Okay, not true

I hope we make an enquiry to see if Anasta would be available for this season. If we could get him over here, he could play as a ball palying 13, where he played his best rugby last season for the Roosters. That would allow Langley to move into the second row where he is far mor effective.

The aussie press are saying Anastas out after 2011 so hes there for next season, he would be a good addition skills wise and position wise but if he and his gf Home and Away Jodi wouldnt be interested in moving inside Aussie from Sydney to North Queensland, he certainly wouldnt move from this: www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/s ... 5812017933 to Bradford in winter. and dont forget if we were interested then it would have been at the time of the Cowboys offer, and Awford would have been a good advert for the Bulls. So we seem to have made the decision that it is better to have team players that are commited to the club such as Kyle than "trophy" Aussies and if you get an overseas get them young and with potential like Hape Withers etc. The squad is a work in progress, and a big step on from last year, and Mick needs to see how 11 new players gell and then think about what is missing, rather than any knee jerk reaction to an Aussie becoming available. Reading between the lines it looks to me as if Roosters are wanting a bit more space under the cap for youngsters and using this threat to negotiate a longer but cheaper contract with Anasta. But stranger things have happened...

The aussie press are saying Anastas out after 2011 so hes there for next season, he would be a good addition skills wise and position wise but if he and his gf Home and Away Jodi wouldnt be interested in moving inside Aussie from Sydney to North Queensland, he certainly wouldnt move from this: www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/s ... 5812017933 to Bradford in winter. and dont forget if we were interested then it would have been at the time of the Cowboys offer, and Awford would have been a good advert for the Bulls. So we seem to have made the decision that it is better to have team players that are commited to the club such as Kyle than "trophy" Aussies and if you get an overseas get them young and with potential like Hape Withers etc. The squad is a work in progress, and a big step on from last year, and Mick needs to see how 11 new players gell and then think about what is missing, rather than any knee jerk reaction to an Aussie becoming available. Reading between the lines it looks to me as if Roosters are wanting a bit more space under the cap for youngsters and using this threat to negotiate a longer but cheaper contract with Anasta. But stranger things have happened...

Anasta would be a good signing but is he really what we need?

would give cover in halves and also slot straight into starting team as a genuine ball playing loose forward. Seems an ideal fit to me. Seriously doubt we could get him though. Another NRL club will pick him up imo.

yeh cant see it myself

IMO I don't really want us to sign him and would rather see Briggs playing 6 this year.

Wouldnt be a bad signing but I don't think its desperately needed!

dont think for a second we will sign him, but Luke Robinson and an absolute clone of him was around 2mins from odsal staduim an hour ago. i used to play againt him and i am 99% sure it was him and an older bloke walking (not sure why) on Rooley Av

I heard he is a massive Little Chef fan..

Having a ball playing loose forward would take a little pressure off the halves, which would give Briggs a great help.

There is no point in using the quota spot for the sake of it - it must be for somebody who is better than what we have, not just somebody to add competition.

I updated that when we released Hall forgot to change it since.

Dont think anyones suggesting anasta (or Sutton for that matter) as a replacement for Briggs at 6, more as a 13 and cover for 6.

As I said to you on the phone before the game today, we don't need Sutton, Pryce or Anasta and instead we should wait for the right player to come along.

Who knows which NRL club will break the cap this year

depends where you view our weaknesses in current squad. personally I'm nervous over lack of depth at halves and would prefer a ball playing loose so anasta/sutton would improve our squad for me. Others would prefer a strike or a impact prop. purely personal preferences. other option is to wait and see where we pick up injuries although problem with doing that is, if we wait until someones injured before signing a replacement, we face a 4-6 week wait for visa's before replacement is available to play by which time injured player is probably close to fitness anyway.

fully agreed Mick, but more important than what you or I think, thats what the club decided 3 months ago.

