Got himself a 1 match Ban, don't think he is any better than what he had, seemed like he was only brought in to cover the Proctor injury but would much rather Windrow was given a go

For all the build up he got on this post I'd say he turned out pretty disappointing!

That's not to say he isn't or won't be a top player...just not worked out and not been good enough for me...you could arguably say he's had two big involvements in both games played that have been major contributing factors to our defeats...

If the loan is costing us anything at all I just don't see the sense in extending it further with Proctor, Tanginoa and even Windrow available in the next few weeks...

Fair to say it’s not really worked out this one. Probably best to move on given players will be back by the Cas game.

I'm sure I've read somewhere that Mash wanted to extend his loan period, but that was probably said prior to the ban.

No need for me, Windrow, Tanginoa. Proctor are already employed by the club. Use them.

Young, injured, injured

Just more wasted money. The hole we are plummeting down just gets deeper. I guess someone also thought the hooker was useful. He’s really got a vested interest in Trinity hasn’t he? Stood out well too didn’t he, Hewitt certainly did with three penalties against his name.

Due back soon though?

Windrow looks mature enough to me and he has far more physical presence than Hewitt. He is also a first team squad member. If he is not good enough, then why is he in the squad ?
OK, he may have less first team experience than Hewitt, but he isn't going to get any if he doesn't get picked

Someone posted last week that Windrow has just picked up a 2 match ban but, as I posted above, Proctor is due back this week and Tanginoa next week, so like other's have said, I don't see the need for Hewitt to stay, especially going on his 2 appearances for us so far !!

Tough on the young 9. Thought he put in a solid stunt tbh and looked busy. Didn’t do much wrong especially with how much we were on the back foot and coming out from deep most of the sets.

You say that but I remember a while back now when a certain Dean Hadley played for us , he was really impressive and of course Shaul , but the team as a whole was playing better rugby back then , this lad was never going to lead the team from the front, only fill a gap , same as Hewitt . Our Talisman has gone , and we have no one to lead the charge against the odds , which are getting longer by the week

But he did nothing that Bowes couldn't have done.

Exactly. Why kick Bowes in the teeth?

It maybe that Wigan would only allow the loan if the player would be in the team. The error was to move Kay from fullback and throw the young lad in. He could have left Kay and played Bowes but for some reason he didn’t.

We were short on numbers.
He brought 2 loan players in to ease the stress on the squad and played a youngster who quite a few have on here have said they wanted in.

There was no point risking Bowes if you had another body available. Bowes is now fresh for other games.

It's easy with hindsight to criticise but there was every chance Butterworth would do well. Early in the game they were looking to bring him into the line. They weren't treating him like a kid.
He dropped two high balls which turned out to be important but there's no way of knowing if Kay would have caught them.

Why look for scapegoats.
I'd prefer them to try stuff that doesn't work rather than just do the same old stuff that fails.

Surely we must try stuff that works and throwing a young lad into such an important game and in a vital position makes no sense. If Bowes was not fit why pick him for the 18th man why not one of the others. I am not looking for scapegoats but it was his decision so the buck stops with him.
I note that even with Butterworth playing our performance was pretty much unchanged from those that went before. We have plenty of triers but not enough class players to elevate them to score trys.
The chairman believes that we have a competitive squad early indications say not. He has supported the club for many years but despite this he still allowed this squad to be put together.

Ah great. Switched to moaning about the Chairman now Carter is leaving. Good work.

"Surely we must try stuff that works".....what a strange comment.

I agree with you there Poptart. The way this club functions is quite complex from my understanding. I also think JM and MC have differing views on some matters. Although JM is chairman he made it quite obvious that his main aim has been getting the stadium delivered. All rugby stuff is being left to MC who is in effect rugby director as well as CEO. They are both strong characters and have equal ownership.
If we have a functioning club left after this season and MC has left, I suspect there may be a change of philosophy in respect of the rugby side.
All my opinion of course.

The Chairman a long time Trinity supporter must hold some responsibility for the current recruitment strategy. With the exception of a few on here we could all see what would happen, i think we are entitled to question the decisions taken and not just accept that we as supporters only responsibility is to pay our money and never question what is decided.
I think even you albeit you won’t admit it must accept that despite many warnings over the last few seasons and the importance and difficulty surviving this season brings we chose to handicap ourselves with our recruitment and retention philosophy. I guess it will fall to the Chairman to pick up the pieces at the end of the season once MC departs the scene.

For the 50th time, the people who left, left because they wanted to go, not because we didn't want to retain them.
I'm pretty sure you'd be moaning if Fifita and Arona stayed and couldn't play because they were too old for the rigours of Super League.
I didn't like Miller leaving but no one forced him out. He chose to go.

It's not that simple regarding Miller, there was more to it than that as I think you well know. However, moving on,I personally was not that bothered, we have had a good run from him and had is best years.
However !!!! not to replace him with someone as good or preferably better was rank incompetence in my opinion.

Completely agree. I expected a replacement and was looking forward to our options at half. That has not gone well.
Possibly, and it is only possibly, Smith will turn out to be that guy.

If he is given a chance when Gaskell is back.

Windrow picked up a ban in the reserves apparently