Board index ‹ Super League ‹ St. Helens - the-entertainers.tv ‹ Rumours thread.

Saddened! wrote:

Do we want any players from Bradford? Sounds like they will all be available pretty soon.

Would take Hargreaves back short term to offer us more cover in front row, also like Bateman (Wire bound) and Whitehead (although with Sia, Wilkin, Flanagan, Flannery & Dixon we have a lot here, with MAnu also coming in next season)

If Nathan Brown is looking for a half back, would Luke Gale be worth a punt? Great organiser, good kicking game, young and British...a better prospect than Matty Smith imo and could develop into a similar mould as Danny Brough in future

wakey_saint wrote:

Would take Hargreaves back short term to offer us more cover in front row, also like Bateman (Wire bound) and Whitehead (although with Sia, Wilkin, Flanagan, Flannery & Dixon we have a lot here, with MAnu also coming in next season)

If Nathan Brown is looking for a half back, would Luke Gale be worth a punt? Great organiser, good kicking game, young and British...a better prospect than Matty Smith imo and could develop into a similar mould as Danny Brough in future

Their best players are back rowers, which is precisely where we don't need anyone at the moment.

I don't think Hargreaves offers anything more than we can get in house from someone like Forster, so I wouldn't move for him.

I've not seen enough of Gale to make a fully informed comment, but he hasn't struck me as a proper organiser when I have seen him. Possibly one for the future, but, again, we have someone of that sort of standing in Gaskell.

I quite like the look of the centre, Lulia, but he is out of the question as he is non-fed.

So, in sum, I can't see us going after any of their players.

[Offside Monkey]

Any wingers? That Crookes looks handy, but I think he's off to Hull.
Kearney is a good player at #1 (not top drawer, maybe), if they were granted non-quota status like the Crusaders mob were then maybe its a goer?

On second thoughts, Elliot Kear has always looked quite handy.

Dux wrote:

Their best players are back rowers, which is precisely where we don't need anyone at the moment.

I don't think Hargreaves offers anything more than we can get in house from someone like Forster, so I wouldn't move for him.

I've not seen enough of Gale to make a fully informed comment, but he hasn't struck me as a proper organiser when I have seen him. Possibly one for the future, but, again, we have someone of that sort of standing in Gaskell.

I quite like the look of the centre, Lulia, but he is out of the question as he is non-fed.

So, in sum, I can't see us going after any of their players.

As mentioned, you can forget fed status, the RFL will roll it all up into another exemption. Lulia, Manufofkakaeseskekse, Crookes, Bateman, Elima and Gale for me.

I'd have Craig Kopczak

Saddened! wrote:

As mentioned, you can forget fed status, the RFL will roll it all up into another exemption. Lulia, Manufofkakaeseskekse, Crookes, Bateman, Elima and Gale for me.

I can only see that happening if the Bulls actually go into liquidation and all of their contracts are terminated.

The only guy from the Bulls who has caught my eye is the back row guy, think he's Kiwi or Australian. Then again I'd like somebody to make a RL player of Karl Pryce but nobody ever does.

Crookes been Hull bound for a while.

Dux wrote:

I can only see that happening if the Bulls actually go into liquidation and all of their contracts are terminated.

That's the plan.