Separately, as a general opinion, I would be surprised given 18 of the first team squad (and all that cost) are on new contracts to see any more signings until the dust has settled on the 11 new recruits. It looks to me as if it was more important to get rid of Awford so as to stay within the salary cap for the year ahead than to get a signing fee for him. The red amber and black membership thing would be an alternative source of cash to that signing on fee (helped by Georges fee) as however you account for it, it would be cash now not over the next 5, 15 or 25 years. But where does all this wishful fantasy for a supersigning (aussie or not) come from given the experience of the last few years? The club themselves have clearly gone beyond it looking at the nature of the squad so far. and lets remember history: our Superleague success came from the SALE of of one super player the price including exchange of three players none of which were trophy aussie superstars.

but it is still good to dream that the cap is not there and Bradford were half decent last season.

update: Just seen your latest posting posted as I wrote the above: if you are concerned about the lack of depth at halves, how about last year: we started with Kearney - a full back by trade - and awford - and who else? This year we start with Herbert and Kyle and Danny and Brett (and Cain). where in the squad is there not competition for places between a young player with good skills and an older player with experience with in some cases eg props mid aged players competing. Last season half the squad was academy players, none there now.

But yes you are right in the most important issue: any new signings need to be as a consequence of proven weaknesses in the squad. and we just do not know yet where those are.

Don't think you'll find it was anything to do with staying within the cap that we got rid of Toerag - it had made it clear it wanted out ages ago, and was clearly going to go. It was never going to figure with a Salary Cap Value for 2011, and the club was planning on that basis from months ago. The only thing that held its departure up was the club trying to secure some recompense for it breaking it's contract.

The Red, Amber and Black membership schemes - if well-subscribed - will generate many many times any cash we might have received in respect of Toerag, so I don't see a connection there. I doubt we were relying on anything from Toerag, other than maybe paying a fee for Pryce.

So you overall conclusions - that the club has moved on from marquee signings and is now going for solid strength in depth and competition for places, and that we would be dumb to rush into any signings with the cap and quota capacity we have available until we see more clearly where the need is - make total sense to me.

i dont think signing a proven aussie who was part of a grand final run last year would be panic. One thing i do believe our squad has lacked is the experienced player for the kids to learn from. briggs and cain dont really have a deacs to learn from in training and this would surely be beneficial. It was the great advantage of having morrison and beaver for the young 2nd rows, lynchy for the props etc. that is why i believe diskin is a GREAT signing, O brian who could be amazing gets to train with a guy who has been there and done it in a winning environment.

That was pretty much my thinking. I certainly wouldnt go out and sign a journeyman just for the sake of using the quota spot. If we can find someone who genuinely improves our squad then we should look at them. It doesnt necessarily have be a "superstar" aussie, just someone who offers something we havent got. But just because we've had 1 bad experience with a marquee player doesnt, in my view, mean we should rule out ever signing someone who falls into that category ever again.
If theres no-one available who improves us then keep the spot free in case injuries strike during the season

Completely agree with this POV.

Keeping a quota spot free also means that as the season progresses we will be competing with less clubs should someone become suddenly available. The way the squad is shaping up, I'm confident we can compete as we are which hasn't been the case for a few years with a full quota

Sorry I didn't mean a replacement for Briggs. I think after yesterday's showing we have signed someone with enormous potential!

i think we all know one game is not hard proof. im confident he is going to go very well, but bringing in a guy with the experience of anasta must be a positive and briggs development would be aided by this.

If an injury was to occur to Elima, Whitehead, Or Sibbit we dont have much experiance to cover the loss of one of these players. If we could sign Anasta it would be problem solved, we get a world class 13, which allows Langley to play in the 2nd row, where he is far more suited. Obviously we have Donaldson, Addy, Olbison and Bateman, but i reckon a quality 2nd rower or Loose would be the best way to use our quota spot.

If an injury was to occur to Elima, Whitehead, Or Sibbit we dont have much experiance to cover the loss of one of these players. If we could sign Anasta it would be problem solved, we get a world class 13, which allows Langley to play in the 2nd row, where he is far more suited. Obviously we have Donaldson, Addy, Olbison and Bateman, but i reckon a quality 2nd rower or Loose would be the best way to use our quota spot.

Walker would likely play second row if we were short, IMO.

It's going to be interesting seeing just what Potter decides to do with second row and the threequarter positions. I'd say we were stronger in the second row than centre, and Walker, who can cover both, would probably play centre. Without getting a few games in and seeing how the land lies, I can't really see any point in getting a second row (or even a loose) no matter how good. We're not short in those positions and there seems little point in getting someone in just because we can. Better to keep the powder dry, imo.