I'd agree with this apart from the restrcted games part.

Apart from the restraint of trade issues, both Sky and supports will want to see the best possible team available every game.

Sky will soon stop paying money if they end up with Salford playing London when their best players aren't playing cos they've played too many games....or more imporatntly to them Wigan and Sts playing, with no Roby or Tomkins

I don't think there'd be a restraint of trade issue by placing a cap on the number of games a player could participate in, unless they were paid by appearance rather than paid a salary, which I gather is rarely the case.



As for the quality issue and Sky - what you've described happens week in and week out anyway, due to injuries and bans/suspensions; my system could even have an unintended positive effect on injuries, as key players would play fewer games over the season and have greater opportunity for rehab and recovery. Jamie Peacock would love it!



Overall, I think it's in everyone's best interests to secure the future health of the British game; clubs have demonstrated that they're not willing to do that on a discretionary basis, so a bit of coercion seems appropriate.



Sky wouldn't give a hoot who was playing as long as the audience remained the same, and I'm pretty sure it would.

The Watts thing has hit the news now. He was a very naughty boy...



[urlhttp://www.runcornandwidnesweeklynews.co.uk/runcorn-widnes-news/runcorn-widnes-local-news/2012/05/10/drugs-shame-for-sacked-widnes-vikings-star-anthony-watts-55368-30932773/#.T6udHoawFq4.twitter[/url

Silly boy

Dennis Betts growled some interesting comments towards the end of that article; nothing new, but it's refreshing to hear a club official saying something more than the usual bland management-speak that organisations tend to reel out in situations like this.



As for the lad himself - whilst a season-ending injury on debut is obviously devastating, his response has cost him a year of paid rehab and a new contract for next season; I doubt it was worth it.

Its a wonder he hasn't made his way to the Galpharm

I reckon we will do the same again this close season and sign the same mixed bag of waifs, strays & crocks from the Queensland Cup or whatever and most probably have the same results. We need less imports but better. I would say Aiton & Lauititi are the only imports that if replaced by a UK based player would have a tangible effect on the quality of the team - most of the rest of them could and probably should be replaced with domestic players.



We never seem to learn, and continue to throw money at it looking for a quick fix that rarely pays off......

I believe Aiton was Agars first signing as opposed to those signed by whichever secret committee was signing them before. I also know that Agar stated he would be the best overseas signing in SL this year - he's certainly one of them. Had he signed for a proper team he'd be Eddie and Stevo's new love interest IMHO. So Agar may not be a good Coach as many suggest but at least he knows a good player when he signs one. To have Aiton on a three year is a great deal for us unless he gets tapped up as Nathan Wood and a few others have and exits early.

Whoever signed him has pulled a blinder - dont know who it was. Agar though, regardless of any other (fair) criticism always had a knack of attracting big names to the KC, along with some very average ones too.



The test for us is when the likes of Tony, Mellers, John, Smith etc come to the end of their contract, and we see who Agar replaces them with.

Nope Collis was credited as Agars first signing according to the clubs website. The only new players signed prior to his appointment were Lauitiiti, Southern, Fox, Ellis, Mellars & Wilkes along with a few contract extensions for some of the younger guys. All the others were after his appointment.



[urlhttp://www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/news/wildcats-capture-collis/2011/09/[/url

It was definitely Agar and I agree with you - he's a cracking player and I'd like to see us retain him.



I'm hopeful that in the off-season, starting from the same place as everyone else and with the NM approval to wave under their noses, we can strengthen the squad with a good mixture of our own young players coming through into the 1st team and a few strategic signings; I'd be disappointed if we end up with the same number of overseas players as we currently have - that's not progress.

Official perhaps, but I know Aiton was the first he wanted even if the actual signature wasn't the first. Was that really worth checking

Took all of 5 minutes, somet to do whilst eating my snap!



I know that he targeted him from the off and he has certainly picked a good one there. Problem is the balance of our squad isn't quite right for me, too many back rowers and hookers of a similar style and not enough grunt up from and organisation at halfback. With most of the players under contract there is going to have to be some serious wheeling and dealing if we are to rectify it for next season.

This is bang on, Bren.

For the past 6 years we have looke to be vunerable as regards SL and when NM gets the nod, we will have the stability that the club needs to move forward.

This will certainly give the powers that be at Wakefield a far graeter "pull" when they are trying to recruit good players.

We have been in a catch 22 situation. Cant attract the right players without stability and/or SL status and without the right calibre of player it is a struggle to progress.

Hopefully there will be good news in a few weeks time

Being picky here but is it not 2 year?

Quote mwildcats="mwildcats"Being picky here but is it not 2 year?'" Seems so www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/de ... ie-mathers

Quote mwildcats="mwildcats"Being picky here but is it not 2 year?'" Seems so www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/de ... ie-mathers

Contract extensions for younger players are to be applauded, surely that fits in with the supposed ethos of the club, to nurture homegrown players.

If it's correct that the above players were the only ones signed prior to the arrival of RA, then the business about this not being 'his squad' ie players he wanted to sign, doesn't wash with me. Of the above, so far, I would only question the signing of Southern and Mellars. What other SL coach couldn't work with Lautiti, Fox, Ellis and Wilkes?

Not all if that's the case, makes little difference I fear - if he keeps this form going someone will spot him sooner rather than later.

Agreed. To be honest I was happy with Southerns signing as well but we just haven't seen the best of him yet. I'm still backing him to come good when his personal matters have settled down and he is played in his true position.

the Southern thread is worn out, but the fact remains, so long to "settle" is dead money as is players arriving with niggling injuries.

His wife was pregnant before they arrived so this is bad planning all round.

Aiton has showed you don't need a season to settle. Maybe it's a case of a get out clause in contracts being introduced.

Don't think it is as much not his squad, as much as the balance of the squad is wrong.

Shown that SOME don't need a season to settle. Both Pat Richards and King were on their way home becasue they struggled to settle. Both clubs stuck with them and they turned out to be stars.

There are more that find it difficult in my opinion than don't. It's just the level of expectation that makes you focus on particular players.

This.

Agree, there's no one rule first all when it comes to settling.

I think the problem is we tend to or probably have to go for the players with baggage (awfull term sorry).



There are always likely to be issues with a married player especially one with a young family - as opposed to a young bloke with few ties. Clinton, Tronc and now Southern (supposedly) - it's always a risk I'm afraid.



Also Queensland based players seem to struggle more than Sydney based players. Having lived in Sydney I know it has seasons, can be cold and changeable so maybe the UK climate is not such a shock - who knows but it's a recurring problem. What I do believe is that although Wakey is not San Tropez it sure as hell beats Hull, Bradford and Cas to name a few others as a place to live, so it's not the City itself.