: Thu Jun 18, 2009 6:40 pm  

Maybe if we aren't going to re-sign Jeffries we should go with Sykes & Wing and then look for another quality centre?

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:09 pm  

mat wrote:

seems to support my position in a discusion I've been having in one of threads. terry monster seems obsessed with fact that we cant afford 3 'expensive' halves in deacs,bj and wing, and since deacs is under contract he must retain starting spot with bj released. Cant make him understand that we need 3 halves going into next season and retaining a 3rd hooker who can play the odd game in halves isnt the best option

I'm not saying he must Mat, I'm saying he will, that is 'if' we do sign Wing and retain BJ. I too voted for Wing & BJ. Ive already told you that if Deacs was OOC that I wouldn't think twice of getting rid of him and retaining BJ.

I fully understand we need need some cover operating in the halfs next season, but why does it have to be 3 players on big dollar's? You don't seem to understand that cover is meant to be cheap, and not a well paid player within a squad of players, hence why cover is usually a youth team player or a reserve grade player. What's the point in having a player operating as cover that's getting paid a fair chunk of the salary cap, that might only play a handful of games, especially if he's not called on to play many games?

Take a look all over super league, which team has 3 high profile players opertating the halfs roles at their clubs? few or none will be your answer?Ask yourself why you don't see what you are suggesting, at Super League clubs, because it's to expensive to have a high profile player operating simply as cover.

As for Rinaldi, he's a hooker/half back, he plays them both well enough to operate as cover, and in a cover player, that is all you need. Not an expert, just somebody who can get the job done if need be.

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:15 pm  

I always make a point in these polls of identifying the option the originator least wants me to vote for and then voting for that option.

I'm bloody minded like that.

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:21 pm  

mystic eddie wrote:

It will be one of hari, bari, gari, lari or cari.


Failing that, Tigertot.

Of course!

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:31 pm  

I don't think the Craig Wing deal is as signed and sealed as people seem to think. I hope to god it is, but lets not count our chickens.

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:33 pm  

beefy1 wrote:

I don't think the Craig Wing deal is as signed and sealed as people seem to think. I hope to god it is, but lets not count our chickens.

Don't think anyone truly thinks it is. All the stuff regarding him is purely hypothetical.

I for one don't think the Wing deal will come off. But I'll be pleasantly surprised if it does.

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:38 pm  

Terry Monster wrote:

I'm not saying he must Mat, I'm saying he will, that is 'if' we do sign Wing and retain BJ. I too voted for Wing & BJ. Ive already told you that if Deacs was OOC that I wouldn't think twice of getting rid of him and retaining BJ.

I fully understand we need need some cover operating in the halfs next season, but why does it have to be 3 players on big dollar's? You don't seem to understand that cover is meant to be cheap, and not a well paid player within a squad of players, hence why cover is usually a youth team player or a reserve grade player. What's the point in having a player operating as cover that's getting paid a fair chunk of the salary cap, that might only play a handful of games, especially if he's not called on to play many games?

Take a look all over super league, which team has 3 high profile players opertating the halfs roles at their clubs? few or none will be your answer?Ask yourself why you don't see what you are suggesting, at Super League clubs, because it's to expensive to have a high profile player operating simply as cover.

As for Rinaldi, he's a hooker/half back, he plays them both well enough to operate as cover, and in a cover player, that is all you need. Not an expert, just somebody who can get the job done if need be.

thats point your missing. whilst deacs will be on a decent wage, he isnt taking up the full amount of his wage on the salary cap due to 10year/50k rule, therefore he is relatively cheap as a cover player. If he's not good enough for starting spot then he shouldnt get it next year,just because we made mistake of signing him on a two year deal last year.

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:41 pm  

mat wrote:

thats point your missing. whilst deacs will be on a decent wage, he isnt taking up the full amount of his wage on the salary cap due to 10year/50k rule, therefore he is relatively cheap as a cover player. If he's not good enough for starting spot then he shouldnt get it next year,just because we made mistake of signing him on a two year deal last year.

I'm not missing that point at all, Deacs is still probs one of our highest paid players even with 50k knocked off, his wage will still be relativley high I reckon, still far much for somebody who you want to play as cover.

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 7:45 pm  

Terry Monster wrote:

I'm not missing that point at all, Deacs is still probs one of our highest paid players even with 50k knocked off, his wage will still be relativley high I reckon, still far much for somebody who you want to play as cover.

I don't care how much we're paying. If he isnt good enough to warrant the starting shirt he shouldnt be starting. simple as. we didnt have a problem doing same with harris last year and he was definitely our highest paid player. I'm not arguind any more its like talking to a brick wall

: Thu Jun 18, 2009 8:03 pm  

mat wrote:

I don't care how much we're paying. If he isnt good enough to warrant the starting shirt he shouldnt be starting. simple as. we didnt have a problem doing same with harris last year and he was definitely our highest paid player. I'm not arguind any more its like talking to a brick wall

Clearly.

If you dont care how much we are paying and are prepared to see a high profile player, with a high profile players wage going to waste cleaning the boots then you are clearly happy with throwing valuable money away.

OK, That's no problem. What's point getting into a debate though? This is what I believe, it's neither right nor wrong, same as you it's just what I think would be best for Bulls. But I'm not going to change or concede ground on my side of the debate, just to please somebody else.