you cannot make a correct judgement about the players without looking at the actual carries.

i am sure i could make more meters than certain players per carry if every one of my carries was running the ball back from a kick.

we know with both these players that they have both made a lot of easy yard from the work done inside them. how many times have we seen a winger running countless meters after an overlap, so in effect just running into empty space. thats why im a bit wary of looking at the meters made by a winger. if it was someone like joel, then meters made would be very interesting, because he makes alot of breaks for himself with the lines he runs.

I don't think that one lasts very long.

To join his brother at Saints ?

I'm unsure about pryce, he can score from 10/15 yards out better than goulding (Would goulding have scored vs Saints on Sunday, knocking away foster?) but doesn't return the ball as well.

For me, keep him in the side if he's fit enough. Let him build up his confidence and score some tries. Pryce can be a good asset in the long run, he just needs a bit of form and confidence.

Goulding is a fringe player, yes this season he is on a hotstreak. But last time he got the starting jersey he lost all confidence and was back in the reserves.

Exactly what I meant by my 'should have killed foster' comment. He ran at him 1 on 1 and got injured. I do think he pulled u before contact though so maybe he pulled summat.

I have no problem with Pryce. He is scoring tries which is what we pay him for, and as some have said his defence is quite solid. (Remember the hit on cudjoe anyone?) I think its the usual story of someone doesnt like you so never will no matter what you do.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with his confidence this season so what may have gone on in the past in that regard is no justification for not selecting him over Pryce if that is the debate. In fact it's the opposite. If confidence is a factor in dropping and selecting players Goulding would be in the side as Pryce looks the least confident out of the two of them.

Dave

I think that is a pretty good observation. What would be interesting to see is if Goulding got a wing slot on the right if Pryce made the bench. In theory he offers cover for both wings and centres.

Dave

Pryce would never be put on the bench, nor would any other outside back. We always go with four forwards which is correct as we have more than enough versatility within the starting 13 to slot into the 3/4 line if there are injuries.

With Pryce being as big as he is he ought to be able to cover every position in the team bar scrum half!

I know can't because he because he probably doesn't know how but the physique he has ought to make him a great utility player.

Dave

He played there in the world club championship against Wests

I disagree with 'p1e e8ter'

Darrell shows more confidence than Pryce does. He wasn't dropped last year because of his confidence because the games that he did play in he either scored or set up a couple of good tries. He was dropped last year to salford, which was a huge mistake, which is what i believe knocked his confidence.

He has come back this year fresh after an injury and looks like a completely different player, as someone on here has stated his stats, it clearly shows that he is a better player than Pryce.

How can you say that Pryce can score 10/15 yards out better than Goulding, when their tries have been similar, however Darrell has had a few where more effort has been needed. He has been very good this year and has improved so much in defense and out of the two, shows so much more confidence and the will to do things for himself to help the team.

Except even a totally untrained amateur like me can find in less than 5 minutes that Darrell's stat's are not =#FF0040clearly better than Karl's at all, and that the guy who does have training and experience in analysing stats, has access to far more of them, and even has staff to work on analysis, and most importantly above all else =#FF0000Know's exactly what he's asked each player to do in each match, and how they've measured up, must have drawn one conclusion that nobody can argue with:

In the opinion of Michael Maguire, Karl Pryce has been a better option for the =#FF0000team performance on the =#FF0040left wing than Darrell Goulding on the =#FF0040left wing

Beyond that, it's just opinions from all of us.

My own personal take is given a fully fit back in the swing of things side, Pat will be on the left wing and Amos will either be at fullback or on the right wing depending on what happens with Phelps in the remaining games. Medium to long term, I feel (like Cadoo and Rogues) that Karl's future is in the centres and that the current wing play is just a stepping stone to that goal (wing is used a lot in the NRL to bring on players destined for other positions). I also think that Darrell's future may lay in the same direction (dependant upon his own personal development).

The whole situation is kind of a little silly, and as a set of fans we should be just enjoying both Darrell and Karl being given chances and developing their games this season - far more than under BN. Maybe all of us just need to take a step back and celebrate that, rather than us either finding fault, or endlessly having to defend particular players.

