 tries in a poor Salford side, over 3 seasons!
Not had much of a look in at Cas due to Shenton, Channing and 'biscuits' Webster.
So unless you have an inside track on info about him being a physical wreck, his stats stack up pretty well.

For me there is such thing as a specialist in every position, a player that is highly skilled in a specific and restricted field.

Although I don't think in Super league there are many "Specialist` and all backs seem to blend into the same category (As you say) they can cover multiple positions and every club needs those types of players.

The only example I can think of in our squad is Dean Collis - When I watch him play I cant imagine him playing anywhere else other than centre, because he has all the skills to be a well rounded, specialist centre and that's what he is.

Can you imagine Tim Smith playing anywhere else other than in the half's or do you think that his particular skill set would label him a specialist halfback?

Players like Ryan Hall would be wasted anywhere else other than on the wing, he's probably one of the best finishes on the planet and great under the high ball therefore I would label him a specialist in that position.

I agree with what you say, but sadly it's now the preserve of the few rich clubs and International teams. Yes we do have some specialist players but that is unlikely to be the reason we signed them.

Exactly my thoughts on a player who can play both wing and centre if he were available.

Personally I think the person playing fullback should be one of your strike players, someone capable of creating and making something happen as well as reading the game well. At the highest level you usually find that the fullback is the team's no1 threat, so I think it is a bit of a waste to have different people filling in that position.

For example if you look at the NRL teams, the fullback spot is the one occupied by most of the game's running superstars and influential players. It is the position that provides the most flexibility and opportunity to influence the game in attack.

Therefore I would imagine that Webster has his main FB in mind, whether that is an existing player or a target.

"Ashley Gibson is a professional rugby league footballer who currently plays for Castleford Tigers of Super League, having previously played for Leeds and Salford Red Devils. He is primarily a wing but can also play at centre. He is also known to kick goals. He played only 29 times for Leeds over four years, despite scoring a hat-trick in his début, a 74-0 win against Leigh. A combination of limited first team opportunity and injury halting his chances in the first team" Wiki.

Debut 2005, played 125 games - average 14 games a season - about 50% of possible appearances - not exactly Neil Fox territory and not great for a back. I can only put this down to injury because he's a top class player who when fit would walk into most SL teams. To me he's very similar to Collis and we all know how much stick he gets for being a sick note - can we risk two? that was my point.

I can see Collis playing stand off, but he's certainly a specialist centre
Smith is a half back. He can switch 6 and 7 depending on the style of the other half.

Being a specialist doesn't make you better or worse either.
Scruton is a specialist prop in my opinion. You couldn't play him anywhere else.
Tautai can play anywhere in the pack. Neither is more or less effective because of it, it just makes a difference to the team you build around them.

On the same note, I think we should be prepared for what a utility back means.
If we were shopping for smeone who can truly play across most positions in the backs, they are then probably behind the current crop.
For us to buy someone who is better than what we have but still a utility, you are looking at top dollar and we don't really even have bottom dollar.

I reckon we'll have an older guy who is on their way out, or a young guy, who won't command a place yet (which some would say we already have)
Getting a better standard will mean we probably get a specialist, who can't get in his own team due to others or fall outs.

Getting someone like Shannon Mc who will take a specific position will simply force one of the others to be a utility, probably Owen or Lyne.

How many juniors have walked straight into the Leeds side and kept their spot?
He may have got injured and someone else stepped in, thus making his progress harder to get back into the side?
You are including the first 4 seasons of his career in your not very Neil Fox territory stats.
Would rather look at what he has done recently.
Again you compare a domestic player with an overseas, a comparison that didn't work for you when you compared Kirmond to Collis.

You could also put it down he didn't get many 1st team opportunities for a few seasons at Leeds after his debut. That surely would have a bearing on his average amount of games per season and therefore not exclusively down to injury. .

Collis at stand off? If he were ever to be an option at 6 I'd bring back Paul Sykes!

We at least agree on the quality of the player and let's hope who ever we manage to sign they have that ability to find the try line.

Beautiful bit of artistic license!

You my friend are typical of the breed of poster who know riddles this forum. It's not that I don't like you or even disagree with much of what you say, I don't. However you all share this odd desire not to face up to or at least debate what is a fair and reasonable if slightly negative point without turning it into something personal with petty quips and silly point scoring. I guess it's the twitter mentality but it ruins debate.

I have no issue with Gibson I'm just looking at him a a signing, why you feel this compulsion to defend and big him up I don't know. He's not a Trinity player, we owe him nothing and likewise he owes us nothing. So with that in mind there is nothing wrong with comparing him to Collis, tbh it beggars all reason why it isn't. Secondly he has had more than his fair share of injuries without actually being a basket case, in which case it's worth debate. In my mind it's a moderate risk which I wonder if we can afford, it's just debate don't be so frightened.

I await your response with glee.