It's the context you have got wrong and for reasons best known to yourself won't give ground.

I'll try one more time to put it in a context that suits you.

With the time and money available after the Stosic fiasco I consider King as adequate. Especially when you consider SL props with the experience of King don't grow on trees, also Kear knows him and this must count for something. If you can name me an English player with as good a CV that we could have got in the time I'll be happy to accept him.

Finally you seem to have ignored the fact that I also included Sculthorpe ie both props who have left (perhaps I should have also included Bibey). In other words it wasn't meant to be a player v player comparison.

I'd have loved to have retained Stosic, but you run with what you have. HTH

sorry vasty but IMHO king couldnt lace sausages boots , not a slur on king but a judgement on much i rated sausage . i think that if he was still available for selection then we would be quite a force to be reckoned with.

He is not comparing King to Stotic though!

Matters not to me my friend. You seem to think that I am deliberatley trying to bait you, when all I was doing was agreeing with Bloomers. Is noboby else allowed an opinion (I did state it was imho), because that's all mine is. I am not trying to state that I am correct (as you seem to do

), just offering my opinion. I thought we had already established that we have differing views on King and our front row options (KH - utility

), it's just that JK seems to agree with mine rather than yours



It's also called having a GSOH.................which too many people that use this forum seem to lack.

No agenda pal.

King, looks an adequate replacement for Stosic or Sculthorpe

Does this mean Tronc could be Trin's best prop since Fritz??

THANKYOU!!!

For heavens sake how obvious does it need to be.

Again thanks, I was starting to think I'd gone mad

King replacement adequate for stosic

perhaps we have all cracked up

time will tell big boots to fill

That's the point, he - is - an - adequate - replacement! No where does that suggest he is as good, that is subjective/opinion and you don't have the monopoly on that even if you are deluded enough to think you and JK are thinking the same.

If Stosic had not cocked up, no one myself included would be suggesting we would have chosen to replace Stosic with King. However there was no choice - was there - hence King was an adequate replacement all things considered - still with me



However for those who can't stomach me using the sainted Stosic as an example I gave you Sculthorpe as an alternative.

So one more time - King is an adequate prop who due to the circumstances at the time was probably the most adequate replacement for Stosic/Sculthorpe (delete to taste) available.

Happy

Jesus wept

Yes I am deluded enough to think that JK and myself think the same on previous issue's debated with you, because it has been proved by team selection (i.e. spelling Hendo at prop, not picking King etc etc). And it depends on your definaition of adequate............as it can be taken to mean

as much or as good as necessary for some requirement or purpose; fully sufficient, suitable,.........

or

barely sufficient or suitable: Being adequate is not good enough.....

so either way you can't loose Mr V...

Happy





It's just like some of the posters on the Newton thread saying if Tezza goes it's ok Cos we've got three hookers anyway (without Davey).......

But not if one was intended to play a lot of gametime at LF

He probably did when he read some of the petty rubbish posted on here ( I include myself also...................................at times

)

FYI Im a friend of anyone who supports the mighty RW+B..........just one with an opinion...............but not always the right one

OK, for the benefit of harmony can we assume JK considers King of some merit, possibly even adequate. Stosic is probably best left out of the equation such is the reverence in which he now appears to be held (typical Trinity).

Quick one, as I am busy as chuff and really shouldn't be bothering with this.

The context you portray isn't what was stated. Your post indicated so far. What you talk about now is King, based on what he did way before he came to us, and projecting ahead to what we all hope Kear and Broadbent will make of him. I don't at all diagree with that. I wasn't in the first place trying to start an argument, I was merely pointing out that as the first post read, I agreed with the vast majority of it other than the bracketing of Stosic against King. What I was getting at, is that on the basis of what we have seen so far, he isn't yet a replacement for Stosic. The reason I've not bothered with the Sculthorpe aspect is I don't disagree with that. With the sounds of it, were are not really in disagreement, once it has been further elaborated on. I'm not entirely sure that makes me the only one who has got the context wrong and won't give ground though; quite clearly, others interpreted that aspect of the post in the same way.

shock horror vasty involved in Internet row.

maybe your words were taken out of context

Yes we can, and im sure he does.

Hopefully that keeps us all happy

KING IS MORE THAN AN ADEQUATE REPLACEMENT FOR STOSIC.

Don't get them started, adequate is a strong word.

An argument about props and no mention for Korki, what's wrong with you people?

Korki rocks!! Back to his best for me, massive against the rhinos!!!!
As for the newbies:
Morrison looks class, bj also, king for me no better than a replacement for bibey, millard, he's certainly done more for us than atkins has in the two games for the wire that I've seen!!! I think enough has already been said about "the new hooker"!!!!!
The garden is "looking rosey"!!!!!!!