I completely disagree and if the stats showed Pryce was better in these areas I am fairly sure then you wouldnt be trying to make the excuses that you are. In all of the main areas, such as carries, runs from dummy half, metres, tackle busts and clean breaks, then Goulding's stats are better if you average them out per game. This is fact. You can make any excuses you like about left/right patterns etc but they are simply that, excuses. You use the case of Carmont and Gleeson to try and back this up but it is obvious to anyone watching the games that Gleeson comes inside and looks for work a lot more than Carmont and makes the hard yards that Carmont does not. I am no great Gleeson fan but he does work very hard in this area. If Richards plays on the left he makes plenty of runs from dummy half, metres, tackle busts and clean breaks. Pryce just doesnt look for the work and when he does is too slow and does not use his size effectively and that is why his stats are so poor.

What would be people's opinions if Pryce got another 12 month contract?

A lot would depend on the size of the contract. I have certainly heard conflicting stories about how much he has been paid in his time so far. However even the lower figures are too much for the return we have got. It would certainly need to be a very low contract to retain him. The mere fact though that he would stay for that doesnt exactly instill confidence in him as it would indicate that no other club wants him. He has been here 3 years and is still a long way off the finished article and I cant really see any evidence that he is getting any better. How much time do we give him and if he is in the same position next year does he get another 12 month deal to prove himself? Where do we draw the line, or more to the point when does Lenegan admit that the signing of Pryce was a mistake? I personally think that enough is enough and dont think he should get another contract based on what he has done so far and think that the money could be better spent elsewhere.

The value of his contract is irrelevant really as we'll never know what it is but if he's a first team player scoring at least a try a game, should he not be paid accordingly?

I'd be pleased. He is beginning to show his potential and another year would be about right too see if he can continue (providing he's not on silly money, and with IL in charge I doubt he is)

In the days of the salary cap the size of his contract, and value for money, is very relevant imo. He has played 8 games this season and less than 20 in 3 years. He is far from a first team regular and has played far less games this season than players like O'Caroll, Prescott, Mossop, Goulding, McIlorum etc who may be considered squad players more so than consistent first teamers. The same could be said of the previous 2 seasons. In addition with his injury record it would be lunacy to pay him more than any of these, never mind the same as a regular first teamer.

Didn't he say in a club quote that he had an option for another year?
Perhaps he's taking up that option.
I'd be ok with that, he's doing ok at present. Scoring tries, not making mistakes.
Very much work in progress though.

He certainly divides opinion though.
Those like me who are ok with him being given a chance which he does appear to be taking and making the effort at the moment.
Then there are those like the woman sat a few rows behind me at the Saints game. The hatred and foul mouthed verbal vitriol she was spewing out was disgraceful. A "Wigan fan" screaming like that at a player wearing the Cherry and White shirt! I've heard that towards opposition players but never like that against any Wigan player before. It did shock me at the time I suppose.

The one thing KP has in his favour is he's British and over the next few years home grown or federation players will become more valuable.
Aussies will become more expensive and their "marquee" players will hardly ever leave to come here seeing their salary cap allowance has been increased.

How much are they on?

Apart from the money, as already mentioned, that would depend on who, if any, of our other threequarters were released in order to keep him. I'd be happy with keeping him, as long as we also keep Goulding & Carmont (and the youngsters like Marsh, Thornley & Charnley, whose contract statuses I'm unsure of).

Unless, of course, we have a better signing in the pipeline...!

For Super League players at a top club not a great deal and I dont really see why it should matter anyway. You said he should be paid accordingly, which I agree with and that was my point. His status in the squad and the games that he has played mean that if he was given a new 12 month contract it should be somewhere between what an academy player and squad player earns. At this current time he has done nothing to justify any more and as such I would be very much against a contact for any more. Do You disagree or do you think he should be paid the same as a regular first choice player like Pat Richards as your post implied?

I don't think his value is as high as Richards but I would expect him to earn more than a acadamy-squad player if the plan is to use him as our left winger. I suppose only the coaches will know how they want to use him. Personally I think he comes in for some very unfair critisism but I also don't agree with the praise he gets from some quarters. At this moment I like him as our left winger but I prefer Amos to fullback. If that means he's dropped for pat and and goulding returns to the right, then so be it. I suppose when Amos is 100% we'll find out the coaches plan.

If he was on roughly the same as Goulding (however much that is), that would be about right, IMO.

Suicidal - having to put up with threads like this every other week for another 12 months is enough to put anyone over the edge.