I dont think we need to replace Briers we need to add another halfback to the squad. every player in the league knows the ball will go to him on tackle5, so we would have a better balanced team if we had another option! That said if Briers does go we will need to sign two halfbacks

Jonathan Thurston may be a bit of a pipedream, but if we can get him it would be the biggest signing in Super League history.

Ben Roberts is not a bad shout. Always impresses me, plus his cousin Tim Cahill already lives in the North west and could help him settle in.

As for British players, I think only Myler or Danny McGuire would do for me.

Myler said on BBC I've got one more year on my contract at Salford and I'm just leaving all contract talks down to my agent Martin Offiah so who knows Salford may keep him if they can raise enough money

Wouldn,t you say langer or johns were the biggest signings in s/l thurston will always be in the shadow of these two greats, so if we can sign these two i wouldn't think he would be a problem especially as they would offer him "silly money"

I'd disagree. A current first choice Australian scrum half at his peak aged 26 would be a far bigger signing than either Langer coming out of retirement or Johns for three games both at the back end of their careers. Immaterial though as any talk of Thurston coming to SL would just be a bargaining chip in contract negotiations down under.

briers will do another 12 months,personally i think he deserves it too.

No there isn't, if you look over the past 4-5 years, at our record when Briers plays against our record when he doesn't, it is about the same.

People forget that during our last few years of "injury crisis" when injuries to Reardon, Bridge and Johnson etc meant we lost every week - Briers was hardly ever injured and we were still erratic.

When Briers went off, it was easter weekend all over again for me. I knew we couldn't score enough to win, and as harsh as this may sound, relief swept over me when Grix did score to avoid being nilled. However, it wasn't just Briers and our England rep's whio were missed. Higham was a noticeable absence in my opinion. We were very flat and there was rarely an injection of pace from the play the ball.

As for Myler, well, people are throwing his name around but I'm not 100% on this one. The guy has played well in some games this season but I certainly wouldn't go breaking the bank for him just yet. Let him prove himself over time (not half a season) first.

I'm at a complete loss as to why people are interested in slagging of Lee Briers when we have a number 7 that is without doubt the worst number 7 we have ever had......

Gary Hulse was twice the player Monaghan is...and thats being serious...

Michael Monaghan is a waste of a jersey, a contract, heat rub and Vaseline....

No, that's being silly.

Couldn't agree more. Well said.

Right then, i didn't want to start another thread so i'm bringing this back up.

Ive said many times that the team if given the confidence and direction can play and win games without Briers.

My argument was that for many years under the Cullen or Lowes regime the team imo have been told that everything from play making to water carrying goes through Briers, so much so that the team seemed lost without him. We now have a coach that can give the team the self belief, confidence and direction when Briers isn't on the field.

We lost at Scotland without Briers although i feel he wasn't missed in that game but Morley was, we lost last week because we had the drongo in charge again and he lacks the expertise of a first class coach.

I don't want this to turn into another Briers bashing thread and i know it's only one game but those people who think we need Briers on the field to win games, what do you think now and are you anymore convinced that with the right coaching the team can play and win games without him

No Morley no win

Let's see how we go after more than one game, eh?

I want to believe, I want it to be true. I just think that we'll be here, soon enough, after a lacklustre defeat, debating if he'd played would we have won, and plenty of us championing the "Yes" angle.

I think Graham Appo showed in 2003 that we can do without Lee Briers, what nobody ahs been able to do since, is do it for a long enough length of time to convince coaches & fans alike that Lee should go, now maybe Old Father Time is making that decision for us, and rather than 'Can we play without Briers', Smith will enforce the approach of 'We have to win without Briers, and will do so.'

I think what Smith does is empowers his players, gives them the confidence & self belief. If they didn't previously believe that they could win without Lee, they soon will do.

agreed

Apart from a few mentalists (I have to put that in after WOTT managed to find someone last week who LITERALLY thinks we'll NEVER replace Briers) no one is saying Lee Briers is utterly irrelplaceable. Similarly, no one is saying he is perfect, personally or professionally. However the overwhelming evidence, over 10 years, is that we are a much better team with Briers in it than not.

Now, I take your point that for years the team may have been directed to send stuff through Briers. However, the other reason is that he has been excellent for us on many, many occasions. It's natural that people will look to him.

As an aside, I don't agree that the reliance on Briers has been all that contrived - lest we forget, past coaches have tried to sign any number of half backs to play with the bloke. For obvious reasons, it makes no sense to have 1 player who can kick, pass and cause problems for the opposition line.

What I would like to see Latchy is you to acknowledge the bloke's contribution to our club over his career and his importance to the team. Who knows how long he has left at the club (well, you might) - I'm a bit uncomfortable with how his reputation (player) is being tarnished by some.

Well said Ian, I really hope people do acknowledge his contributions over the years, surely no one can't deny his commitment to Warrington.

Every time you bring this up i have said many times and will say again that nobody can knock the contribution/commitment that Briers has made over his Warrington career, he deserves to be acknowledged for that but it doesn't make him a great player.

He is a great player he has has just been unfortunate not to have ever played in a great side.

briers is legend full stop, i will be writin to the big wigs for a statue of him somewhere in this town when he retires.

Perfect example of why the word great is overused.

Briers has been a talented player who has had some good games and played a long career.

Great is like Andrew Johns, Ellery Hanley, Martin Offiah. Briers was never a great.

If he was a great however he would have played in a great side, he wouldn't have hung around Warrington he'd have been winning trophies with Saints or Bradford.

COUGH,COUGH,COUGH,COUGH
LEGEND is a strong word and Briers is nowhere near LEGEND status nowhere near the cotributions of Brian and John Bevan ,Murphy,Parry Gordon,Boyd,Drummond,Hesford,Gregory and the list goes on and on without Briers mentioned,YES he has served the club well yes he has played well in patches he has been a good player but he ISN'T a LEGEND !

i'm 25, so i really havent seen much of all of the above names to be honest, but like you have sed and me dad tells me, they were greats, but for the warrington legend of what i know and my era it has to be lee briers, really do think the stick he gets sometimes is a joke, people who dont even watch the ruggers and you have a conversation with them they will say, (we need get rid of that briers dont we), For me, personaly opinion, briers is the man