IMO we are light in the centres and need to sign an experienced international with some years left in him. Ablett is doing alright filling in there but cnt expect to do it any longer.

How many experienced international centres with some years left in them are there. And how many would you be willing to pay over the odds for because the are many teams that would be interested in a player of that description.

Leeds never lost at home to Salford at any time during the 80's.

If the chequebook isn't neccessary does that mean the signings of Senior and Ellis weren't neccessary either?

Of cause they were and I'm sure if the right player became available GH would be in there in a shot.At this time in the season I doubt any club would be prepared to sell their top players.

The right player (the current England first choice right centre) became available last week. Was GH in there like a shot?

Could they fit him in under the 2010 salary cap if they'd signed him without losing other players they hoped to retain at the end of 2009 (on the basis that Eastwood will be here in 2010).

He's decent player, but lacks out and out pace. Doubt he'd be at the right price point.
There's an experienced international centre at HKR that they might part with

Not sure GH would think he is the right player.Tony Smith also didn't as why else would he let him go.

Do you mean Chev if so I'm sure he'd jump at the chance of playing at Headingley again.Whether he would be our best option I'm not so sure.

You can't keep umming and arring about the quality and the cost. Gleeson still is, along with Senior one of the two best English centres playing the game. Gleeson still is the best English right centre playing the game. Or am I mistaken in that opinion?

Who knows why Tony Smith didn't want him at Warrington anymore. It could have been for a whole multitude of reasons, no-one on here knows.

If Leeds have to wait for the right player, in the right circumstance and at the right price (does that mean cheap?) then they're not really out there in the market place at all are they.

No it doesn't mean cheap nor should it mean paying over the odds for a player either.Gleeson is 30 next month and I think £100k his over priced.

Gleeson was born May 1980 wasn't he, which would make him 28 now and 29 sometime next month.

The transfer fee is about right for an almost 29 year old current first choice England International centre with a wealth of experience and talent. Possibly heading towards on the cheap side given the dearth of quality centres out there.

Gasnier on a free transfer, for 19k per year. That'd do.

They might get Reg Gasnier for that maybe.

Would you really want us to sign Gleeson though tvoc? Given all the rumoured off field problems?
Part of me thinks we should be in the market for a player as obviously talented as Gleeson. The other half thinks that he'd be a complete waste of money.

my thoughts also.

That would depend entirely on the basis for the rumours. Rumours are just that. There was once a rumour on here that a Leeds star didn't get on with Tony Smith either but it didn't stop them being arm in arm after winning the 2007 Grand Final together.

On the field Gleeson is the best English right centre playing in SL. Why wouldn't Leeds have been interested in acquiring that talent?

Definitely it would give the team a lift it would enable players to have a rest and it would give the coach more options so in a word yes.

I'd have been interested in signing Gleeson for Leeds, but certainly not for £100K and Mathers!
Wigan once again showing their desperation, although it hasn't donw much good. It's the coach Wigan have, not the players!

I don't know but I can guess...

a) We are tight and don't like paying transfer fees.
b) The rumours are truer (or more believable to the club) than we think. (It's not like he doesn't have previous for being a t*t).
c) His wage demands (compared to what Wigan may (or may not) be giving him, were way too high.

We've lost 2 international players (Ellis & Toopi) and replaced them with one (Buderus). Add to the fact we've lost Scruton, the recruitment of another player before the end of the season is vital IMO.

But this brings the question, do we want an out and out centre, with big wage demands and the reputation for being abit of a liability off the pitch?
Gleeson would have been a nice signing in terms of balancing up the side, but I also feel we're very lightweight upfront now.
Like I said I'm 50/50 on this issue, but I think we're a big lad light upfront, and would prefer to see money going on that, than Gleeson.

Given the make-up of the rest of the squad if Leeds don't have the cap space to do both then someone's on too much money.

Who mentioned necessary? I said its' no guarantee of anything.

Explain how signing anyone in the world would "guarantee" we don't lose the WCC, lose to Saints in the CC and lose 2 league games on the trot.

...and he's improved Wigan's results how?

Maybe GH wasn't in for him because of the reasons Smith was quick to get shut of him?

I don't think tight can be used against GH in regarding transfer fee's we have over the years probably paid out as much as any other club.The rest I agree with you.

How much did Wigan add on top to offload poor old Richard?

It'll take Gleeson more than a week to have an impact on that shower from Wigan but they had a really tough programme at Easter (unlike some) and didn't look that bad against decent opponents. Catalans in particular are everything Leeds aren't at the moment and that is dominant in the pack.