Thanks for the update, JR. I'm glad Ruan's got a new contract. I believe he was the "quickest" player at the club last season (as per GPS results). The club just need to decide if he's going to be used as a prop or bit of a strike second row.

I'm surprised Demetriou's name hasn't been mentioned more. I think he'd be great, and has history around the area. He might be a bit too similar to Rohan in his zen approach, but he can't be too bad if Wayne Bennett didn't mind having him around.

different being head coach and assistant

Clueso re props I think it will depend on who is available. If we can find two, maybe. But we look light in the back row unless we successfully convert Hudson, Ryan, Littlewood to first grade and/or Gannon comes back and stays back.

McDonnell I can just about live with for size but O’Connor, Goudemand, Bentley are all too small frankly. I expect Martin to leave, we’ll see.

We have great strength in back rowers coming through the system but for me we need to plug a gap.

Jim - I'd argue that you always need more props than 2nd rows, just because good sides tend to play 4, sometimes 5, every week. Contrast that with 2nd rows where you might go with 2, perhaps 3. Like you I think we'd benefit from a big second row, but I still think the priority has to be a couple of props.

The order of priority 'for mine' is 2 props that fit position s 1/2 and 3 in the front row rotation, a 7 to replace frawley and then a second row with a point of difference. If we can't get the latter that we can always use that as a reason to explain why 'the project it's still ongoing hence why we finished 8th.

Don’t say for mine, don’t say for mine.

I would have a modest wager that in 2 years time Littlewood could be the second row with a point of difference you are looking for.

Again I think it depends who is available, at what price.

If we are going to have a tilt at the title seriously next year, and we should be, we can't afford too many holes in the first 17.

I can see us trying to sign Eseh plus an Oledski-level starting prop, which for me would be a significant upgrade on the front row.

With the retirement of Donaldson and fitness issues with Gannon and Bentley, I think if Martin leaves we will replace him like-for-like with an OS quota second row (we just need a different type).

We still have plenty of risks in this squad going into next season and there's only so much Blease can do. But there are opportunities too with the hopeful return of Simpson, Gannon, Hudson to full fitness and some of the younger lads will improve with another proper pre-season.

It looks very much like Martin, will become an off quota player next year, due to changes in RFL rules. That would tip the balance for me in terms of keeping him. Would allow us to target two NRL props and still have the best kicker in SL. Of course this would also make Rhyse more attractive to other suitors.

It all depends on how much money he’s been offered elsewhere. I wouldn’t break the bank for him, although he’s a very solid player.

I see where you’re coming from but I would be very surprised if we sign 2 more senior props, meaning it likely we would drop Lisone and Sangare out of the match day 17. I’m not convinced that would be the most balanced way to develop the squad personally.

Again I don’t really mind whether it’s 2 props or 1 prop and a second row, what I am bothered about is that we sign quality not quantity.

[code][/code]
I'm not sure if Holroyd or Sangare deserve to be in the match day 17. Well, actually I'm sure Sangare doesn't and Holroyd is so rarely in a position to be picked, it amounts to the same. I wouldn’t want to break the bank for Rhyse but not sure we'd have to.