His best 20 minutes for us was when moved to 6 against Leeds IMO. Certainly looks happier when he has had spells at 13/6. He played as much at 13 against Huddersfield as he did at 11 (Fitz did a stint up at prop). Ball in hand he looks like he will be more than useful long term but his problem so far (again IMO) is he is trying almost too hard and has resulted in a couple of poor defensive reads and one silly offload against Hudds. Is certainly a keeper though and should be more of an asset as the pitches firm up and the weather gets warmer.

fair point, i especially like the bit about the authority he simply shouldn't have, I wonder if leneghan has sold his harlequins shares yet?

We wouldn't have got Westerman when his contract expired for nothing or indeed at all . Other clubs, including Saints, were sniffing round him. That's why we decided to move when we did and were willing to pay a fee.

you can't know that for a fact just because james rule says so, its well documented you got sean long ahead of wigan by offering a more attractive deal, i would have thought o meley and fitzgibbon would have had other suitors apart from yourselves as well. sure you might have had to up his contract offer to beat other competitiors but would have saved on the 6 figure transfer fee.

Ok I'll put it another way. There was no guarantee we would have got Westerman when his contract expired. That's why we moved when we did and paid a fee.

A bigger contract offer may not have been enough to secure him in the face of an offer from someone like Saints.

The difference being that O'Meley, Fitzgibbon and Long already have collections of winners' medals, Westerman does not. At other clubs he could end up that way as well as being well-paid.