It's hardly clear as day though is it. He's got no pace and hasn't yet done anything to suggest he's a world beater. His initial burst of first team action was a classic knockonathon and although he now seems steady and settled in the side there are still massive question marks over his defending and I just don't see him ever being given a position at Saints. Where is Johnny going to play for us long term?

Personally I'd play him on the wing, purely because of his name (Number 5).

Nathan Ashe is a class act. I think we may see him handed some first team action this season and could be a real star.

Happy to have foster, lomax and Wheeler to a degree. But 60K a year
is nonsense money given the level of experience (all 3) and how
injury prone (Wheller & Lomax) are.

All this trust in Mac stuff held good over Gleeson and Millward but
there have been several bum decisions made since.

The confidence in who we sign and how much they are paid is not there for me.
Things have not been right since Sully was left to limp in and out for big games
on a boatload of cash.

If Lomax, Foster and Wheeler are all making around 60k a year i dread to think how much we're paying Kyle to get injured. If he stays fit it is more than worth it though.

Agree 100% with Saddened and Gerry.

Ive been banging on about the lack of any genuine "exciting" signings since Lyon. With the current dire state of the british £, I seriously cant see any top line aussies coming over any time soon. The three Storm players signed for Wigan are here because of Maguire, not because of the lure of big $. I just hope Rolls Royce has the same pull.

Kyle will be on at least £100k, if I remember rightly, thats what Offiah was valuing him at during the time of his contract negotiations.

I suppose thats the price we have to pay to stop the lure of big money in the lesser code.

The lure of big money may come again......but sooner than we think!

It's good for your club's and GB's future that you're getting the youngsters signed up , the one you need to get on a new contract is Ashurst,....i'd welcome him at Wigan

Which of your numerous second rowers would you drop to accomodate him, you already have 6, would you place him above any of those?

Probably not but he would certainly add to the squad and increase competition, i just think that he is vastly undervalued at your club

How undervalued? He is one year in of a three year contract, he has played over 40 games due to injuries in the team. If he was at Wigan he would never have got those opportunities!

He's not undervalued within the club, but there are many supporters on this forum who do not see him as a first choice player , i just think if given the chance he will become one of your best

I think you've somehow got Clough and Bryn Hargreaves mixed up, mate. Cloughie is a MUCH better player than you're estimating. Last season he was 12th in SL's total yardage figures. This season he's a bit down on those numbers and yet they are still better than Jamie Jones Buchanan's (a player in the same mould) and he's only three or four hundred yards down on Joel Tomkins (having played fewer games).

The kid is one hell of a grinder with excellent fitness, good hands and a reliable head. IMO, there's plenty more improvement to come and he's a certain starter for the next five years.

So lets put this into perspective, you think that the supporters on this forum should give him a chance as he will be one of our best, yet you would not select him above any of the six second rowers at Wigan?

RE: Lomax.

Ok, this is how it works. Kids are precisely that. They have the bodies of adolescents and yet fans expect them to perform against [ufully grown adults [/uwho have the physique of a silverback gorilla. It's little wonder the likes of Wheeler, Lomax and to a lesser extent Eastmond are always injured.

I'll keep on saying this until I slump over the keyboard dead: Unless a kid has obvious deficiencies in his game (terrible hands, no pace, serious attitude issues etc.) which are practically impossible to redeem you cannot make a fair judgement about his abilities until he reaches his final growth stage (somewhere between 20 and 23). The term "filling out" wasn't plucked from the luminiferous aether and thrown into everyday conversation just for a laugh. In six months a player can jump from 5' 10" to 6"+ and put on the best part of twenty pounds. That makes a [ihell of a difference[/i to someone's game. Where was Joel Tomkins' game aged 19/20?

I mean, if you couldn't promote kids from the reserves in the dismal, slipshod, semi-pro days of the seventies and eighties without them looking like a straw among tree trunks what makes you think this is possible now (especially given the quantum leap in diet, training, attitude etc.)?

Playing foster at fullback could be a very good call. His positional play is very very good, he's very good on the high kicks and not afraid of putting his body on the line.

