I wasn't referring to the score lines. I was meaning that coaches concentrate on defence above attack. They select players who appear to spend more time in the gym than on perfecting the subtler skills. This produces good tacklers with great stamina but is not the best for producing the side step or body swerve or retaining their natural speed. The result is backs who are really 2nd rowers and rely on physical strength rather than traditional silky skills.

With so many games decided by momentum, often coming from a run of 50/50 decisions which gift possession to one side the best way to turn the tide is by an exciting player's individual attacking skills.

There are not too many backs currently in SL with the natural skills of say Watkins but I fear that in bulking him up to be able to withstand a high tackle count there is the risk of dulling some of his pace and footwork ability.

Look its only an opinion but you have to agree there is currently a shortage of backs in SL that can transform a game. Burrow is an example of rare rugby talent where speed and footwork used in an unorthodox way has been so successfull, yet he is criticised by fans of his own team because he doesn't conform, so some would have him relegated him to the bench at best.

I agree there's a shortage of skill across the boards with a focus on athleticism rather than skill but that certainly doesn't manifest itself in better defence, quite the opposite, I would like defences in Super League to be far more intense than they are.

but its relative and a short career so it is not quite like you say...

but also that £120k per year is x how ever many years contract it is, rather than the relative insecure position most people work in.

In terms of pure ability, Eastmond has a lot to offer - although I'd say there are 3/4 better NRL players in any position he can play, and Sam Tomkins at his best is a far better player than anything I've seen from him.

Also, have a look at Eastmond's last few 'performances' for Sts. No sign of any running game there - just a player going through the motions and not wanting to be tackled. That part of his attitude stank - whether he was going to leave for RU or not.

The injuries would be a major concern. He's effectively lost a couple of years out of his career already. Its a shame he isn't still in RL, because Bill Eve isn't able to roll out the biscuit bones comedy classic every time his name is mentioned.

BTW I dispute entirely this idea of star players bringing in mega crowds. Even if Leeds signed SBW, they'd undoubtedly get a couple of extra thousand for his first game, but over a season? I think not much of a boost. Otherwise there'd be no need for a salary cap because 'star' players would pay for themselves through the gates.

It was a question not an assumption.

We are talking about SL not the NRL. Eastmond can play in postions from 1 to 7 in SL with very not many serious challengers.

He may or may not have an attitude problem which in any case could be sorted. But I have been talking about his rugby skills which have made him a double code International and he still is only 24.

The history of rugby league is full of instances where star players have regularly increased the gates. I was brought up on the likes of Lewis Jones, Brian Bevan, David Watkins, van Volllenhoven, David Watkins, Jonathan Davies, E.T.,Meninga,Bevan etc etc who all attracted larger crowds to watch them play but also a star player with the abilty to play a major role in winning games can also increase income by bringing success or even just the the promise of success. The short term signing of Andrew Johns and Adrian Morley were cases in point.

A star player need only bring in a 1000 or so per gate to bring in an extra 250k for their club but if he contributes to more wins and more exciting play then the attendance will creep up further.

The salary cap is in place not because of real star signings but rather to guard against foolish management making star salary offers to players who are no longer or have never been real stars.

I am sure SBW has increased the gates for the NZ matches dramatically and would do so if he ever nmoved to SL. Stars draw extra crowds in football and most other sports so why not SL?

This brings me back to the point that SL is suffering from a lack of real star players with classy attacking skills IMO.

The last paragraph is a bit strange - salary cap is so the clubs try and avoid going bust - although that still hasn't happened. Star players draw crowds because with them in the side the side wins more regularly which increases crowds as speccies love a winner.

The point is people trot out the old nonsense that star players bring consistently increased crowds - which is what they'd have to do every week to justify paying them a shedload. The reality is far less exciting, and Leeds fans in particular have seen the real impact time and again.

If it were true, then clubs would be able to sign star players, get crowd boosts and there really would be no need for a salary cap because it would be a self-sustaining virtuous cycle of sign star player, increase revenue, sign another star player.

I suspect it was exactly this kind of false logic which Leeds followed under Doug Laughton. That went ever so well. Widnes did the same with RU players, yet the increased revenue they got obviously got nowhere near offsetting the increased costs of their contracts.

As for comparisons to the NRL, the point is that if a SL side wanted to sign a class RL player today, and had the money to do so, there are quite simply better players 1-7 than Eastmond has ever shown in RL.

