If the first 3 names line up in that order I'd expect us to finish lower than last year. Overall though, the squad looks bigger physically as well as in numbers and we've good reason to expect the young players to press on and improve. The 2 hookers are as good as anything in the league and better than most. Bring on the glorious 12th and a spot of Rhino hunting!!!!! COYB

Koncrete was a great servant to Northern but TBH I couldn't really understand why they retired number 21, how long did he wear 21, 1 ... 2 seasons ?

I don't think anything can be read into this and it clearly doesn't reflect selection thinking.

The long servers get 1-13 irrespective of position etc, and so there is no instance like last season where platt got a clear and public demotion. At the same time the younger players don't get squad numbers and so a clear message of 'earn the shirt' through the season.

Basically a continuation of the pre season recruitment and public messages: nobody has a guaranteed right to be in the side and the whole squad has an opportunity.

So all good...

I always guessed it's because you weren't allowed to retire the numbers 1-17, so they reversed his "usual" number of 12 to make it into 21 instead, so they they could retire a number in his honour. Never realised it was for a limited time though.

It seems to me that the younger players HAVE been given numbers, but they just haven't officially announced them. Otherwise why wouldn't Briggs just be given number 26? I said before that if you included all the players from last year as well as Bateman, the next number would be 32. Which coincidentally is what Briggs has been given?

Suggests to me that those players do have numbers, just not announced.

(There are 6 numbers missing i.e. 26-31, there are six players who we expected to get squad numbers, i.e. O'Brien, Finigan, Burgess, Southernwood, Bateman & McAvoy. Coincidence?)

Indeed. Conor named six players* who have not yet had numbers announced, and funnily enough we have 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 & 31 available...

As for retiring shirt numbers, I guess this is a purely internal thing for a club and it can do what it wants?

*

Yep, the only rule I've ever heard was not retiring the numbers 1-17, although I forget where I heard that, so that may not even be 100% accurate.

17 for the 1st game:

1. Kearney
2. Raynor
3. Ah Van
4. Walker
5. Ainscough
6. Briggs
7. Herbert
8. Scruton
9. Diskin
10. Lynch
11. Elima
12. Whitehead
13. Langley

14. L'Estrange
15. Bryn Hargreaves
16. Kopczak
17. Royston

Unlucky to miss out: Platt & Donno

i think sykes deserves a chance. the guy made sacrifices by playing out of position because his/our club needed it. He played with nothing and always gave his all whilst other, much more highly paid players, didnt appear to do the same. Give the guy a chance in his natural position when he has a solid team around him.

I like ainscough and raynor, but there is no way i can justify 2 new guys, one who couldnt even get in his squad over K Pryce, to take a place when van agh can be put on the wing and a guy who has done a lot for the club would nt even get a fair crack

Utter bollockxs of the highest order. Sykes has had more than a "fair crack" and he has shown himself to not be good enough whatsoever. Even his goalkicking has gotten worse.

As far as I am concerned, Sykes can continue to play "out of position". Preferably in Cape Town.

which part is bollox.

He was good enough to be a starter last year and since then played in a poorly balanced team out of position.
He isnt on big money.
Ainscough was loaned out whilst pryce played
Van Agh was in the 2nd string.

People need to take there head out of their and stop crucifying people. You want a guys who have missed the full year injured, or not been good enough to even get in their last teams squad to WALK into a team ahead of a player who has played international, and stuck it out last year, playing out of position whilst getting flack from a crowd who seem to expect sucess.

The treatment of players like Platt and Sykes sometimes makes me embarrassed to be associated with our crowd. And thats from a guy whos been a season ticket holder for 70% of his life.

Wiganbull i think its unfair to leave platt out for ah van. Platt has been brilliant at centre spot and ah van looked very unfit in the pre season game last week.

