try adding dwyer and currie to that 17

Crowther stood out for me on Sunday. All effort and determination.



I thought it was a really strange loan signing but now he’s staying it makes sense.



Currie looks finished.

Why make it worse??

course he's not finished, you dont think we'd have been daft enough to sign him to a 3 year deal if he was finished, do you.

A lot depends on the coach. That pack, if fully motivated with Bullock and Kasiano (without errors) as interchanges, should be very competitive - Fitzgibbon is quality and Nicholson will be a year better. Williams is SLs best half back and Dufty is extremely dangerous as are our wingers. It then comes down to the centres and Tai looks good, and King, while not the best can be descent if he finds his pre-contract form.



I'm optimistic we can do something next year, but I'd have more confidence if we could keep Gleeson, or obtain a tactical attacking coach of sorts for Burgess to bounce ideas off.

Assuming the pack is competitive I think we are missing a real captain/on field leader and an effective organising/kicking halfback.

That almost elevates us to Aussie Test squad level…

Just wondering what version of King we are likely to get back?.



A clean slate with a committed and interested King will surely be a decent addition. A sulky 'don't want to be here' version could be disruptive.

I suspect the same one that left. Jumping out of defensive lines, inability to make space for his winger, and only real threat being to catch a cross field kick.

If he is given a fair opportunity and not dropped after just 1 bad game, Leon Hayes could be the organising/kicking scrum half.

So what you're saying is an improvement on Mata'utia because King can catch a cross field kick.

That's true, but with respect you have set a low bar.

I remember Ducky telling us all how Currie was a better player than Liam Farrell.



In truth he looks interested in about 20% of games he plays in (if that) and makes up his tackle stats by being 3rd man in - just watch. Rarely gets 'stuck in' in the middle when the going gets tough and possesses zero aggression. To think we used to have Westwood and Anderson in our 2nd row. But 3 more years it is at the old boys club. #undroppable



Crowther is OK but a very mid to lower table signing. Workmanlike. If we want to be the best (and really mean it) we need to start signing the players that would be good enough for the top teams.

and don't forget Ratchford.

Obviously, we haven't seen Sam Burgess in action, coaching-wise. But after all I've read and videos I've seen, one thing is for sure......he certainly want except any sulking, certainly not from the likes of Toby King. The sooner King gets to realise that I'm sure'ish we'll see a decent player.

Doubt he'll be accepting of some of Currie's 'tackles' or Ratchford's chin to the floor when the going gets tough.

Drinky isn’t likely to do that, like most of our other backs, if we haven’t made enough territory to get him in the area to attack the line.

And if we do manage to get into an area of threat, it’s almost always Williams that gets the pass to create something.

It's a shame we couldn't tempt Gleeson away from Seattle. It's not like coaches come under the salary cap either.

Some massive money in the Union World & Sam Burgess will not be cheap.

It wasn't a matter of money. The Ra Ra Boys have told him he'll struggle to get another coaching job in Union if he doesn't fulfill his contract at Seattle.

Ah, shame. Or maybe we could compensate them if we deem him that good.

We are P5 W2 since Chambers took over. Don't get the love in with Gleeson?

I think it is because we look like we have an attack now, even if we do keep dropping the ball at crucial points. Moving Dufty to the inside channel has also been a good move.

Yes moving Dufty into the middle has proven a good move.

Yep. Without seeing what is happening at sessions we are guessing how useful he is.