Professional rugby is in the entertainment business. The paying public would prefer to watch the best players and as I said previously history overall confirms that gates increase for most sports including League. Yes of course there will be exceptions. It was certainly not nonsense when Leeds signed Lewis Jones for a then record transfer fee (todays equivalent of be well over £400,000.) He not only increased the attendances at Headingley but at most other grounds he played on. The real stars can do that.

I repeat that I have been commenting on SL and not the NRL so your comparison is irrelevant to my point.

IMO SL is suffering from a dearth of true classy players at present which has in part been caused by Union going pro in 1995, the changes in exchange rate with the Australian currency and finally the increases in the NRL salary cap. To base your argument on what Doug Laughton did or imply that there is a wealth of classy star players out there for all the clubs to sign could be called false logic or even a red herring fallacy.

This is not in any way intended to denegrate our home grown stars but the imported stars were the icing on the cake. We now lack the opportunity to make those same big name signings. If you can produce home grown stars then all well and good but only a few sides are doing this and this cream is being slowly skimmed off by the NRL and Union. So if we ever the likes of SBW or Eastmond were to become available we would be foolish not to seriously consider them.

Where would the Premier League be without the biggest stars on the world stage?

If stars don't increase gates, why did Hanley have written in both his Wigan and Leeds contracts, to have a share of the gate over a certain number? That number was higher than they were getting before his signature.

Were Leeds home crowds any bigger with the likes of Hanley and Schofield in the side than they are now in the "beige" era?

Did someone really just put Eastmond and SB Williams in the same sentence?

I'd imagine even Eastmond's agent would be struggling to keep a straight face when delivering that line.

At this point a returning Eastmond would IMO add very few additional numbers through the turnstiles at any SL club.

Yes. You did. Just then.

On Twitter recent pic of Kyle Eastmond partying in Leeds with Bailey, Burgess, Widdop etc.

No but they went from around 9-10k in the late 80s early 90s to 12-13k

Yippee... That could mean all are playing for Leeds next season. Right .? Nothing like a bit of bonding to enhance better team spirit as proved with the England camp

Exactly.

That is not the point. We were not comparing eras otherwise I would have pointed out the Headingley record attendance of 40,175 or the Wigan record v Saints of 47,747 in 1959 for star studded sides.

The question you should ask yourself is what would the Headingley attendances have been like without the likes of Hanley and Schofield. I think I know the answer.

You speak for the paying public? Having watched many garbage teams in the 1980s littered with stars and having watched successful teams in the 2000s I know you don't speak for me.

Before my time but do you have any statistics to support those claims and, if you do, do you have any evidence to justify these alleged increased attendances being attributable to Jones rather than any other trends?

[codeWhere would the Premier League be without the biggest stars on the world stage?[/codeIt would be where it would be. Where it is is a league the offers little or nothing to in the way of junior development, nothing whatsoever to the international side and no chance to any club other than three or four to possibly win it. Great example.

Was the Leeds one v Wigan in the cup in 1957? If so, there were more than that on as we broke the gates down to get on and I was also at that and the Wigan v Saints game

Blimey. That's a big picture. Sorry about that.

Showing off about the size of your medal again?

I speak for myself and would certainly not want to speak for you. You do enough of that yourself.

The term 'star player' is now often used for good to average players who do not possess genuine game changing skills. This discussion is about real classy stars with real game changing abilities. These special players have always been a rare breed and it is because of this that they can bring out the crowds. I am suggesting that previous important sources of supply of these rare birds has been cut off in recent years.

Could you name these star signings that you claim littered the teams in the 80's with those same abilities and are you suggesting they did not attract extra attendance? Do you have any statistical evidence to prove real star signings do not have a positive effect on attendances?



Well it was obviously before your time, because had you been there you would have joined with me to testify from personal experience on what the "Jones effect" had on most of the Rugby League grounds he played on, even at places like Tattersfield and not just Leeds supporters. The same can be said of Brian Bevan and other real stars. You must be one of the very few not to accept that LBJ's signing (at great cost) was one of the best investments made by the Leeds club.



You miss the point. Because of the world stars that play in the Premier League it attracts huge TV money and sponsorship and for the teams with the most stars high attendances. If some of this massive income does not filter down to the juniors and grass roots then this is the fault of poor management not the star system. Professional sport is in the entertainments industry and some of the top clubs like Man Utd do produce juniors that make the first team. However the state of the national side is more to do with poor coaching, and a failure to teach basic skills at an early age, than the signing of world stars. Take Spain as another "great example" Their league has for many many years attracted world stars yet with very good caching from the likes of the Barcelona club they ave produced a world champion side with outstanding skills.