Joined: Jan 21 2010 Posts: 727 Location: Hull...West Side
knockersbumpMKII wrote:Is it? I'd rather go with a seasoned pro like Micheals slightly underdone but then again most people are forgetting we still have Arundel who has had a full pre-season
you'd risk a player, who hasn't had match time, back from surgery over Logan, who can hold is own in SL played plenty minutes over pre-season??????
Joined: Feb 09 2004 Posts: 7735 Location: Here there and everywhere
Dave K. wrote:Arundel isn't good enough, average at Hull, didn't stand out at Donny or Bradford last year and looked poor in the friendlies he played this year. I think the fact that he is available and no clubs have come in for him (despite the fact we will no doubt pay towards his salary) tells its own story.
Thats about as harsh as it comes!
When Arundel has played he has done no worse than Yeaman. During 2013 he produces SOME good displays (Cas at home and rovers away spring to mind).
As has been pointed out, he stood out when it mattered for Bradford, against his parent club. Hardly a reasonable comment is a beaten team for most weeks.
To be told you're not wanted is hardly the morale booster any player would want, thats bound to have an impact on performance.
That no other club has come in for him suggest the old regimes valuation of him was beyond what other clubs are willing to pay and has no reflection on his actual ability.
dayvoz wrote:Yet when the coach brings in a seasoned pro(Pryce)who has a much better pedigree than an underdone Michaels,you say its to the detriment of one of our young players.
I did suggest JA would be better as first choice 6 & I stick by that, JA is far and away more advanced than Logan in any case & Micheals is a class player, picked for Origin, scored almost 50 tries in circa 120 appearances (have you actually watched Micheals play?). Radford signed Micheals so we use him if he is anywhere near being close, he isn't (or shouldn't be) here as 2nd string back up material unless we have cash to burn and Yeaman is going to remain 1st choice centre along with Sa which would make even less sense if Radford would be looking at Logan as back up centre?
If you're that bothered about my opinions with regard the youth why not have a look at Radford's, last year was an unmitigated disaster, signing of old plodders that were shiate instead of playing the youth MY OPINION is that I would rather have an underdone Micheals than Logan, but wouldn't be opposed to Arundal, so who would you play and why?
Joined: Jan 21 2010 Posts: 727 Location: Hull...West Side
Arundel cant play as he would take us over the salary cap - so that a no go. Micheals I think will be 1st choice centre with Sa on other centre, when fit. but as Micheals has only a one year deal, he will be looking to perform at his best so earn a extension. to do that it would only be fair to play him fully fit and raring to go, so we can see his best. if he's not 100%, we will not see his best, so wouldn't be fair to judge his impact. Logan is tried and can more then hold his own in SL, so I say play Logan, until Sa and/or Micheals is 100% then bring them in. Yeaman for me will be back up, along with Logan
Joined: Mar 14 2003 Posts: 26021 Location: Back in Hull.
Mild mannered Janitor wrote:Thats about as harsh as it comes!
When Arundel has played he has done no worse than Yeaman. During 2013 he produces SOME good displays (Cas at home and rovers away spring to mind).
As has been pointed out, he stood out when it mattered for Bradford, against his parent club. Hardly a reasonable comment is a beaten team for most weeks.
To be told you're not wanted is hardly the morale booster any player would want, thats bound to have an impact on performance.
That no other club has come in for him suggest the old regimes valuation of him was beyond what other clubs are willing to pay and has no reflection on his actual ability.
Would you take a pay cut to do the same job?
It isn't hardsh it's reality and the signing of players like him are the reason for under achieving the last few year, you are right he played well against Cas and Rovers (Both teams that finished below us), but never played well enough against any top sides.
I was at the Bradford game and honestly he was nothing special he finished well, but looked nothing of note against a team that finished 11th.
Ask the Bradford (Struggled to get a place at centre for the team that got relegated) and Doncaster fans what they thought of him, if he doesn't stand out at that level he has no chance at SL.
I'm not a big fan of Yeaman, but IMO his performances have still be above those of Arundel and can produce it against the better sides (As he did on Sunday)
Joined: Oct 07 2006 Posts: 4932 Location: Drypool Bridge - watching out for invaders from the East.
Arundle won't be picked for economic reasons. Michaels won't be picked for fitness reasons. Logan should be picked as he has already proved that he is good enough at this level. None of them will be picked if Sa is available.
Joined: Jul 18 2010 Posts: 1288 Location: where dobbins board & squad live west of the river
knockersbumpMKII wrote:I did suggest JA would be better as first choice 6 & I stick by that, JA is far and away more advanced than Logan in any case & Micheals is a class player, picked for Origin, scored almost 50 tries in circa 120 appearances (have you actually watched Micheals play?). Radford signed Micheals so we use him if he is anywhere near being close, he isn't (or shouldn't be) here as 2nd string back up material unless we have cash to burn and Yeaman is going to remain 1st choice centre along with Sa which would make even less sense if Radford would be looking at Logan as back up centre?
If you're that bothered about my opinions with regard the youth why not have a look at Radford's, last year was an unmitigated disaster, signing of old plodders that were shiate instead of playing the youth MY OPINION is that I would rather have an underdone Micheals than Logan, but wouldn't be opposed to Arundal, so who would you play and why?
So we have 2 of our young players both U19 internationals,Firstly Abdul who is back up to Pryce learning from someone with lots of honours and international experience yet you attack Radford for stopping Abdul's development and then say you would have Logan behind a player(Michaels) lacking match fitness and another(Arundel) whose performances have generally been below par making him 5th choice,now most people would see that as blocking his path to the team. By the way anyone can get stats off wikipedia regarding Michaels.
eastul105 wrote lets be fair Mickey Paea is too good for us.
Joined: Dec 01 2004 Posts: 1797 Location: Now back in blighty
Hessle Roader wrote:Arundle won't be picked for economic reasons. Michaels won't be picked for fitness reasons. Logan should be picked as he has already proved that he is good enough at this level. None of them will be picked if Sa is available.
Not sure Logan's defence is good enough yet at this level, he got exposed quite a bit in the pre season friendlies.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum