: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:39 am  

We didnt release Boyle......he left, not our problem now.

I might get shot for this but....

IMHO 31 apps for a 21 year old prop in super league is plenty to show his metal...and for me he has not shown the promise he did in NL1, compare him to Pitts at Leeds (i would of considered them similar standard).

He didnt play that many games at wakey and got snapped up by leeds, if Boyle would of carried on progressing after his early promise, Leeds would of snapped him up when they had chance, but no he is at Salford which is for me, about his level. We should aspire to be better than that. He will ply his trade well at Salford but he is not a top 6 player.

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:40 am  

tigerman1+1 wrote:

In the post where do I state you do agree with the decision to release Boyle, who's making assumptions there !!!!!!.

tigerman1+1 wrote:

come on Bonzo explain the TM reasoning behind this strange situation...

This seems like a contradiction to me. How the hell should I know TM's reasoning behind the decision?

Although TigerSteve makes some valid points.

tigersteve wrote:

IMHO 31 apps for a 21 year old prop in super league is plenty to show his metal...and for me he has not shown the promise he did in NL1, compare him to Pitts at Leeds (i would of considered them similar standard).

He didnt play that many games at wakey and got snapped up by leeds, if Boyle would of carried on progressing after his early promise, Leeds would of snapped him up when they had chance, but no he is at Salford which is for me, about his level. We should aspire to be better than that. He will ply his trade well at Salford but he is not a top 6 player.

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:08 am  

Tigerpie wrote:

Your comparison was against Burgess and his 80 starts in the top flight.

I'm not going through stats but I reckon there are probably quite a few young forwards with more than 31 top flight appearances over that time period. Maybe Huby and Lynch with us for starters?

Again, my main gripe is that we let the lad go and then I see talk on here about 2nd rate props joining us. If this happens then someone needs a brain transplant.

In the last two seasons in the top flight (i'm excluding 2006 as boyle made his debut at the end of the season and was behind nutley, ward, sculthorpe, huby and fletcher, and at the time considered to be in the same bracket as payne) there have been 59 competative cas games (54 league, 4 cup, 1 playoff) and boyle has played in 30 of them, he has played more than half the games possible and missed some through injury as well. Now there are some 20/21 year old props that get more than that but not many, most have to wait till there older to get that many games in sl.

Listen i wanted boyle to stay he's a player i rate highly, but at the end of the day cas offered him a contract and he turned it down because he wanted to to be a starting prop, we didnt let him go.

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:00 am  

If he wanted to be a starting prop, he would have had to drop down in standard of tem (i.e Salford) This may be the best move for him andin the long run could benefit him. If he turns out some great performances for Salford he could wel be snapped up by a top 6 side next season and then be a starting prop there.

[tb]

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:07 am  

On the David Mills rumour – it's worth noting that Gremlin is also touting him as a signing for Crusaders on their board.

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:44 am  

King leaves Hull FC...

King leaves Hull FC...

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:37 pm  

I'd put money on King going to Wakey, Kear knows him well from his Hull days too

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:55 pm  

Bonzo wrote:

This seems like a contradiction to me. How the hell should I know TM's reasoning behind the decision?
It may seem a contradiction to you but i state nothing concerning you either agreeing or not with Boyle going, i ask you as a TM supporter to try and give a reason behind the strange situation where we rid our squad of a prop and replace with one seemingly no better.

Although TigerSteve makes some valid points.

i do like this bit " but no he is at Salford which is for me, about his level. We should aspire to be better than that. He will ply his trade well at Salford but he is not a top 6 player." so wanting so much have we got a top 6 player to replace him????? i'll take a rain check on that one.

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:59 pm  

tigerman1+1 wrote:

so wanting so much have we got a top 6 player to replace him????? i'll take a rain check on that one.

Il reserve my judgement until we sign another player as reported.....

: Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:10 pm  

tigersteve wrote:

We didnt release Boyle......he left, not our problem now.

I might get shot for this but....

IMHO 31 apps for a 21 year old prop in super league is plenty to show his metal...and for me he has not shown the promise he did in NL1, compare him to Pitts at Leeds (i would of considered them similar standard).

He didnt play that many games at wakey and got snapped up by leeds, if Boyle would of carried on progressing after his early promise, Leeds would of snapped him up when they had chance, but no he is at Salford which is for me, about his level. We should aspire to be better than that. He will ply his trade well at Salford but he is not a top 6 player.

So your logic is our good players will be snapped up by Leeds?

All the players we have resigned are top 6 players?

One word for you.......Clayton