Kearney
Raynor
Walker
Platt
Ainscough
Briggs
Herbert
Hargreaves
Lestrange
Lynch
Whitehead
Elima
Langley

Bench: Scruton, Diskin, Kopzack, Royston

The part about Sykes not getting a "fair crack". He has had more than enough chances and the only thing he has proven is that he is not good enough.



Aye, cos we had such a plethora of top talents to choose from eh? Seriously that really does not say much now does it?



How do you know what he earns?



Who?





Are you his dad? If so, your son is crap.

I would be surprised if Sykes isn't in the 17. TBH I had forgotten about him though.

I thought Sykes deserved better given that it wasn't his fault that the squad was too thin and we had no stand off. He was given the job and he did his best. It may not have been good enough but we had no other options really, that's not his fault.

He may have defensive issues which he's shown for us in the past even when he played centre but all our players could be criticised for something last year.

He's never going to be top class but I'm hopeful Potter will improve him. Sykes hasn't exactly played under many great coaches since he left us first time around. Playing in the McNamara regime the last couple of years won't have helped either.

At least now we have the squad depth that means poor performers can be removed if needed. Given how well the build up to the season is going and the major sugery on the squad thats occurred we don't need to be bagging players before a ball is kicked do we?

Possibly not, but I, for one, hope that the squad overhaul will lead to the likes of Sykes not featuring.

My 17 first up;

1. Kearney
2. Raynor
3. Platt
4. Walker
5. Ainscough
6. Ah Van
7. Herbert
8. Scruton
9. Diskin
10. Lynch
11. Elima
12. Whitehead
13. Langley

14. L'Estrange
15. Bryn Hargreaves
16. Kopczak
17. Addy/Donaldson(if fit)/Sibbit/Sykes/Royston

last sub spot depend on the game plan and whos stepped up in training I guess, for a forward dominated gameplan stick Addy or Sibbit in, but having Sykes there allows us some movement in positions 1, 3/4, and 6 if needed given we might not yet have nailed our best combinations with the huge turnover in personnel. I wouldn't put Briggs in at 6 against Leeds at Cardiff for his first superleague game, maybe overcautious to some but that would be my call at the moment. Kearney is our best full back so he starts there in my team, I suspect Ah Van can do equally as good at 6 as Kearney until Briggs is ready.

Good to have options

Is probably the key point in all this.

A nice headache to have isn't it!?

I know this a typo, but I'm gonna get that put on the back of my shirt

Sorry, Agh Van

Lol, i think im younger than him let alone his dad. Mystic Eddie, which considerably better centres have we signed since last year that have changed the situation that dramatically. as i can see, we have a guy coming back from a career threatening injury who hasnt played for a year and a utility back who couldnt get in the Warriors squad and looked out of shape in his 1st game. Plus we ve lost nero.But good point well made. they are cleary PROVEN to be better options, what was i thinking.

Btw, i know how much moneys hes on but i think you realise my point and are being pedantic. I like some of the signings and if players dont improve they should be dropped, but some of these guys have done and shown nothing to simply jump ahead of players who dug in last year in a team

poop??? i didnt write that!

Indeed. Bullseye, as usual, gives a balanced assessment. No mileage in seeking scapegoats and looking back.

And I think you just pooped the shìte naughty words filter...

I'm assuming that Potter will be testing different centre/wing partnerships in the remaining friendlies before he decides on the starting lineup for the Leeds game. Sykes will get his chance to show he deserves a starting spot. How about you wait and see how everyone gets on before you decide who deserves it more?

For the record, I didn't think Ah Van looked unfit. He did well in the first half to beat his centre on the outside and put Raynor away, and in the second half he showed his skill with the boot by slotting 6/7 conversions over, one from the touchline.
For a debut performance, in a practically entirely new team, in freezing conditions he has probably never experienced before, I'd say he did pretty well.

Some people must have been watching a different game to me if they thought ah van looked out of shape. Thought he slotted in very well, especially in 2nd half when he was much more involved.

Who?

Arrrggghhh! Van!