I don't but if you change the d and st for an f you could describe a few of the lynch mob on here

Maybe but out of you're 87 posts you've made on this forum, the majority are on the subject of Mathers.

Also I don't know anyone who's played rugby themselves, who would label any player playing SL as lacking in bottle, frankly a moronic thing to say and I'd have thought you'd know better.

You make yourself the target, don't blame others for taking the shot.
The thing is that very few disagree with you in regards to Mathers defensive capabilities, even the clubs conditioning coach have taken the mick recently.
What you simply cannot or refuse to grasp though is that in attack he can add greatly to the team effort and that is valuable and valued.
The other simple fact you fail to be able to manage is who you would replace him with.
Based purely on his defence, my five year old could point out the glaringly obvious, and like you he would also be unavailable to fathom a better quality and affordable replacement who might want to pull on the R,W & B.
Until you can I can't see you swimming in any other direction as very much upstream.

Constant bagging of Fox and Mathers is becoming nothing short of a joke now. Yes Mathers 1 on 1 defence is gash and Fox is rubbish under the high ball, but does anyone not think they personally don't know this, and also work really hard to improve this. Every player has weakness, look at Leeds with Vickery, would anyone swap fox for him because i wouldn't. Big strong Kallum Watkins defence 1 on 1 is..... you guest it gash, and they are a six time grandfinal winning team. Feel embarrassed coming on here at times

Aaron Murphy Scott Grix both looked good last night.

I was really impressed with Aaron Murphy last night. Be nice if we could get him for fullback.

There's quite a list of layers it would be nice to have, that said the likelihood of Murphy being a better allround FB than Mathers based on what I've seen in the past and Murphys history of playing very little at FB would make it a gamble, and probably a financial gamble we cannot afford.
We've got to be able to afford them and then they've got to want to come.
I would argue that if we had kept hold of Jordan Grayston and he was pulling up trees in the reserves he could have been given a shot should Mathers be off the pace, but that boat has sailed probably for financial and rugby reasons.

Murphy is an excellent fullback and he played most of his games for us at fullback whilst in the reserves. His move to the wing is something that happened later. Therefore to have him at fullback would not be a gamble at all and it would certainly improve our defence. The gamble with smurph is his injury record.

I am a bit old fashioned in that I like a FB to be a defender first and formost. Anything offered in attack is a bonus but after all there are 12 other guys on the pitch who can concentrate more on attacking.

Yep - would have Smurph back in a flash - well under-rated IMO. Fantastic hands (when not broken), great awareness, brave and can start an attack from deep.

Also would be home-trained - would be a player near the top of my shopping list - ahead of Grix who can look good and awful in the same game!

Murphy is rock solid in defence and under a bomb but offers less in attack imo than Mathers, so it would be a trade off, depends what a club values the most.

Young Jordan i would have liked to have seen develope but its not to be.

Anyway it won't happen so Mathers it is then.

The lads got a knack of making hard work of everything he does but he gives it all. Prone to the odd bad game no doubt.

Lee Smith

You can have Richard Owen?
As surprised as I am to say it, Tansey has made the number 1 spot his own at Cas so far this year and we don't need to be paying Owen to sit in the stand.

No ta.

Not sure.
I'd like to see him move on to the wing and partner up with Reece Lyne.
Foxy to make way for me.