Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sat Dec 14, 2024 12:17 am  

jonh wrote:

Completely disagree.

If Field gets injured French or Eckersley goes to 1.

If French goes then Farrimond gets a start in the halves.

If Eckerskey goes he gets game time in SL.

We don’t need Brierley he doesn’t improve our squad in any way.

Would be a poor signing and a rumour I see no truth in.

Farrimond and Smith together in my opinion won’t work. Both are a number 7 and won’t complement each other as they both play the same game. I don’t think currently we have an alternative to French at 6 in the squad other than a relatively unproven Keighran. Having Brierley in the squad would allow Field as another alternative.
Eckersley for a prolonged period at 1 seriously???? I like Eckersley but he isn’t the fleet footed roaming FB that we’ve become accustomed to in last few years and he would reduce our attacking options compared to Field or French. Obviously Brierley isn’t a French or a Field but he does play a similar style of play and has a decent level of pace over the initial 15 or 20 yards.
Brierley replacing Hampshire isn’t an improvement??
I don’t think the Brierley rumour is true due primarily to SC so to a large degree it's probably irrelevant but if it was possible then he’d be a decent signing. I wouldn’t lose any sleep if we didn’t sign him however, if we could fit him within the SC then I’d consider him an astute signing with our current first team squad.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sat Dec 14, 2024 12:53 am  

BoredWiganer wrote:

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/salford-red-devils-instructed-make-30574633

This could lend some weight to the Brierley rumour, not sure it is a good move for him though as he would surely only assume the position of Hampshire and be seen as back up. Not a clue how we would be fitting him under the Salary cap also.

I hope not. The asset strippers are circling Salford and it is not a good look.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sat Dec 14, 2024 12:55 am  

jonh wrote:

Completely disagree.

If Field gets injured French or Eckersley goes to 1.

If French goes then Farrimond gets a start in the halves.

If Eckerskey goes he gets game time in SL.

We don’t need Brierley he doesn’t improve our squad in any way.

Would be a poor signing and a rumour I see no truth in.

Eckersley and Farrimond are all quality and the future of our club.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Sat Dec 14, 2024 2:22 pm  

Itchy Arsenal wrote:

Farrimond and Smith together in my opinion won’t work. Both are a number 7 and won’t complement each other as they both play the same game. I don’t think currently we have an alternative to French at 6 in the squad other than a relatively unproven Keighran. Having Brierley in the squad would allow Field as another alternative.
Eckersley for a prolonged period at 1 seriously???? I like Eckersley but he isn’t the fleet footed roaming FB that we’ve become accustomed to in last few years and he would reduce our attacking options compared to Field or French. Obviously Brierley isn’t a French or a Field but he does play a similar style of play and has a decent level of pace over the initial 15 or 20 yards.
Brierley replacing Hampshire isn’t an improvement??
I don’t think the Brierley rumour is true due primarily to SC so to a large degree it's probably irrelevant but if it was possible then he’d be a decent signing. I wouldn’t lose any sleep if we didn’t sign him however, if we could fit him within the SC then I’d consider him an astute signing with our current first team squad.

I thought the same initially re Farrimond and Smith but was comfortable in admitting i was wrong last year when it happened.

For me a spine of

1. French/Field
6. Farrimond
7. Smith

Is a better backup than

1. Brierley
6. French
7. Smith

Plus it means Farrimond is getting what he needs which is games as first back up.

Would be a pointless and short sighted signing for mine.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Mon Dec 16, 2024 11:57 pm  

jonh wrote:

I thought the same initially re Farrimond and Smith but was comfortable in admitting i was wrong last year when it happened.

For me a spine of

1. French/Field
6. Farrimond
7. Smith

Is a better backup than

1. Brierley
6. French
7. Smith

Plus it means Farrimond is getting what he needs which is games as first back up.

Would be a pointless and short sighted signing for mine.

As I said Jon SC makes the signing of Brierley a bit of a it’s never going to happen. It will be interesting to see how Farrimond develops as currently I think both French and Smith are on long term contracts. Something at some point within the next two years will have to give or Farrimond will probably feel that he has to move on as for me he is an organising 7. It’s a nice position to be in and I’ve just got a feeling that Farrimond may just be one of those players who come along once in a generation. Currently for me Smith is the glue of the team and he could actually kick on and even improve his his all round game even further. Interesting times and I’m just going to enjoy the ride.

Have you seen much of Drachenberg? I’ve only seen him once and he looks a lad with lots of raw potential and hopefully could kick on as a future FB for us. He seems to be under the radar at the moment.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Tue Dec 17, 2024 8:17 pm  

When Farrimond first played in the first team, everyone said, he's a 7 really, but he was actually played in a 'running 6' role, and wasn't too dusty about it. That said, I think Brierley is a decent player (and better than Hampshire), and would be happy to see him in the squad if we could fit him in.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Tue Dec 24, 2024 3:08 pm  

Wakefield apparently after Makin. Didn’t see anything of him last year. Wonder if we’ll let him go

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Tue Dec 24, 2024 3:23 pm  

WWste wrote:

Wakefield apparently after Makin. Didn’t see anything of him last year. Wonder if we’ll let him go

Matthew Shaw reckons it's a loan arrangement, got no issues with that.

Re: Rumours and signings v9 : Tue Dec 24, 2024 8:32 pm  

CM Punk wrote:

Matthew Shaw reckons it's a loan arrangement, got no issues with that.

I agree, I think that is a good result for all concerned.