My only worry is his attack, i donn't think his attack is up to it at the moment but im sure that will improve in time as he bulks up.

Might be worth a try in the pre season games.

In part that will be up to the coaching he receives I should imagine. He has managed to sidestep around players: he did that very well against Warrington, for instance. But given the improvements he has made in such a short space of time since the Salford match, with the right coaching then I can see his attack coming on with few problems.

I'm not sure what 'bulking up' might do in terms of his attack? I can't see the correlation, is what I'm saying. I hope he doesn't artificially bulk up too much because that will simply slow him down and he's quite nippy at present.

Quote ="Mugwump"I think you've somehow got Clough and Bryn Hargreaves mixed up, mate. Cloughie is a MUCH better player than you're estimating. Last season he was 12th in SL's total yardage figures. This season he's a bit down on those numbers and yet they are still better than Jamie Jones Buchanan's (a player in the same mould) and he's only three or four hundred yards down on Joel Tomkins (having played fewer games). The kid is one hell of a grinder with excellent fitness, good hands and a reliable head. IMO, there's plenty more improvement to come and he's a certain starter for the next five years.'" Just to put further meat on the bone so to speak Here are the stas for a 21 year old paul clough versues 24 year old John Stankevitch. Which basically backs up that Cloughie is a league above what Stinky and Jonkers were capable of. www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010

Quote ="Mugwump"I think you've somehow got Clough and Bryn Hargreaves mixed up, mate. Cloughie is a MUCH better player than you're estimating. Last season he was 12th in SL's total yardage figures. This season he's a bit down on those numbers and yet they are still better than Jamie Jones Buchanan's (a player in the same mould) and he's only three or four hundred yards down on Joel Tomkins (having played fewer games). The kid is one hell of a grinder with excellent fitness, good hands and a reliable head. IMO, there's plenty more improvement to come and he's a certain starter for the next five years.'" Just to put further meat on the bone so to speak Here are the stas for a 21 year old paul clough versues 24 year old John Stankevitch. Which basically backs up that Cloughie is a league above what Stinky and Jonkers were capable of. www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010

I always like to use Andrew Johns and Ellery Hanley as the perfect examples to show that players arent world beaters at 18-19 and you need to give them time.
Andrew Johns only started breaking into the Newcastle 1st team when he was 20 years old due to another players injury. He was 21 when he 1st played state of Origin. However this was only because Ricky Stuart had sided with superleague down under and therefore wasnt available.

Ellery Hanley had been playing for Bradford for a number of years steadily improving, scoring 34 trys in 89 appearances. However in 1984 aged 23 his game suddenly went up a level and he scored 55 trys in just 37 games. This lead to him making his representative debut for first England and then full GB team.
The rest is history.

I prob used the wrong word when i said "bulk". I mean when he gets stronger and develops in size, i think he's a little weak at the moment. A good pre season could see him make that extra step up.

Quote ="The Chair Maker"Just to put further meat on the bone so to speak Here are the stas for a 21 year old paul clough versues 24 year old John Stankevitch. Which basically backs up that Cloughie is a league above what Stinky and Jonkers were capable of. www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010'" It's a fair analysis. Clough does appear to be achieving more than Stankevitch did.

Quote ="The Chair Maker"Just to put further meat on the bone so to speak Here are the stas for a 21 year old paul clough versues 24 year old John Stankevitch. Which basically backs up that Cloughie is a league above what Stinky and Jonkers were capable of. www.superleague.co.uk/statistics ... eason=2010'" It's a fair analysis. Clough does appear to be achieving more than Stankevitch did.

Fair comment. I always think of months spent in the gym turning nicely toned guys into hefty blokes who can't run for toffee when people mention the word 'bulk'.

It's a fine line between gaining enough muscle to break tackles and putting that much on it slows you down. I think we've had the balance wrong a few times over the last 5 years.

I think Foster has the body type to gain muscle and keep his speed.

I agree tho, the likes of gardner has gained to much bulk and lost all his pace.