no i didn't as a matter of fact. well pointed out.

Well said Paul, Danny is going no where and is a very very good prospect indeed with the limited game time he has had recently but he is a student of the game for sure and will be an ample replacement for Gibsy when he leaves,
Does make me giggle though Paul as we have said when posters keep stating this "offload and replace" policy a lot have on here , I mean as much as you can see internationals in a massive queue around the KC wanting to sign every week cant they?? why would anyone want to offload a young talented individual with lots of solid years ahead of him unless there is better to come in!! and there isnt much better than Danny given the cap restraints in place.

I find it a bit odd that people say Washbrook has 'potential' given that he is 24 and made his debut 5 years ago.

But limited game time given that time at the club and all players develop at different speeds..
He is a good lad

I have mixed feelings, I would like to give him a consistent run out to prove his potential tbh..

But what is the point in keeping such a player if he is not going to be used correctly and allowed to progress? He dosnt fit Agars criteria for a "13" and playing at 6 he has been nothing but avarage for two seasons at an age were he should be developing, it would be more benificial to sign a player who could cover 6 better, Washy had the potential to be more then a solid player and his lack of progress can be put down to Agar in my opinion. Fitz, Radford or Burnett would be prefered by Agar over Washbrook in the 13 role, so would be better for both parties to move on.

I thought Washy was responsible for giving Manu most of his decent ball last night. He gave Yeamo a cracking delayed ball too where he nearly went through the gap.

Exactly right.

I guess the potential part for Washy is based on the fact that from the age of 22-24 he's mostly been injured. From the age of 20-22 he looked a class act.

The potential statement is based on him staying injury free and proving his 20-22 form again.

Players develop at different rates. I don't remember Washy looking a class act - at 20 he had potential for sure. Injuries have not been kind I agree. At the end of the day the best young players become internationals early in their careers and become first choice players for their clubs because their talent and ability levels warrant it. They are good enough to hold down a place and make it their own - ensuring that overseas recruitment is targeted elsewhere in the team and not in their position. If they are really good enough they will make a position their own. Washy, for whatever reason, hasn't managed this - he is not the only one Hall is another who has had a fair chance to shine but not quite grasped it. Whiting is probably not good enough in a single position but is generally reliable and has immense utility value. Fitzgibbon showed why he is such a quality player last night when the chips were down he took the game to Saints time and again. OK Washy is younger but I don't think he could have played that role. That is the quality level of player the top teams need. Sinfield is a good example. Similar in build and position to Washy he has been and still is a quality international. Leeds haven't needed to recruit in his position for years because he made the grade. Some of our not so young youngsters have still to do that IMO.

i'm sure washbrook would be alot better player with regular game time. maybe some people forget he can do a job in the second row for us too

i reckon when fitz leaves us then washy will get his shirt and play LF. we might not use him as a pivot but his time spent at stand-off would benefit his game IMO