So the fact we tried to sign sammutt before tansey was sacked means we weren't looking for half back cover before tansey was sacked? You're disproving your own argument

So now you understand it give it up

brindley? Thought that was your agar hating alter ego? Not suggesting he's a real person are you?

Now I'm confused. Obst wasn't signed as a direct replacement for anyone was he? I suppose the closest would be Berrigan but definitely not Tansey. Phelps replaces Tansey's main role (FB) and Obst takes over as back up HB from both Berro and Tansey if you want to look at it that way.

My point exactly but a couple of our learned friends seem not to agree, which is what we've been "debating"



Which is quite enlightening when you consider he then posted this



And your buddy told us this



All bollox as I said

We needed HB and 9 cover, we were after Sammut. Crusaders said yes to a deal but we would have to wait until Hanburys visa came through. Tansey got sacked - we couldn't wait, so decided to sign more urgently. Luckily for us, the Wakefield situation made it easier than it might have been.

If its any consolation I can't prove you're wrong either, but then I didn't claim victory, did I.

That sounds about right to me, Obst was a neccessity due to the fact we had lost Tansey/Berrigan. We ended up needing halfback/hooking cover.

If we're fully fit and had another hooker, Obst would be in ours. Briggs will get better, Obst is as good as he ever has been or likely ever will be.



Disagree, Orr is significantly better than Obst and always has been IMO. His organisation skills and kicking game especially are leagues ahead. He and Randall were responsible for the majority of good from Harlequins in the past few years.



He just seems to talk a bit more since Dobson's been out going by TV, and their attack looks more organised than ours. I suppose that could as much be down to them being more organised as a team in general than us though, but then that applies to most of SL.



Depends if you want your hooker to be playing 80 minutes. Houghton sharing the hooking role with either Obst or Diskin makes no difference to his development, he'd still be sharing with someone. I'd just rather it be with someone better.



We should have been though, so that point is a little irrelevant. I think our seeming preference of moving the fullback and bringing someone in there was idiotic, particularly given the fitness records of the 2 halfbacks.

Ok, ok I'll accept I worded the first post incorrectly, what I meant was that it wasn't a high priority until Tansey went.

Won't accept it, or disagree with it?

at the end of the day,its wether we should have signed obst on a 2 year deal.some say no ,some like me say yes.i suppose time will tell.if hull come out in a few months and say we could have signed cronk or thurston,but we used quota spot on obst.the no s will be right.i just think its becoming that much harder to entice top aussies over here.but as i said time will tell.

That's the way I see it.

I cannot believe people are having a pop at Obst, done more than Horne or Long since he arrived, no he isnt a world beater but he gives 100%

Hows obst going for you guys?

Heart of a lion and 100%

I believe the word you're looking for is WRONG