[quote="bonaire":nadasm1n]Ashworth signed as a starting front row and has the number 17 Cust signed as a starting 6/9 has the number 14 Martin currently our best wing has the number 22 on the other hand we have Briscoe with the number 2 and Chamberlain number 4 and both shouldnt be starting first team players so trying to make out that Holmes was not signed as a starting second row because he has the number 15 is nonsense.[/quote:nadasm1n] Can't remember Ashworth starting last year. Came on from the bench majority of the games played. You know full well Cust was signed as the player to play 14 and rotate in and out of half back/hooker. Only now Abdul has gone has he been promoted to starting 6. I do agree with Martin however. Strange he's not been given a starting jersey and looks likely to not start.

[quote="DSJ1983":35lpzbc5]Leyland and Russell were the only two possibilities really. Cust is a similar age to those two and I’d have him better than both so they’d both be squad players. Short term we’d have a bit better depth if we’d have signed one of those two instead of Abdul but long term I’d maybe prefer to give Charles and Kemp game time. That’s assuming either would have wanted to join which isn’t a given at all especially Leyland. Either way I don’t think the Abdul signing had any real impact on who we could have brought in, we still went for our main targets regardless.[/quote:35lpzbc5] Big difference between those named is Cust takes a quota spot, very early days, but I'm yet to be convinced he is worth one. Wouldn't have minded Leyland, Russell is awful though.

[quote="Dave K.":2ul22jwb][quote="DSJ1983":2ul22jwb]Leyland and Russell were the only two possibilities really. Cust is a similar age to those two and I’d have him better than both so they’d both be squad players. Short term we’d have a bit better depth if we’d have signed one of those two instead of Abdul but long term I’d maybe prefer to give Charles and Kemp game time. That’s assuming either would have wanted to join which isn’t a given at all especially Leyland. Either way I don’t think the Abdul signing had any real impact on who we could have brought in, we still went for our main targets regardless.[/quote:2ul22jwb] Big difference between those named is Cust takes a quota spot, very early days, but I'm yet to be convinced he is worth one. Wouldn't have minded Leyland, Russell is awful though.[/quote:2ul22jwb] In regards to the recruitment done in this off season as fans we don't know what the clubs plan and strategy is long term. Myler when he came in has had to plug the holes to stop us sinking further so to speak, I don't doubt these signing in the main will have been done to solve issues in the short term but also with an eye on recruitment/retention and promoting from within in mind for the long term. Taking out the fact there were little options available to us as a club at the time, factor in the club probably for once have a long term plan with set criteria so even if the market was awash with a number of players still doesn't mean we'd sign any if those signings had potential to jeopardise the long term goals. Then throw in the new transfer rules which were about to come which has changed the landscape significantly.

[quote="Dave K.":3ge4rprb]Big difference between those named is Cust takes a quota spot, very early days, but I'm yet to be convinced he is worth one. Wouldn't have minded Leyland, Russell is awful though.[/quote:3ge4rprb] Cust and the use of a quota spot is a valid debate but Abdull signing didn’t prevent us using the quota place better, other players just turned us down. As for Leyland yeah in hindsight we could have used Abdulls spot to make a play for Leyland, but he’d still have likely chosen Wire. Hardly a disaster though IMO, if we manage Charles and Kemp properly no reason why one of those l couldn’t be as good as he is at 24, he looked a threat for London but still got a bit to prove.

[quote="DSJ1983":1c086t2u]Cust and the use of a quota spot is a valid debate but Abdull signing didn’t prevent us using the quota place better, other players just turned us down. As for Leyland yeah in hindsight we could have used Abdulls spot to make a play for Leyland, but he’d still have likely chosen Wire. Hardly a disaster though IMO, if we manage Charles and Kemp properly no reason why one of those l couldn’t be as good as he is at 24, he looked a threat for London but still got a bit to prove.[/quote:1c086t2u] Cade has played for Wigan and Salford in Super League and is fully developed. He is unlikely to get any better. Leyland had 1 year in Super League is only 23 and will probably improve as he plays in a more professional environment.