But that's the problem, any player with a SL deal has been 'watched closely' but then people only seem to remember an error, not a break or good ball. Seems a natural bias from Widnes fans AGAINST those retained which is ridiculous.

We were e at Fev but Dave Allen made some good runs and a break where he wasn't backed up, mentioned? Don't be silly, it's easier to say he's !

What you are failing to recognise is players like Allen and Coyle were not rated before they were taken on, and that makes your point somewhat moot. I was disappointed when we signed coyle, doubly disappointed when we signed him for super league, as he has never for me looked like a quality player.

This has nothing to do with over scrutiny due to a signed contract.

I understand people who don't rate players, especially on here as usually consistent with it. Buy especially on the other board players who were re-signed with praise at time (Inc IMO Coyle without a doubt) have come in for incredible critiscm just due to those released, that's not really fair ESPECIALLY those in different positions.

How many games did he play in the first team at hooker though ? From memory it is certainly in the low single figures.

He isn't / wasn't a hooker. He wasn't good enough in the reserves in that position let alone make the step up to the firsts.

Ultimately that was his problem in having no settled position for most of his time at the club. Was a half at 18's until reserves where there where better options in the halves and he mixed between there and hooker. That didn't work out so he went to FB at the start of the year and seemed to settle into it quite well where his natural backing up came to the fore and he got his chance again in the firsts through injury.

I can see the clubs reasoning behind it and I did call it previously on the TIW board. He is unlucky in that it took him so long to settle into a position and make the break to the firsts and look comfortable. If he made the switch to FB a year or so earlier and he would probably be the settled number 1 FB now and in all likelihood have bagged himself a SL deal. We have scraped around with dross at FB for quite a few years since Grix left and now we have found ourselves with three of our own produced talents looking good in the firsts let alone the signing of Briscoe.

Abso... Blooming...lutely

Craven is one of the most natural looking full backs I have seen at the club for a while and he isn't even a full back by birth. He has scored a decent number of tries to boot and he joins the line very well. Terrific support player. If he hadn't been injured DH wouldn't have got a sniff.

Correct me if I'm wrong here but I don't recall Danny Craven making so many line breaks and scoring from open/broken play. Was it not Halifax where he scored 3 in the space what 15 / 20 mins? As I said, on both players showings this season, Danny has looked the stronger in my opinion. Craven was very unfortunate to have that injury so obviously his chances have been limited but I still feel Hulme has excelled in the 1st team, far better than some who have been re-signed imo.



Betts alluded to him having too many 9s, therefore I assumed that hooker was one of Danny's positions.. I see Danny as a more skilful, elusive and talented player than Coyle in generally, who in recent times has become quite pedestrian at dummy half.

So no Joey, it was not made up. If we can find space on the cap for players of Coyle's standard, then I don't see why we find can't one for one of the brightest, versatile young prospects at this club in recent times. Given chance he could have fought his way into that side next year.

Hulme as been standing out in the first team, what a pointless thing to say.

Craven has had a solid stat to his Widnes carear. Very safe and good support play. Danny Hulme still gets my vote as the better fullback. He wont be eligible for the 20's next year but he's still only 20, 21 next year obviously. Young player of the year, Breaks the line and supports more than anybody on the team.

I still find it amazing that people are trying to defend the decision.

No-one is defending the decision! People don't know the difference between defending and at least seeing a bit of logic behind it FFS.

Absolutely fine. Danny Craven gets my vote and the clubs it seems.
I remain gutted but I can see see the reasoning behind it and it seems that he is set for a championship club next year if rumours are to be believed.

Hulme, great home tallent, too bad he's gone, would have done well....Why did we drop him?

Drop him? Or you mean let him go?

Not pointless at all you moron.We all have opinions and I think Craven,Briscoe,and Jack Owens are better than Hulme.High balls and hulmes defence not the best.Can't play halfback as seen him in t reserves.You and I have different opinions so if don't like it do not read it.

My view of Hulme is that he can fill in at hooker, scrum half or full back. But, he would never be first choice in any of those spots. His asset is kick returns at full back but that's off set by the tendancy to drop a bomb and I don't recall many try saving tackles.

Craven is the far better all round player and I'm surprised how so many people have forgotten the impact he made when he started in the first team. The biggest disappointment this season for me was him getting that bad injury.

I'd say spot on as usual mate.