Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 7:30 am  

Dave K. wrote:

Coaching staff don't agree with you, that's why Dean has either played 19's or played at FB while the two mentioned have played halfback.

So I'll take the opinion of Radford, Horne and Wilson over yours.

Position has a lot to do with it, we don't need a FB, but could do with a half, so it makes sense to keep the players who are have more chance of playing halfbacks than FB.

He has a good chance of still making a SL player, but I would bet that both Abdul and HTW have better careers.

The position as nothing to do with if I attend games or not like you suggested in previous post, not really sure what your banging on about. But I'll let it go this time, as I was starting to think you was decent forum member, and not a bell end like your post suggests.

Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 7:56 am  

I've never seen Reece Dean play so I cannot comment on his ability. But why do so many people criticise a players ability once they join another team. Grow up. Accept the fact and wish the kid well in his career.

Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 10:18 am  

Zuider wrote:

I've never seen Reece Dean play so I cannot comment on his ability. But why do so many people criticise a players ability once they join another team. Grow up. Accept the fact and wish the kid well in his career.

100% agree, if he's got a long contract on good money, can any of those criticising say they wouldn't do the same if they had an opportunity in there walk of life?

Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 10:41 am  

I'm not criticising Reece, I'm telling the truth. He was very good last year, outstanding at times, but he's not as good as HTW & Abdull and as others have said, he won't get a look in at FB (which is where his best position is imo). HTW & Abdull have a skill set that's far superior and have been consistently better and progressed nicely for 3-4 years.
Seems to me that people are over estimating how good Reece is based on hearing about him on here or Twitter etc.
Which is why I'm laughing at Rovers (if it turns out to be true) offering him 4 years and in no way would I blame Reece for taking it. Good luck to the kid, I hope he has a good career, I've certainly enjoyed watching him the last 12-18 months.

Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 12:29 pm  

*1865* wrote:

I'm not criticising Reece, I'm telling the truth. He was very good last year, outstanding at times, but he's not as good as HTW & Abdull and as others have said, he won't get a look in at FB (which is where his best position is imo). HTW & Abdull have a skill set that's far superior and have been consistently better and progressed nicely for 3-4 years.
Seems to me that people are over estimating how good Reece is based on hearing about him on here or Twitter etc.
Which is why I'm laughing at Rovers (if it turns out to be true) offering him 4 years and in no way would I blame Reece for taking it. Good luck to the kid, I hope he has a good career, I've certainly enjoyed watching him the last 12-18 months.

Exactly how I see it tbf. He catches the eye with his high tempo busy urgent style play that always endears fans. But even last year when outshining HTW I always though harry has the time n subtlety in his game to be better suited to SL
If you ever see him off the pitch it stands out how small he is. Like Burrow but missing about 10kgs of muscle. At half back untill that's balanced out he'd be a target at SL level for every 2nd row n centre in the comp

Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 4:21 pm  

*1865* wrote:

I'm not criticising Reece, I'm telling the truth. He was very good last year, outstanding at times, but he's not as good as HTW & Abdull and as others have said, he won't get a look in at FB (which is where his best position is imo). HTW & Abdull have a skill set that's far superior and have been consistently better and progressed nicely for 3-4 years.
Seems to me that people are over estimating how good Reece is based on hearing about him on here or Twitter etc.
Which is why I'm laughing at Rovers (if it turns out to be true) offering him 4 years and in no way would I blame Reece for taking it. Good luck to the kid, I hope he has a good career, I've certainly enjoyed watching him the last 12-18 months.

Be careful, if some posters don't like your opinion they will call you a bell end.

Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 4:28 pm  

Tinkerman23 wrote:

The position as nothing to do with if I attend games or not like you suggested in previous post, not really sure what your banging on about. But I'll let it go this time, as I was starting to think you was decent forum member, and not a bell end like your post suggests.

Ok, so we don't agree, but is there any need to name call, you don't know me, we have never met, but the name calling pathetic and it makes you sound like a 12 year old boy.

This forum is in need of the mods acting and stopping good people talking rugby, due to personal abuse.

Re: reece dean : Sun May 01, 2016 4:32 pm  

Reality is we cannot keep them all and we have to trust the coaches and it will be the coaches not just Radford . I have seen Reece play a few time and he is a good player but like many before him looking good at his level does not make him a Sl player.If Rovers are giving him the contract rumoured then they must see something in him ,however at the moment it is a rumour

Re: reece dean : Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:20 pm  

Knocked Rovers back, then. Understandable. Good luck in Toronto.

Re: reece dean : Mon Aug 15, 2016 10:20 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Knocked Rovers back, then. Understandable. Good luck in Toronto.

Once in a lifetime chance to live and play the sport he loves in a major city in North America


Or


East hull


Wise choice and good luck to the kid