Phuzzy wrote:Well I don't lke to mention "great minds"..*COUGH*

DaveO wrote:Now that really would be supposition

Dave

Jukesays wrote:But unlike your Suppositions DaveO, His would be Correct!

pedro17 wrote:Dave is right though none is fact is all ifs and buts and in a lot of cases hoping. Lets leave it to IL he knows best and he can be trusted afterall we got Gleeson for £30k as thats what we had on the cap

NickyKiss wrote:The Riddell signing hasn't been a bad one and in the long term i think he'll be a big influence around the club and a fine player for us.

As for the Roberts one it's not looking the best piece of business is it?!! Richards is solid at fullback but better on the wing and Ainscough looks a great long term bet.

Roberts hasn't been bad i suppose but you can't help feel the money would have been better spent on an out and out fullback if it were a back or more importantly a prop forward of real class.

Last Son of Wigan wrote:Can you back this up? Justify your comments?

Cruncher wrote:They can't be justified on the strength of his time at Wigan thus far, but they can be on the strength of his NRL career, which was pretty impressive. He's not that old either.

I think we should be patient with Mark Riddell. There's every chance he'll come good for us.

pedro17 wrote:Least thats not ifs and buts eh

Cruncher wrote:Like it or not, there are no ifs and buts concerning his career in Aus.

Fell free to dismiss that if you wish, but it doesn't make sense to.

pedro17 wrote:The fact of him saying he will come good and will be a good signing.....because og his career in Aus. You forgot the first part to meet your aguments needs.

If that was the case in the past Roberts, Fielden, Gleeson, Smith and Piggy will destroy SL on their own.