It's common sense for Gaskell to go given that he's been stopped from playing. No point throwing money away, just to spite a player.

Lets not forget we offered him a contract, so I don't buy it that we think he is now below us only a few months later.

I also don't buy the drop in form. If you were to pick the form team in SL, you would need more than just 3 games.

I have no problem with Brown picking his own team and players, that's fine. I'm not getting into the youth arguement, his record at Huddersfield and here shows he will play them if they are what he wants.

Not sure why we have took Howarth, just seams like a nothing signing, he's not a replacement for anyone really. Although it does show how shocking our recruitment has been to not even have an understudy ready for Roby. Don't give me Lance, as Lance was not bought to be a hooker, he was bought and has played as a half.

Just goes to show that playing Roby for 80 mins has been more down to need rather than good planning.

From a Salford p.o.v. I wonder if Brian Noble has had any input. He had Howarth at Wigan and never played him.

Indeed, but in the talent-starved marketplace of the moment someone like Gaskell is pretty much golddust - every team in the league would be offering him a contract in the hope he develops into a player in some position even if they had no immediate plans or place in the squad for him.

That was the point I was making about player development. That is exactly the point although you speak to recruitment rather than development.

Saints still do not phase in young players. They just drop them in when there is an injury. That is such an outmoded approach it is unreal. We should be phasing in young players for all the positions so that we do have understudies and if over a period of time they do not meet the standard Saints want for their first grade players then let them go but to be unprepared like this after so much effort has apparently gone into the youth development programme I think is very poor, not to mention foolish.

The reason Gaskell gone as nothing to do with playing or Nathan brown

Sorry but you can't say that without backing it up or at least being willing to PM people with whichever crazy rumour you've come up with.

Now there's a player who would be great cover for Roby !!! Howarth = dead rubber

I disagree, we do develop young players, however we don't develop them in all positions and neither should we. We need the best players in the best slots, if that player plays elsewhere then we should be looking to recruit.

We have developed the likes of Roby/Graham/Eastmond/Lomax/Jones/Dixon/Ashurst/Clough/Wellens/Makinson/Walker/Emmitt/Higham....

All these players have been drip fed into place at Saints and are still playing. We can't expect to keep them all, but we do develop players.

My point about no stand in for Roby is that in the last few years we have concentrated on buying and developing players without thinking about where they are going to play. We have 4 very very decent players who can play Fullback. Yet at hooker we have just relied on Roby since Cunningham left. Cunningham never did it on his own apart from a short period of time in the 90's. He had Moore/Roby and Higham as stand in hookers.

We have had an unbalanced side, due to recruitment. Recruitment is there to fill the holes we can fill from youth development. Cunningham has been gone for 3 years now. But it takes a busted Roby to finally realise what the rest of the league know, you can't opperate with just one hooker.

I disagree but I'm not going to debate the issue further as I'll just get yet more abuse. All I will say is that with a few exceptions we just drop people in at times of injury. Even Wellens was a case of that. We need to stop that attitude and start phasing players in.

Do share...

I imagine the answer is "he refused to sign a contract".

But, even if true, that is to miss the point - seems like the the club have offered him a contract they feel is reasonable (and based on performances since 2011 it probably wouldn't be a whopper) and he's clearly decided it's not enough.

But you see that IS to do with playing - specifically, not playing well enough to force a club into paying what you think you are worth.

does this mean your going to go and support Salford???? I wonder if the handle 'SalfordFan' has been taken ??

Well you clearly dont like much about Saints, the coach, the management, the player selections etc etc .. try supporting a load of tosh like Salford and then you'll really have something to moan about

An absolutely rediculous bit of buisness by the club again.
Salford must be p!ss!ng themselves.If he's better than what we have comeing through were in deep sh1!

The only positive I can see is he'll be gone at the end of the season. Personally I'd have asked for a transfer fee for Gaskell and just banked the cash

From what I've seen of Howarth, and the 10/15 minutes of Speakman I've seen, he isn't.

Wakefield fans on Howarth...
"I always thought he was good quality that will be better with a better team around him."

"Thought he was very underrated at BV , and think in a decent team he will go well."

"Stuart was an excellent player for us. Led from the front with a good RL brain and will do OK at Saints."
Sounds a bit more positive.

Basically they are saying we have better players so we might be able to carry him ... hmmm sorry for being negative it's just a poor signing for me.

Only four have posted on that thread!

Time will tell I guess. Either way, throwing him into the derby without any chance for him to get to know his new team mates is pretty dumb.

I agree. I'm just trying to see the positive side.

I'm sorry but I can't understand all the kneejerking over Howarth coming in - we have a fair few injuries piling up in the forwards so a bit of cover coming in makes perfect sense to me. And bringing in some other team's cheap makeweight player to get smashed for a few unimportant games instead of relying on risking a bunch of our own young players for 80 minutes so early in the season when they're not quite ready for it game-in, game-out and performances and results ultimately don't matter too much anyway seems like a flippin' good move to me... I could understand the haters if he was a permanent signing or we were getting him in ready for some big CC game or the playoffs but, errr... we're not...

I'm annoyed the way Gaskell has been Treated! which is badly, the quicker he joins another Super League Club like Foster and shows what he can do the better for the lad! I wish him every success. To put Howarth straight into the squad sends a real positive message to young players! McManus & Brown never fail to shock.

Shocking really. What has Gaskell done wrong exactly?

Can someone tell me what the point of signing Howarth is? He's one of those players that is so average he'll be completely anonymous. Why not just play Speakman and let him sink or swim?