If we did get Lockyer which I very much doubt we would I'd move Pryce to Loose Forward not centre . Great runner of the ball and good hands

He's younger than Long and Cunningham, and only just older than Gidley.

He's a champion player and any club who can afford him should be looking to sign him on a one or two year contract.

He is class, still one of the worlds best players and would be a huge draw in Superleague.

I would much rather keep Leon to be perfectly honest. Lockyer is quality, but why sign someone with no desire on a massive salary when we already have the best no.6 in the country?

No team in superleague could say no to lockyer, regardless of his undoubted abilities, it would be a massive marketing coup, and increase attendances and shirt sales more than enough to cover his costs. I do believe we may be one of the bigger clubs with room under salary cap after the off season clearout. Dont know where we stand on quota though?

No thanks.

Too old and whats the point of having him for a year or 2 when we already have Pryce.

Only a mickey mouse club like wigan would dream of signing Lockyer and restricting the chances of their up and comming superstar, Sam Tomkins. Even the signing of Lockyer would not make WIgan title challengers so what would the point be? I will tell you why, because it will appease their clueless fans for another couple of seasons.

I would sign Lockyer and play him at fullback.

Wellens could then go loose forward

Lockyers pace and vision in any SL team would be a massive boost.

If Wigan signed him they would IMO become a real threat for the title.

Only a fool wouldnt want to sign one of the best players in the history of the game.

He would rip SL teams to shreds.

So look at Saints with Long, Cunningham over 32, Gidley over 31 and Gilmour already over 30.

This year Meli, Puletua will reach 30 years of age with Wellens, Cayless, Fa'asavalu and Flannery not far behind.

Not one of those players is in the same class as Lockyer. I hope he comes to Superleague regardless of who he signs for as he is still one of the best players in the world.

I don't recall all this age thing when Menzies signed for Bradford.

I honestly believe it would be great signing for the GAME, but your agenda is quite obviously different to mine.

He's undoubtedly a quality player, but can you not grasp the obvious negative that anyone signing him would represent? He is 30+ and he is not looking for a new challenge, he is looking for a pension boosting pay day before his retirement. He won't be busting a gut for anyone, like most of these NRL 'superstars' that come over.

Has Matt Gidley come over for a pension, did Barrett. Top class players who gave top class performances, and yes got / get well paid.

It's a chance you take, but with Lockyer I believe it would be a risk worth taking.

I think he would be a brilliant signing. Very top players who have come over have been awesome in the past i.e. Meninga, Langer, Barrett and even Andrew johns for his very short spell.

Lockyer will be 33 when he signs. How many of the players you mention were signed at 33? WHats the point of signing a 33 year old to replace another 33 year old.

Look at the most consistent teams of recent times. Us and the Rhinos. What do we have in common? Our player turnover is nowhere near as high as other teams. Stability is the key. You will get nowhere signing players for a year or 2. Wigan and Barrett are testament to this. You could point to the signing of Jamie Lyon, but tbh, we could have signed Phelps and still would of won the grand final.

Lockyer isn't 32 YET so how can he be 33 when he signs? I'm (assuming maybe wrongly) that he MAYBE available for this season.

He should go to Harlequins RL. He'll get a game there and contribute positively with their corporate sponsorship.

That said, any team wishing to sign him should see how hit fitness goes this year.

I really don't want us to sign him.

We won't sign him, especially after what Eamon wrote in the programme last week. He basically said that he wants to bring through the youngsters so that the International game becomes better.

That's not a bad idea at all, or Celtic?

He will be 33 at the start of the season, when he comes over.

Therefore he will be 33 for 90% of the season

no chance! i read he once threw a sweet wrapper out of his car window and refused to pick it up....

I guess Maths is not your strong point.

He isn't 32 yet, so how can he be 33 at the start of the season (it starts in February)

And so by your reckoning the average age of the Saints side should go up as Gilmour is classed as being 33.

Rather keep pryce meself got more playing time in him then lockyer. Dont get me wrong would like lockyer for sign for us but he be told old time he comes over to england and hes might not even get an visa like some players havent already this season

A tad petty and pedantic, don't you think? He will be roughly 32 and 11 months if he was here for the start of next season.

Just in case it's the Goons that have agreed terms, I emailed the following quote from a Sydney Morning Herald article over to the relevant authorities:

"Captain Darren Lockyer recently admitted to manhandling a bar manager during a drunken night out, only after video evidence proved it was him."

Lockyer was also accused of being near Andrew Johns when he took the ecstacy tablet a few years back at the church.

No chance of him getting a VISA now.

Do I detect a little cause for concern.



Anyway if he has signed for Wigan, getting a visa would not be problem.
Uncle Mo still has contacts.

Yes, but Uncle Eric doesn't, does he?

I was under the impression he will be here for the 2010 season so yes, he will be 33 in march/april of next year.