All the players named here, to a greater or lesser extent, had the misfortune to be players who a faction of the fans "never liked", and so it didn't matter what they did - they were doomed to be forever second rate.
Players like Naylor and Harris were brought in for their particular strengths, and to do a particular job, and they did it exceedingly well - one look at their trophy cabinets shows this - yet were as reviled in certain quarters when they left as they had been when they arrived.
It's also normal - some years after the event - for the unreasonable critics to suddenly do an about face and claim they liked Player A all along and isn't he much better than player B that we now have, what a pity we let A leave.
Ben Harris had no pace, but wasn't bought for his pace. He was great at what he did and the proof includes leaving us to nail down a starting spot in the NRL. Naylor - what Terrytot said.
Evans was different. Evans was always a classy player who you could stake your life would always have a good, solid game, wherever he was asked to play, and also score his share of tries. It was only the shambolic, pathetic RFL that caused us to let him go. We certainly wanted to keep him, and would have.
Some people have strange ideas and don't understand the concept of horses for courses, or how a player is bought or made to fit into a plan. They don't all have to be Darren Lockyer. Indeed most people never consider the fact that a team of 17 Darren Lockyers would get beat by a few dozen every week!
Players like Naylor and Harris were brought in for their particular strengths, and to do a particular job, and they did it exceedingly well - one look at their trophy cabinets shows this - yet were as reviled in certain quarters when they left as they had been when they arrived.
It's also normal - some years after the event - for the unreasonable critics to suddenly do an about face and claim they liked Player A all along and isn't he much better than player B that we now have, what a pity we let A leave.
Ben Harris had no pace, but wasn't bought for his pace. He was great at what he did and the proof includes leaving us to nail down a starting spot in the NRL. Naylor - what Terrytot said.
Evans was different. Evans was always a classy player who you could stake your life would always have a good, solid game, wherever he was asked to play, and also score his share of tries. It was only the shambolic, pathetic RFL that caused us to let him go. We certainly wanted to keep him, and would have.
Some people have strange ideas and don't understand the concept of horses for courses, or how a player is bought or made to fit into a plan. They don't all have to be Darren Lockyer. Indeed most people never consider the fact that a team of 17 Darren Lockyers would get beat by a few dozen every week!
