It always amazes me how many people seem to get upset about having their opinions challenged on an internet messageboard.

Suit yourself. I don't come on here to argue with you. Your not that important to me and I suspect is true of you.

When i say too far i mean when childish comments and personal digs start entering the discussions. Maybe I should have balanced my statement more with respect to there been two factions of our clubs supporters who clash like a civil war. Those who openly air their opinions on poor player performances (not always constructively and sometimes childish) and the set that take offence to these opinions and respond in stern defence mode (not always constructively and again sometimes childish).

Neither sets of supporters are wrong they just differ in opinions on players performances and that's their paragotive.

As for blaming one player, I don't agree with bagging a player leaving the other 16 on the field unaccountable. I do not partake in this whereas some may desire to.

But this is a Blaymire thread and I put my opinion on blaymires performance in which he made 2 crucial errors leading to trys and thus not his best day at the office. That doesn't mean I think he's a bad player.

If your or Anyones opinion differs from my own then I can live with that.

Wakey Tom, I entirely agree with you,we have at least two far superior fullbacks in murph and vivers, blaymire has, and never will be a super league full back. he cannot break the line, doesn't follow the ball and doesn't tackle on the line. He is, and always has been a liabilaty.
I know i will be shot down by the "goody goody brigade" on here, but we have better at the club.

The 'goody goody brigade' being those that disagree with you regarding Blaymire I presume?
He seems to have made a pretty good fist of being a Super League full back over the years and even his harshest critics didn't get on his back during his first couple of seasons most considering him and Peter Fox, amongst others, as great finds by Kear. For me Blaymire is as solid a full back as we have had since Martyn Holland. He scores a fair amount of tries and his defence is tested more than most full backs in the league and he isn't often found wanting.

I disagree that Vivers is a better fulback and i would not put Smurph ahead of him either.

Wildcatowl. I don't agree that Blaymire doesn't tackle on the line. I think his defensive qualities are good. That said he failed to make an important line tackle on a player last week with a player on him and no momentum when he was stood infron of him on the line. A costly mistake but one I haven't seen as a regular occurrence in blaymires game.

I suggest taking more water with it if you are seriously putting blaymire and peter fox in the same breath. I think i'm right in saying fox has played for england, has blaymire? and will he ever? .....NO!
I don't agree he has made a good fist of it, he has just seamed to get the No1 shirt whatever. I do agree he is a kear find, but a good one? No! He is what we call in crown green bowling circles( no doubt that will be mocked) "the bus driver".
Given a the chances blaymire has had both murph and vivers WOULD make better fullbacks.

You might actually want to read what I wrote and then respond to it!


I thought you said they were better full backs? Not sure what these massive flaws are you are seeing in Blaymire's game.

The ones that 90% of our support see week in week out.

Who's this 90% you speak of.

Really? That's not the feeling I get. I can just about get my head around the 'lazy' running it back in argument but aside from that I can see little to complain about with his game. At Wakey and especially this season full back is a predominantly defensive position and this is Blaymires strongest area solid under the high ball, good tackler and decent positional sense. He has also scored a fair amount of tries for a player who is not thought to have much of an attacking game.

I don't profess to know all their names. But, I'm sorry i refuse to believe, and won't be convinced, that blaymire is even a "decent" fullback. lets be fair even the administrators couldn't get rid of him! And answer me this, why have we got more fullbacks at the club if blaymire is so good.

ah hah one thing we agree on, I do have a sneaky fiver on him scoring the first try.

You know you're dealing with someone who has lost the argument when the resort/claim to be speaking for the majority - it's sad really.

Makes you wonder where they found the time to poll everyone at the match!

The 90% comment is class ha.

72 % of fans think we should sign Jamie benn and pair him with smith in halfs

I'm in the 90%. I don't rate Blaymire. Never have.

Why would it be churlish to suggest things are greatly improved under AG, would it be the push to increase attendances? the push to bring in money from the now fully occupied boxes? The push to increase memberships? the push to increase merchandise sales? The flow of information that now comes out of the club? The increase in proffesionality now in the club, the cutting adrift of the deadwood, the extra income now being generated from food and drink sales and improvement in the supporters bars and subsequent marketing of these facilities?
None of these things would have happened under TR, so yes I think it's a vast improvement.
If you don't that's fine.

Fair enough but that leaves another 4000+ fans who can't be spoken for by one fan.

I agree, so far imo there has been a vast improvement and at the end of the day it's all these things that turn a club from being corner shop to professionally run.

Like I've said before,sick of reading criticism of wacky players from wacky supporters ,that old chinese proverb,you s..g with p..k you've got.together we are stronger.

Yeah, that old chinese proverb has helped me though some hard times in life too.

Wacky.

FFS....

Blaymire is a solid fullback who's primary fault is his slow return of kicks.

If he returned kicks ala Billy Slater he wouldn't be at Wakefield.

And to think '90%' of supporters were lamenting his potential loss after his first season at the club. Perhaps they should get Mark Field back to cut Blaymire some slack.

Read my post again or that part of it, you should see you misread the post as I actually say the opposite.

For heavens sake there is no 90%, what part of that don't you understand

I agree that the only flaw in Blaymires game is his kick return and playing for us, particularly this season, I would prefer to have someone like Blaymire with his ability to read the game and be generally solid defensively.

IMO Veivers is nowhere near to proving he his a better fullback than Blaymire, given he has only played 1 and a half to 2 games in the first team in that position.

We have more pressing issues with the threequarter line, like who to play on the wing given Penny's lack of rugby nouse and Johnson's off field problems. This is where Murphy can come back in, either on the wing or in the centres with George back on the wing.