: Thu May 28, 2009 9:37 am  

RebelRebel wrote:

Make sure you post the information on the Huddersfield board as well, please - when you can, of course. There are a few posters there who are most concerned about the state of our club at the moment, and who will no doubt be very relieved to read some good news. Thanks.

I'm sure that would really make their day.

: Thu May 28, 2009 9:44 am  

cool4kats wrote:

as far as wilkes is concerned great front rower. no frills. good work ethic , team player, so why would you bag any of your own players. by the way , if you could have a word with mick nanning whilst he is still in contract and get him to come and give us a hand . i am sure john kear would be very grateful to you.

When did i once bag oli wilkes i think he has been a battering ram for our forwards!!!!! As for nayn i just thought he would be a welcome addition to our back line for the next couple of months....but apparantly he's gone to leigh

: Thu May 28, 2009 9:48 am  

Slugger McBatt wrote:

The whole point of Scully getting a hard time now is because people see him differently in relation to how he fitted into the team spirit, based on how people close to the club have reported his behaviour on here and how he responded to his misdemeanour. People are entitled to reassess their opinion of him. And as for Mary Millington's hint of good news, I would be happy to take unsubstantiated rumour at this stage, given that most daft rumours are negative, not positive. Add a knowing wink or something.

That is partly my point though. People ought to be more discerning in their reasoning for giving him a hard time. Of course opinions are entitled and can be revised. If it is 'bad influence, ill dsiciplined, poor reaction to club sanctions' then fair enough. However, 'poor player, poor contribution when he has played', then it just comes over as sour grapes with a whiff of being unable to read the contribution players make to games, particularly when they make comparisons to the return of the messiah.

: Thu May 28, 2009 9:54 am  

As Scully has gone on loan, I wonder if we can recall him if we get an injury 'crisis'?

: Thu May 28, 2009 10:12 am  

bloomers wrote:

That is partly my point though. People ought to be more discerning in their reasoning for giving him a hard time. Of course opinions are entitled and can be revised. If it is 'bad influence, ill dsiciplined, poor reaction to club sanctions' then fair enough. However, 'poor player, poor contribution when he has played', then it just comes over as sour grapes with a whiff of being unable to read the contribution players make to games, particularly when they make comparisons to the return of the messiah.

Comparisons or asessments are often unfair, as they frequently fail to take into account the task that the player has been asked to perform. There's obviously more to Scully's game than, say, Korki's, but there could very well be good reasons why he hasn't shown everything he's capable of at certain times. Injury or the effects of his medical condition may also have played a part.

One comment I read on another board summed it up quite well for me - a gifted player who just seems to make a lot of daft decisions. In the games that I've seen him play, this would sum up his contribution quite well, but there may be many other instances where this has not been the case. I don't think he's a lazy player - certainly not when you compare his contribution with many of the contributions that his on-loan successor has made to our cause. Have we had value for money from him? Difficult to say. We could probably have got more out of him, but the same could be said for many of the more talented players that have come before him, and doubtless many who will play for us after him. It's highly unlikely we'll ever see him in a Wakey shirt again, and I'm just glad that we have - or at least, I hope we have - drawn a line under this unfortunate saga now.

: Thu May 28, 2009 11:23 am  

Westgate6 wrote:

As for nayn i just thought he would be a welcome addition to our back line for the next couple of months

I take it you don't get to watch much RL then?

: Thu May 28, 2009 11:25 am  

Haywire wrote:

I take it you don't get to watch much RL then?

This reminds me of when Tony Smith said he would bring players in who you never thought would play for Wakey, and boy did he deliver on that.

: Thu May 28, 2009 11:35 am  

RebelRebel wrote:

Comparisons or asessments are often unfair, as they frequently fail to take into account the task that the player has been asked to perform. There's obviously more to Scully's game than, say, Korki's, but there could very well be good reasons why he hasn't shown everything he's capable of at certain times. Injury or the effects of his medical condition may also have played a part.

One comment I read on another board summed it up quite well for me - a gifted player who just seems to make a lot of daft decisions. In the games that I've seen him play, this would sum up his contribution quite well, but there may be many other instances where this has not been the case. I don't think he's a lazy player - certainly not when you compare his contribution with many of the contributions that his on-loan successor has made to our cause. Have we had value for money from him? Difficult to say. We could probably have got more out of him, but the same could be said for many of the more talented players that have come before him, and doubtless many who will play for us after him. It's highly unlikely we'll ever see him in a Wakey shirt again, and I'm just glad that we have - or at least, I hope we have - drawn a line under this unfortunate saga now.

: Thu May 28, 2009 11:43 am  

cool4kats wrote:

shame you haven't got him at cas then isn't it. he would have the b..lls to keep them off the drink more than matterson has ever had.

Maybe but if the alternative is getting rid of a good prop for korki they can drink as much as they want

: Thu May 28, 2009 11:46 am  

Neggy wrote:

This reminds me of when Tony Smith said he would bring players in who you never thought would play for Wakey, and boy did he deliver on that.