which kids would you have kept hold of from the last 5 years? i would have defo kept hold of wild and tickle

Which of our current back rowers would you swap them for?

that wasnt the question

Id swap tickle for bailey in a heart beat!

However i wouldnt have wild any where near the squad!

A complete and utter lack of interest and a heart the size of a pea!

With all this talk of past kids, you have to ask actually how good they were, after all apart from Hargreeves, they didnt go to any teams 'better' than wigan and have hardly gone onto great things.

And i still think O'carroll and Prescott are better than bryn, he just went to a outstanding team. I guess he may point to his honours when he retires but dont think he going to be a great player.

Well you can't have those two back rowers as well as those currently in the squad, can you?

Would you have Tickle and Wild ahead of either Hock, Hansen, Tomkins, O'Loughlin or Bailey?

Tickle's performances in 2006 didn't warrent a contract, so I wouldn't have kept him. Stephen Wild is debatable, although he gained GB selection he didn't produce consistant form and Bryan Fletcher was a better replacement.

Would I take them back? For the expense of Bailey, I'd take Tickle back on current form.

ok then bailey may aswell go play for pats thats if he gets a game and swap him for tickle and me personally would have wild over o`loughlin or hansen

Why people keep referring to Wilde as a kid, I'll never know. He was in his early/mid 20s when he left Wigan.

Aspinwall was the same. Both had had ample opportunity to prove themselves in the first team.

so has sean o`loughlin and still game after game mistakes mistakes mistakes from him

Up till last week he was one of our most consistant players both in the friendlies and the first two games. Had he not performed poorly on Sunday (like the rest of the team) I doubt your comments would have been the same.

It's a matter of opinion about these individuals' abilities, but Wilde was not a kid, and to keep on stubbornly saying that he was is to deliberately distort the truth. It may have been felt that O'Loughlin was young enough to improve his game (and he has, to be fair, gone on to play well for GB on several occasions), but that Wilde wasn't.

For what it's worth, I'd have kept Wilde. It wasn't my choice to release him. But he wasn't a kid.