9 pens in 11 games isnt numerous.......Radford,Tickle and Washbrook are all worse...but dont let facts get in the way.

Cusack will be going anyway.

Fitz you have to be joking far better player and important to the team, if people think that lauaki is better they need to stop watching rugby, Berrigan has been hit and miss, I will play him at centre and sign a hooker.

A lot of Lauaki penalties had been really stupid I can think of at least 3 times he has conceded a penalty when we have the ball.

Fitz is a better player yes but i wouldnt re-new...age and picking up injuries now and money can be spent elsewhere and Washy or Whiting to play 13.

You mean the ones against rovers....Hame could be a bloody handfull if he is coached right.

Fitzgibbon and Lauaki are 2 completely different types of forwards, neither can do the each others job, so you're talking bollox.

Your right Fitzgibbon can tackle.

They both play backrow and can be compared, if you had to only keep one would you keep Lauaki over Fitz, if so you have been watching a different game to me, fully fit squad and Lauaki wouldnt be in my 17.

If you are happy Lauaki this season, you must be easily pleased, maybe ring Agar and ask him to give him a new contract.

Lauaki has been average this year apart from the first game.

Also one against Huddersfield which they scored off.

Fitz has missed a few games, less than Tickle who everyone wants to keep, would have played more if Agar gave him a break (same as Tickle).

You might be right about a different coach but that is unlikly to happen at the moment.

And so can Lauaki, but you obviously only see what you want to. Would I give Lauaki a new contract, yes I would. He's only 25 for starters. Used in the right way with the a new coach he would be totally devastating. He is an inpact forward, not like Fitz who can play for 80 mins and tackle for 80. Get Rid of Lauaki and who would our inpact forwards be, Props would be O'Meley and Moa, and second row would be Manu, that's it. Tickle, Radford, Fitz, are just workhorses, they simply don't bring the physicality that Lauaki does.

Not sure what age has to do with it and how you would give him a contract on what he has done so far is beyond belief. One impact backrow is enough. The top teams seem to survive with only one, so dont see why we need two. Hopfully next season we will sign a least one new prop with good go foraward, to add to the ones you mentioned.

In a perfect world I would keep Lauaki because he could prove a very useful player, but if we could make a quota spot to sign a top halfback I would keep O Meley, Moa, Berrigan (just) and Fitz before Lauaki.

If we are talking about wasted quota spots, we should have kept King and ditched Cusack

Undecided on who i would get rid of quota wise. Fitz although a great player is aging and he may become a liability rather than an asset. Berro has failed to live up to the hype as well. Lauaki not as good as some are saying but if he is coached properly and given a gameplan to work to SHOULD turn into a great forward.

Hame is just the type of player that we have been crying out for over recent years. He's big, powerful, aggressive, and with ball in hand, he's actually a very skillful player. Yes he has abit of a short-temper and is guilty of ill-discipline at times, but he has been a stand out performer for us this season. Last year everyone was complaining how 'weak' and 'soft' our pack was, and that we needed to be meaner and more physical, well that is why Lauaki was brought in, and for people to say that he wouldnt be missed are just complete hypocrits imo.

we will see how much he will be missed.looks like he's gonna be out for a few weeks.

When did King last have a good season? 2004 or 2005?

2005

We won a trophy and had a great coach at the helm

So you think we should have kept a player who's last good season was five years ago?