When did we become such a mighty team that we can turn down some experienced players? In case you forgot 10 months ago we looked like we were gone as a club.


You really are denser than lead. Do you ever think before you post?

I know you don't know what you're talking about, even god doesn't know what you are talking about. You are kind of person that makes it easier to relax, because while you are still around everybody can take inspiration in the fact they could never called the dumbest mofo a planet earth.




[size=50Once he reads this cue the insults and childish replies[/size

Its a bad deal for Trin Vastman is happy about this deal as he is used to shopping at Jack Fultons ! Infact this is a ted richardson deal! If you think this is a good deal Vasty you need your head testing !

I don't want the deal, I'd rather keep Murphy for various reason mainly to make a point. However I simply don't hold your almost child like hero worship obsession with him and am thus capable of accepting his limitations and the fact that there are more than adequate replacements out there. You have put Murphy on a pedestal, that is your choice but most of us are a little more realistic. At this point in his career Murphy is no better than Kirmond - he may be one day but you and I don't know, that's why we employ coaches in the hope they do.

Now get over your Murphy crush it's getting scary.

I remember years ago Leeds offered us a 4 for 2 deal and many people thought that was ridiculous. As I remember it turned out a lot better for us than it did for them. No reason why history can't repeat itself.

This is what I can't understand - unless we are all mistaken, we appear to be ready to swap rather than sell one of our players, when the players we are swapping are likely to be surplus to requirements anyway.

yeah we got Conway, Mason ,Fox and Rayne? for Spencer and Lyon, we ended getting spencer back for peanuts aswell IIRC
was a good deal for us

Murph is a good player - and that's all. If he wants away, let him go - as long the deal is seen as being good for us.

The difference between now and BG (Before Glover) is that we CAN afford to tell them to stuff it if we don't agree with the deal. In the BG days we were under pressure to cash in. It's a simple but significant difference, but it still doesn't mean that we should waste money paying players who really don't want to be here.

He's history - just the announcement to come!

I really like Murphy but if he wants to go then he wants to go.

The question, like TRB says is: Is the deal appealling to Wakefield overall?

As discussed above it is debatable how good the players are that are being offered so that means it is not good enough. We shouldn't take players that might be ok. We should be taking players that are better than what we have.
Mason or Crabtree would be fine, one of that back line would too, but of course that probably isn't going to happen.
BUT we shouldn't go for squad players either.

Lets have the cash and spend elsewhere if that's the best deal, or better players, or no move....which ever is best for Wakefield, not just the Giants, and not just Murphy

Although Raleigh is a squad player for the Giants most Giants fans would have him in the 17. Defensively he is a 30 to 40 tackles a game player with a good work ethic.

From what i hear you are effectively getting a 3 players for one swap as most of you would swap Tommy Lee for a water botle.

Totally agree - we need a big prop and a SH; if they're not offering either of those, it should be a cash deal or nothing, regardless of what Smurph wants.

I wouldn't, there is always the risk you could ask for the bottle back in a reverse swap.

Danny Brough for Murphy and Lee and if they dont like it then beggar off