from the few games I saw of him this year he looks to have a decent kicking game and linked up well with the forwards. Just thought he'd make a decent alternative to what we already have.

If he was British maybe, but he's a Quota spot, so not for me. That place will be used by a Propr imo.

We are looking at a prop to fill our last overseas spot so Drinkwater isn’t a goer. I believe we are looking over here for extra halfback cover though, or for a hooker with both Wood and Randall able to cover the halves.

Didn't see him do much for Leigh but hen again who could with a starting front row of Hock, Higham, and Tickle.

Lets hope that if we are looking at an overseas prop, they make more of an impact than our last one we had.

Good point Willzay, but sometimes, players do play better around a better calibre of players, and yes he would struggle beghind that pack. How many times over the years have we defended our halves because they played behind a beaten pack.

Allgood played reasonably well for us he was just unfortunate with injuries

He wasn't bad for us when he was on the pitch, it was getting him on the pitch that was the problem. Yes, he was unlucky, but it seemed that every injury problem he picked up always appeared to take longer than expected to shake off. Unfortunately for him, he had the same issues at Hull KR.

It became all too reminiscent of a certain other prop we had 2-3 seasons ago that came from Leeds

You make a good point regarding props especially overseas props.

Overseas signing to ourselves and SL in general and even before SL have always been a mixed bag. However where props are concerned we've really been unlucky. It's especially annoying as Wakefield have always been willing to push out the boat where props are concerned and have signed some big names for little return.

For me the best ones have been Watene, Korky, Fifita, Fritz and Shelford - there may be a few more but you get the drift. By this I mean they offered VFM and lived up to or even exceeded expectations - that doesn't mean they were world beaters.

Those who were either disappointing, short lived, no better than British players or just plain garbage were as follows and there are some big names in there. They weren't necessarily bad but just didn't give real value or meet expectations.

Poore, Tronc, Graham, Todd, Allgood, Hood, Stoic, O'Brien, Keating, Masella, Lima, Leaeno, Paea, Anderson (opinions differ) and the abomination that was Hickey.

Doesn't make great reading does it. There are some big names in that list and some hefty wages. We seem to have done pretty well in most other positions where overseas players are concerned but to me Prop remains a but of a poison chalice.

So I'll reserve judgement on any Aussie FR we sign and pray for the best

Stosic was a fantastic prop forward I thought, one of the best. Take his contribution over a Korky every single day of the week.

Well I didn't rate him that highly, but if you read my post again one of the criteria was 'short lived'. For whatever reason he was. I'd say that was a fair description 1 season 18 games - you have to question whether its worth bringing a player half way around the world for that. He wasn't a failure but he wasn't a success imho.

I also agree about Korki, never a favourite of mine but you have to say he gave us some good service 144 games over roughly five year. He was imo opinion a relatively successful signing.

I accept opinions regarding my list will differ but overall I think it's fair and makes the point.

Shelford, yes. He was great.

Every time this come up, I feel compelled to declare myself as the sole member of the Shane Tronc fan club; he was a genuinely classy front rower, and his stats were outrageously good for the short time he was with us - he continued to be top metre maker for some months after leaving.

I heard that he left after the club didn't honour some promises that were made to him - but that could be hearsay; either way, I'm certain that if he'd stayed with us, we'd be talking about him as one of our best ever imports. As it stands, it's probably fair to include him on your list, because for whatever reason, we didn't see anywhere near enough of him.

You're definitely not the sole member or the Tronc fan club. I'd never heard of him before he was signed, he was a great player but unfortunately, as you say, it was too short lived to make a real judgment. He for sure would have been one of the best props seen at Belle Vue, a real handful for defences.

You don't need to feel compelled, I agree he was great but also VERY short lived. Whatever the reasons his signing was a failure.

I'd also add Stostic to the success list, he was very good for us whilst here and only played 3 games less in his Trinity career than Fritz who you deemed a success. I think its also about impact on the team during their time here and Fritz remains one of my favourite trinity forwards, he as afterall part of a team that actually picked up some silverware. We always looked a lot more effective with him on the field and for me Stostic was the same, sadly injury did for him. Fifita does the same currently and will go down as one of the better ones. You are right though it's all about opinions and we have had plenty that have offered neither VFM or impact. Beecraft and Woods are others that spring to mind. Tip of the hat to Dallas Hood though, i bet no player in our history has sold more raffle tickets than him!

I knew this one would end up like this and I knew Stoic and Anderson might be the issue players..

There is a difference between the two which is Why Fritz imo was a success.

Fritz like most players in those days was signed to play in the NRL close season. He was also in a semi-pro team which Wakefield were at the time. Where as Stosic was contracted for a year or maybe two as a SL pro in a full time squad. It's a narrow margin but I stand by it.

I've started something now, haven't I.

I'm not going to pass judgement too much on forwards of the past, as there was a 4 year spell where I lived abroad, and didn't see all games.

What I did see of Stosic, I quite liked, but just didn't play that many games.

Korky was here a while, in what was, at times, a struggling side. I personally didn't rate him, and don't think he would get any where near the side these days

For me short lived doesn't mean poor value or a failure.
Stosic as an example was worth his money. So to me was a success.
Korki I liked anyway because I was good. But he has extra benefit as he stayed longer.
I agree Eastern about your current team point. He would not be top prop at all. Probably fighting for 4th spot......but equally he have less to do and would probably look better as our impact prop.

Amor is another example. We absolutely got our value from him but he didn't stay long.

You're certainly not the sole member mate. I've preached many times on here that he was the best Prop I'd seen at Trinity, albeit for only half a season or whatever it was. Saying that I bet we payed him a pretty penny to get him over and it woyuld be fair to list him as we didn't get value for money out of him. As you say if he'd have stayed for at least a couple of years he may have gone down as one of our best imports ever.

Too right Mash, I too thought Tronc was up there, didn’t he go back due to home sickness which was unfortunate Stostic was another prop who looked good but again a knee injury cut short another potentially good prop.

We were meant to get Stosic back as well weren't we because he thought he could get a European Passport but it all felll through and we had no quota spaces left.

I was under the impression he could get a Maltese (or similar) passport, but didnt send the application off?

Serbian passport I think

You really do have a knack of missing the point.

Maybe I should have phrased it differently, my fault for assuming people would work it out.

So if it helps I'll add a bit. We've also been unlucky as well. Tronc would have been a Trinity great but he just couldn't settle. Ditto Stosic and a few other

Still doesn't alter the fact that our forays into the world of front rowers hasnt always been the success it might have been.

Hope that helps

It helps me understand we don't agree what success means.
You know that's possible right?