[urlhttp://m.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/14479208.Ferres_reveals_Bulls_twice_came_close_to_landing_half_back/[/url

He's gonna look a bit inept if rumours on Leigh board about them sacking chase and bringing in travis burns to replace him are true. We've been 'scouring' the market and 'intensifying' our efforts for last six months at least with no success yet Leigh can do it just like that.

I presume that would be because Leigh have more money to spend? If it's a "like for like" wage to replace Rangi then i'm sure that the money he was paid would be enough to secure Burns?

If the rumours were true, Bradford enquired about Burns but couldn't afford him. We are obviously looking to find somebody on the cheap which is why it's so difficult. The task may have been a bit easier if they hadn't wasted cap money on player's like Mathers.

It would be interesting to know who we missed out on, just so we can see what calibre of player we are aiming for.

Burns meet with the club twice deal was agreed till Roby got injured now its McManus blocking a deal with Cunningham been on increasingly thinner and thinner ice each week.

I know we're not in a position to be picky, but I'm not sure I'd even want Travis Burns. He's not exactly the sort of player that keeps a cool head and leads the team around the park, is he?
I think he spent most of his time at Saints as a 6, not a 7, and even then he was so crap that Saints preferred to play Jordan Turner instead of him.

Despite not being ideal Travis Burns is significantly better than any scrum half we have currently.

We could probably have afforded him if we’d managed our squad better and not had to be shelling out for 6 or 7 players that never get games/we don’t need.

You can smell the BS coming from SF in Odsal from Blackpool.

You can, but "We do need a 7, we've been looking for one, honest" is better than "We don't need one, don't be daft".

Ferres' quote of "We're not just going to sign a 7 for the sake of it" is, IMO, the right thing to be doing. Just signing anyone isn't the way forward - you end up with players like Sijeka and Herbert doing that. But they've made Smith aware of the situation and will no doubt be hoping he can provide a suitable player before we get to the meat of the season in the middle 8's

We do seem to miss out quite a lot don't we.

Can't understand people who wouldn't be happy with Burns. Saints paid a significant sum for him only 2 years a go. He's had a fall out with Cunningham by the looks of it. Yes he did choose to play Jordan Turner there instead, but this is a coach that is under huge pressure at Saints and who aren't performing. So just because he's not playing him doesn't mean he's right. Burns is an excellent goal kicker, has a decent kicking game and can pass a ball. Just don't understand who else people think we'd sign. We're not going to get that perfect HB who has experience, leadership, kicking game, can take the line on, lead the team around and set up tries One thing Ferres said that is correct is that there is a shortage of HBs and we're not the only one looking for a HB.

Hoping uncle Tony will help his nephew out with Declan Patton. Just got feeling Ferres will sign another Marc Herbet from the Queensland cup and Leigh will land Burns.

Just don't understand why we wasted valuable money on Mathers and let Rhys Jacks go. Rhys could have done a job (much better than Addy, Purtell or Haggerty) while we continued looking for a better or more suitable HB.

Thats why i'm glad we've got a coach who doesn't know anything about the current roster or SL players. He won't make daft signings on players on what they did 8 years a go in SL(Mathers) , or keep playing a player because they had one good game last year (Blythe) He can come in and make a judgement on what they are CURRENTLY producing.

I suspect Declan Patton is one of the 2 that we narrowly missed out on due to injuries. There were murmurs of him going out on loan somewhere shortly before Sandow went down injured and then Patton himself did playing Dual Reg.




This is the same Rhys Jacks that can't get in the Sheffield side ahead of Dave Hewitt. Would have been the very definition of signing someone for the sake of it I think.

But he's better than what we've got and we could have used him until the right HB came a long. If we didn't sign him and kept cap space free, then fair enough, but we let him go when we had 1 HB, then decided to bring a 34 year old FB out of retirement when we already had 2 players who could easily play there.

Jacks wasn't the answer, but he would have been more useful to the squad at the moment than what Mathers is. Also if we sign a HB, he could do his knee ligaments and be out for the season and we're back to square one and playing second-rowers and centres there again. Jacks could have provided backup.

