What's last years excuse then? Grix?

I bet broughy and Drew carnt wait to renew their 'friendship'....

The club have seen DB as a priority signing since the end of last season. Talks have been going on for ages and there is no doubt the financial mess he got into had a significant effect on the negotiations. From what I hear everytime we had talks we seemed to meet a new obstacle. We would go away,work around it and then something else would be put in the way.

Now bearing in mind what happened with Griffin a few years ago and how he was turned, I do wonder how much crap shudds have put inside DB's head and how they may have exploited his financial problems to their ends. The truth will never come out but there is no doubt they have been chipping away behind the scenes for quite sometime

Give Southerwood his chance and move on (i.e put a significant offer in for Finch)

Talking of Drew I wonder if the players we get from Hudds will manage to play against them something Drew never did.

BJ to scrum half would be a bad move.

TBH I dont think Scrum Half and Stand off are not all that different, just one feeds it into the Scrum and the other doesnt. IF Brough is going i'm sure Cooke can direct the team around the field.

That's assuming Cooke is coming. Wouldn't want BJ directing things. Still wont believe any of it till it happens Kear was nailed on for the England job a week ago!

Things have happened please move on!

how's that then? last i knew there was just yet another thread saying he's going with absolutely no proof. he might leave he might not, we'll see won't we. if he does go and cooke does come then i hope it's not as a direct replacement we will need another scrum half imo

What things have happened?

Again, assuming he does go and Cooke comes in - what, other than the number on their back, is the difference between a stand off and a scrum half? As long as 1 of them is a runner (BJ) and one of them is an organiser and distributor (Cooke) what difference does it make who feeds the scrum?

I would say Cooke could be just what we need, not the biggest fan of Brough - I think the negatives to a long way to cancelling out the positives, although Cooke is clearly not without issues. He knows how to control a game and organise a side (when he wants to of course) - look at Friday, how many times did we have 2 non ball playing forwards between where the ball is and the 3/4's when attacking in the second half? Why did we leave it so late in the tackle count for the drop goal we had to miss out the under pressure Brough and give it to Matty Blaymire? We need somebody to direct us round the park, and Cooke could just fit the bill in my opinion.

cooke for me should play at 13, i prefer the halfs to be more mobile than he is, hence needing another scrum half. I dont doubt Cooke could bring a lot to the table if his head is right

I disagree. Cooke is a pure organiser/distributer. He has not got the running capabilities to play 13 imo. To play him at 13 would give us too many playmakers on the field at once which has not worked well for us in the past. Plus with DB potentially going would see him play 6.

I can except from a business point of view that it would be in our best interests to let Brough go now. But what I would find hard is if he went and we banked his transfer fee/salary and nobody replaced him. Cooke doesn't count as he is a replacement for Newton. Now if the rumors about Kirmond and Aspinwall are true I would think that would be a bit of good business. Rugby League is above all else a team sport, no one individual is that important not even Danny. We have enough game winners to win enough games to make the play offs. With Kirmond and Aspinwall we would have a really solid sqaud. Let hope we do see something out of this deal not just money down the black hole!