I was dubious about putting Smith straight into the side for a number of reasons. Lack of first team action, limited time with new team mates and more importantly it sends the wrong message out to the fringe players who are busting a gut to get in the match day squad that the coach does not rate you.

but he clearly doesn't rate them. There is no implied message there.

Or, for the sake of balance, that he didn't want to throw them to the wolves by putting them out against the most brutal and clinical side in SL?

If you bring a bloke in on loan for only a month you have to play him otherwise why bother getting him.

Either bring players in for a longer period or not at all in my view. If it’s a short term injury then use the squad, that’s what it’s there for. Smith has been playing u20’s football, same as the fringe squad so his level of performance is hardly going to be much more than they they’re at currently.

we was truley out played by a better team but there is at least 12 teams in league better than us.andrew glover has done a great job at the club but crowds will start to dwindle while that muppet is coaching us action needs to be done we where better last season whith a on paper a lesser squad,

If you bring a bloke in from the start of the season on a hefty contract and then send him off to play champ rugby then you either have an issue with him or you are clueless.

Ellis is a quallity player and is better than Wood/Wildie but can't get a game.

He has obviously done something or can't/won't do something that the coach asks. There can be no other logical reason due to agars priority of having to pick the best side to win games. I doubt we'll ever find out, but I'd doubt it's a clash of personalities, you don't have to like someone to work with them

Agar has his favourites and always picks em,not interested in youth policy,or anybody else s signings [sorry mr elston fact under qualified and over payed 70k a year utter madness sort it out please!

Spot on.

Thought we were right up there with them for the first 20 minutes, even had them somewhat rattled at one stage. Couple of great hits from Aiton on Lauaki and Tomkins. Could have had a few more points in the first half with a bit more composure.

Second half was a case of being totally outclassed!

Wasn't it Raleigh that left Lauaki on the deck after a big hit?

I agree though - we were up in their faces in the first 20 and stifled a lot of their plays; conversely, we seemed to panic when the line was in sight and as a result, made some poor decisions or executed good decisions poorly.

The first 20 the players certainly let them know they were in a game then we stood off and watched them instead of keeping in their faces.The second half well did we come out it was a normal second half Wakey showing.The only time this season when we have been the better side in the second half was against Hull when they started to tire and then the doubts set in.

I think you're definately right that the team is under achieving from the names we have on paper but I think R.A. should have a second full season and if we are not 3/4 places higher than we are now then we'll need a change of coach. He got Aiton, Sykes, Cockayne, Washbrook etc so isn't that bad at recruitment he just needs to do it with the addition of two class props to lead what we've already got.

Some said we didn't need Sykes and were proved wrong. L.Smith has been pure class in the past and is still only 25. If he settles in and wants to stay with WTW & the promise/security of a 3 year contract to see in NM then it will be shrewd business by Agar and more strength in the centre position.

You must watch a different L Smith to the one i've seen over the years, he's average at best.

We all see things in a different light but he's not a centre, never will be.

Keep Smith and Sykes and I reckon we need a full-back (who can catch), a stand-off who can create / run into gaps and a prop who leads by example - I would be happy with that.

The question is, who goes to make room (well at least one is obvious based on that list)!

In the first half Sykes a couple of times ran into a gap he had seen but the rest of the players were no where to take a pass from him.A few times since hes moved to stand off when defending has dropped back and saved a few trys from being scored against us and I wonder how he would go at full back.If Smith could find the form he had in his first spell with Leeds then he would be a good buy but we all know "if" is a small word with a big meaning.We need a player who can steady the ship at times and when needed drive us forward a big mean nasty SOB.

Keep Smith and play him at fullback, get shut of Mathers. I'd be happy for O'Meley to replace Southern in the squad and if the Bulls go belly up or (as is more likely) survive but on a reduced budget then make a move for one of their props and Luke Gale. Job done!

Sorry, meant Tim Smith, not Lee.

Lee unproven yet - must have hunger for it to be worthwhile!

Would agree keep Tim Smith as hes done whats needed since pairing with Sykes and being able to play his own game and not worry about his half back partner.

That is true he needs to prove himself but if leeds tell him his not wanted it might just be the kick up the jacksie he needs. His best position is fullback, get him fit and hungry and he'd a good signing. I'd be doing my best to persuade Issac John that going home is what he wants to do and spending his money on Gale, so keeping Tim Smith would be a must. Perfect he isn't but we are unlikely to get anyone better.

He certainly was not average when he won M O M in grand final.
Give the lad a chance we have nothing to lose.
If we dont he may be one of those who seem to somehow come back to haunt us.
Take Millard and Blanch ,virtually hounded out of Wakefield.
Now performing at top level with top side.

If you mean he sometimes played well in a good side then fair enough, i agree with the rest.


It seems people forget what an horrible little cheap shotting scrote this guy is, when he pulls on a Trin shirt.