Jacks is more of a dummy half really so I'm not sure he was the answer.

Shame Jacks wasnt kept, he could have been a useful squad player. Wouldnt have cost the earth, and can fill in the halves or at 9.
Definitely shouldnt have gotten the 7 shirt, but like someone else said; we could get a new 7 for the 8s and he do his ACL in the first game. Then what?
In the interim, Jacks would have been a better shout at 7 than Addy or Purtell...

Warrington won't let Parton go out on loan only Dual reg. Wakefield tried in the off season and we're turned down 3 times.

Benefit of hindsight. When he was here, everyone was saying to not make sure he's the next Siejka/Herbert. Signing him because we're desperate for a 7, only for him to turn out to be a bit rubbish and we've wasted our money. I'm sure the decision at the time was based on that and thinking he isn't good enough, let him go and aim for other targets. The fact those targets haven't paid off maybe means Jacks would have improved the squad slightly, but at the time they had to make a decision.

I'm as frustrated as the next person at the lack of scrum half, but I also don't want to see the club completely waste money on someone who's nowhere near good enough as they did with Siejka. The fact Jacks can't even get in the Sheffield team suggests to me he wasn't good enough, and his saved wages may end up being the difference between a 5 out of 10 rated halfback to a 7 out of 10 rated one. If one ever becomes available.


I do think people are contradicting themselves a little though. Complaining about not signing Jacks when we were desperate for a 7. In the same post, complaining about signing Mathers as an emergency replacement for Mullaney. The Mathers signing was identical to the Siejka one IMO. We lost a player late on in the recruitment process, so quickly snapped someone else up (knowing Oscar Thomas is nowhere near the finished article) who turned out to be a bit naff. Everything about the situation tells me it would have been the same thing if we'd signed Jacks.

Difference being we have plenty of players who can play FB. Clare, Thomas, and Campbell (a FB who we signed in the off season.

) We already had cover there.

The HB situation we've got 1 player and seemingly giving everyone a go there.

Even if Jacks was a bit naff, he won't be any worse than what we've seen there so far this year (it can't get any worse) But we could have kept him there and it would have allowed Addy/Purtell/Haggerty to play in their natural position and giving a bit of continuity in team (which is another massive issue that a lack of HB is causing as we're constantly chopping and changing)

I do think that point is nearly as important as the lack of a half. Brilliant as Gaskell is when firing on all cylinders, he does have a fair bit of 'downtime'.

IMO, there are at least 8 players in our first team who could be cut loose. Several of which are likely on a decent slice of cash so their loss would be to our gain.

The trouble is getting the off the books to start with.

Personally, I thought that Jacks was worth a deal. He was coming from a P/T background so would be unlikely to be able to command a huge wage, he certainly wouldn't be earning more than we're paying Mathers. Why couldn't we have gone with a longer trial period as we did with Lovegrove? Give them a chance against the week in week out sides we're likely to be facing and see how he does then.

Keep signing these "squad players" and we'll still be in exactly the same situation but with even more people not playing and 50p to spend on a scrum half.

I like Burns because he is one of those players who seems not to understand the concept of pain. I think therefore hooker is probably his best position, he just doesn't cut it for me as a HB, not creative enough.

Depends what your alternatives are..

If you are covering Burns' wages you need to get value for that money; I'm not sure you will get that with him at SH. You'd be better using the cash trying to bribe the ref.

I am putting my hope in Smith knowing a few half backs who want to come over with him. He doesn't need to be a big name, just someone who is a decent player who can't get a game in the few NRL teams that exist. The problem is the visa conditions may hamper them.

I like Gaskell but hold back from saying he is top class. Two SL teams have let him go and he is months from the end of his contract but nobody has come in to sign him for the remainder of this season. It appears Hull want him. He is a good player in the championship but he still has it to prove at a higher level. What if Smith has a stand off that he prefers? Will Smith want to sign a 35 Yr old in Leon or will he want a 25 year old to build the team around.
Smith is a total unknown and may surprise us all with some of his signings.

Looks like Rangi is available after all according to TotalRL.com

Go on, I dare you