: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:50 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

All this talk of Orford, Thurston etc. I think some of you guys are getting suckered by agent talk. It's VERY unusual for a genuine top-tier and prime Aussie scrum half to make the jump to the UK. In Australia these guys are feted like movie stars and live the life of such, whilst over here they are media nobodies.

Orford might say he loves SL more than having the Corrs girls lick ice cream off his nads - but the chances are he's just trying to secure himself a better deal in the NRL by initiating a Dutch auction.

For a team which has lacked a genuine scrum half (to crippling effect) for some time - a slightly past prime Long is infinitely better than an Aussie assurance that isn't worth the paper it's written on.

What happens if Hull hold out on an assurance from either Aussie and it falls through (very likely). Long has gone to another club and you're no better off than you are now. Indeed, you're worse off because you have less time to delve into the bag of second-tier scrum halves (see Thorman).

No brainer if you ask me.

I've been saying this for weeks, good post.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:09 pm  

For all those bemoaning us signing Long instead of Orford. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/ju ... l-transfer Taken from the above article "Hull, who have already signed the ­veteran Sydney Roosters forward Craig ­Fitzgibbon for 2010, had also made a substantial offer to the Manly Sea Eagles scrum-half Matt Orford, reportedly wanted by Wigan and Warrington. But Orford is now expected to stay in Australia, and that has forced any Super League club in need of a new half-back to look closer to home."

For all those bemoaning us signing Long instead of Orford. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/ju ... l-transfer Taken from the above article "Hull, who have already signed the ­veteran Sydney Roosters forward Craig ­Fitzgibbon for 2010, had also made a substantial offer to the Manly Sea Eagles scrum-half Matt Orford, reportedly wanted by Wigan and Warrington. But Orford is now expected to stay in Australia, and that has forced any Super League club in need of a new half-back to look closer to home."

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:14 pm  

Chris28 wrote:

I'll say this slowly

Saints....offered...him... a new....contract.

Nothing to do with him "not being good enough". Regardless of who'd signed him. The fact that othe clubs were apparently after him speaks volumes

I'll say this even slower...Saints offered him a ONE year deal but he wanted a TWO year deal (cannot blame him..security for future/family etc.

Saints were not prepared to give him a two year deal given age,injuries starting to catch up with him and probably to get an ageing high earner off the salary cap to bring in fresher/younger replacement.

Such considerations dont seem to worry your board though as they'll throw good money at any NAME (even if best years behind him) in an attempt to appease the fans and chase the dream.[/b]

[Kosh]

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:18 pm  

cheekydiddles wrote:

I'll say this even slower...Saints offered him a ONE year deal but he wanted a TWO year deal (cannot blame him..security for future/family etc.

Saints were not prepared to give him a two year deal given age,injuries starting to catch up with him and probably to get an ageing high earner off the salary cap to bring in fresher/younger replacement.

Such considerations dont seem to worry your board though as they'll throw good money at any NAME (even if best years behind him) in an attempt to appease the fans and chase the dream.[/b]

Close - but no banana.

Try reading the various threads on here an the Saints board and you'll learn why Long was only offered 1 year at Saints.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:25 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Close - but no banana.

Try reading the various threads on here an the Saints board and you'll learn why Long was only offered 1 year at Saints.

I may have been speculating a little with the reasons but Fact is he was only offered a ONE year deal and that is the ONLY reason he has now signed for Hull...end off.

Had Saints been able/willing to offer him the two year deal do you seriously think he'd have chosen Hull over Saints....if you do...then keeping taking the tablets

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:26 pm  

Wayne Bennett recently said (on the BBC website) that sometimes it's better to take a short term loss in favour of long term gain. This is precisely the thinking at Saints regarding Long.

Perhaps Saints will be the poorer next season for Long's absence. He's a hell of a player who is bound to be missed. At this moment there are a number of kids competing for his shirt, with Eastmond being the #1 candidate (Smith may return from CC, but I doubt it. Lomax can play seven, as can Wheeler).

If Eastmond gets the nod he will doubtlessly find it difficult. The Saints pack and backs are so used to Long communication is almost telepathic. Kyle is going to have to stake his own claim and that will take time and effort. But he has plenty of talent and his attitude seems good.

I expect there will be some short term loss, but we've got to bite the bullet. Yes, Saints may well drop points because of this, but it would be extremely counterproductive to keep kids like Eastmond waiting much longer. So you see, it's not that Long isn't up to it. He is. But there are other, younger - and possibly better - players ready to make names for themselves now.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:32 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Wayne Bennett recently said (on the BBC website) that sometimes it's better to take a short term loss in favour of long term gain. This is precisely the thinking at Saints regarding Long.

Perhaps Saints will be the poorer next season for Long's absence. He's a hell of a player who is bound to be missed. At this moment there are a number of kids competing for his shirt, with Eastmond being the #1 candidate (Smith may return from CC, but I doubt it. Lomax can play seven, as can Wheeler).

If Eastmond gets the nod he will doubtlessly find it difficult. The Saints pack and backs are so used to Long communication is almost telepathic. Kyle is going to have to stake his own claim and that will take time and effort. But he has plenty of talent and his attitude seems good.

I expect there will be some short term loss, but we've got to bite the bullet. Yes, Saints may well drop points because of this, but it would be extremely counterproductive to keep kids like Eastmond waiting much longer. So you see, it's not that Long isn't up to it. He is. But there are other, younger - and possibly better - players ready to make names for themselves now.

Whereas at Hull we only really have one top prospect (Williams) who can play at 7 and he is nowhere near ready. Two years of Sean Long allows Hull to develop the young lad further and for him to learn from Long as the Saints young lads have done. In two years time he could be ready but a lot can happe in two years either way.

It looks a good deal for both sides from where I am sitting.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:41 pm  

Hutchie wrote:

you

Unavailable I'm afraid mate, shoulder injury.

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:45 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Wayne Bennett recently said (on the BBC website) that sometimes it's better to take a short term loss in favour of long term gain. This is precisely the thinking at Saints regarding Long.

Perhaps Saints will be the poorer next season for Long's absence. He's a hell of a player who is bound to be missed. At this moment there are a number of kids competing for his shirt, with Eastmond being the #1 candidate (Smith may return from CC, but I doubt it. Lomax can play seven, as can Wheeler).

If Eastmond gets the nod he will doubtlessly find it difficult. The Saints pack and backs are so used to Long communication is almost telepathic. Kyle is going to have to stake his own claim and that will take time and effort. But he has plenty of talent and his attitude seems good.

I expect there will be some short term loss, but we've got to bite the bullet. Yes, Saints may well drop points because of this, but it would be extremely counterproductive to keep kids like Eastmond waiting much longer. So you see, it's not that Long isn't up to it. He is. But there are other, younger - and possibly better - players ready to make names for themselves now.

If he can keep fit

: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:46 pm  

Whilst I think Long is a good buy, I find it hard to believe a club like Hull with such a vast catchment area is currently unable to promote a scrum half of some description from the juniors.

Going back a few years both Saints and Hull were talking up Scott Moore and Tommy Lee respectively as scrum halves with bright futures. Since then both have enjoyed mixed fortunes - Moore's lack of explosive pace was the reason he was moved to hooker (where he played okay-ish at Cas and better at Huddersfield). Lee's star appears to have diminished significantly to the point where he could well leave Hull.

The thing is, Saints took the hit and worked hard to produce a new crop of kids. What happened at Hull?