Thats a variation on the rumour i started re Melis absence being a conspiracy theory to enable us to sign Lyon after the WCC.

Sorry I was just on my way out and didn't have time to write a long answer!

I just think for the wage he would want it would use up to big a part of our salary cap for a player who is far from at his best at the moment and from what I have see doesn't seem to show the brilliance often enough to make him worth the risk.

I would rather we used the money on developing our own players personally.

Maybe we could offer Meli in a swap deal where we keep paying Meli his wages and Dire get to pay King

[/i

I'm off the impression the King was always a centre in club rugby. There was a period, at the end of last season, following his ropey start, where he seemed to have picked up and was scoring tries and making an impact(although that seems to have dissappeared again).

However, this impact appears to be based on straight line running onto good distribution rather than the more creative approach of a Matt Gidley or Martin Gleeson, and given that our distribution out wide (Pryce) isn't a forte, I was suggest that he'd continue to struggle to find form at saints.

Plus, he does look ropey in defence.

So no, I wouldn't sign him. Not as a centre anyways.

There is some underlying problem with Matt King. He hasnt become a bad player overnight so one has to assume he his homesick or not happy.

He was bona fide world class during his melbourne days and this wasnt down to the players around him

Why is it that people think that you just have to divert money towards young players and suddenly you start bringing through quality?

It's kind of a screwed up Wigan principle.

Wigan are: If it costs us a lot of money then it's obviously going to win us stuff.

Others are: If it is young and costs us a lot fo money then it is obviously going to win us stuff.

No I think we work on a salary cap and to pay the wages he would probably want would take up a lot of money that could be used elsewhere for players who would hopefully perform as well - or better - and would probably benefit the club a lot more in the future.

However the money involved is just part of the reason I wouldn't want him, I am not convinced he is good enough at all regardless of cost.

I reckon he's not the highest paid player at Warrinton, never mind SL.

Really? Can you memo Craig Bellamy and get him to rectify his teamsheets and list him as a winger.

Hard to argue with that answer. Littler should pay Salford subs to play.

King would be a good signing given the right deal. Maybe a loan spell for the rest of his contract paying half his wages.

Warringtons problems are not caused by King he is just a scapegoat.

Matt King in the correct team would be a quality signing.

Same as Fielden?

Fielden was quality at Bradford, he should never have moved.

As was King in the NRL, cack at Warrington though.

Possibly yes, although to be fair to Fielden he has shown glimpses of his past form, and though nowhere near his former standard, he is outshowing the other props at Wigan ie. Feka in every game.

IMO if King moved to Saints, he would prove to be a quality signing.

If Fielden is outshowing the other Props after taking in 3 drives, yes 3 drives against Leeds, then you are going to have serious problems.

If Fielden is showing form, the other Wigan props aren't up to much.

Personally, I think we have already gone past the point where we have let too much experience go, not brought much in and over-promoted from the youth set up. People have to remember although bringing youngsters through is good they still have to be good enough. Our squad is threadbare IMO.

There are 4 options in this respect:

a) [iRecruit from the NRL and choke up the youth system[/i - I dont really want to continue seeing our ass handed to us on a plate by the Ockers and in such a comprehensive manner as the WC.
b) Recruit talent from SL – no one was out of contract who we could be confident would add real quality to the side.
c) Recruit from the lower divisions like Wakefield - Always a gamble for a top team
d) Bring through the youngsters which have impressed in the reserves/academy

I really think only option d is of any sense, and in any case should benefit from the experienced heads such as Long, Cunningham, Wellens and Gidley.

I pretty much agree with that, although I wouldn't mind seeing a bit more of option c. We've had some good service from young players poached from the National Leagues (Higham, Wilkin, Gardner), but it's an option that we don't seem to have considered much since DA took the hot seat. Still, I would generally consider that to be a long term investment, so it wouldn't have done us any good for this year anyway.

A Combination of all of these has and will be the way forward. Noone would be complaining about imports if we brought Lyon back. Gilly and Pryce have been great for us from other SL clubs. You can also get the odd gem fom lower divisions, Sean Long anyone? Finally the academy system is most peoples (and mine) favoured way to rebuild the team, if the new crop of yougsters can be the next Graham, Roby etc. we will do well.

Mix n Match I say. Over-emphasis on one of the four options is not good/risky.

a) Lyon, Gidley, Fairleigh
b) Gilmour, Anderson, Pryce, Fozzard
c) Higham, Gardner, Wilkin
d) Graham, Roby, Clough