Fair shout although I think Cusack has been signed for his experience and professionalism in next year's team. Hope very much it's not at the expense of Moa though.

Yeah, but if we'd not signed cusack we'd have been able to keep moa and bring someone else in

cusack not on as much as ye think mate,got him on a good deal for next season.

moa is class, keep him at what ever cost!

It's more the quota/non fed spot. If we keep moa then 3 of the 6 slots are taken by props

see your point mate,im sure we will find out whats happening soon enough,dont think moa will be staying tho.

Tend to agree. For me he'd have offered more for us than cusack will as we're well covered for cusack's "type" of player

To sign or not to sign.....

Positives
[listAn impact prop who lifts the team when he takes the field
Takes a lot of stopping (needs three or four tacklers)
Shows real enthusiasm when taking the ball up
Developing a handy offload (have any of out other props got a consistant offload)
Because he's a "project", he won't be costing the earth
I get the feeling, he will only get better[/list:u

Negatives
[listWill use up a quota place
Will probably turn into another "one that got away", ( a la Briscoe, Brough )[/list:u


That said, I'd keep him.

You should sign him before someone else steps in. Hes a fans favourite already by the sounds of it. Hes a low granity player and they take some pulling down. Could be a legend for u as a certain stanley is across the city.

I thought his handling was poor.

Agree with the talk about Moa though, played really well.

The price is largely irrelevant, it's whether or not he justifies a quota spot. IMO he never has.

Shame if he is isn`t staying. Makes the resigning of Cusack look more of a mistake .

Totally agree. It seems we didn't learn from our mistakes of jumping in and handing out extensions early doors.

I agree, I do rate Cusack but if we lose Moa because Agar decided to give an ageing Aussie who had just sustained a season ending injury a new deal then I'll be furious.

As has already been said keeping Moa would enable us to potentially use Lauaki in the 2nd row, or rotate him with Moa thus allowing us to have an 'impact' prop on the field for the full 80.

If we don't sign Moa and he decides to stay in SL he will come back to haunt us for the next 10 years.

I was quite impressed with Moa to be honest. Attracts lots of defenders and is really enjoyable to watch. Definitely your best front rower last night. He needs to work on his kicking game though

He's not on his own in our team.

I can defo see us keeping him.

Why is that?

I think he has,but most of all the coach thiought he was worth giving another year.

Amazing isnt it,the coach puts him in the reserves for a few weeks cos he wasnt match fit,now hes back in the first team getting more game time everyone thinks he should stay,who gets the credit then for all this? and before anyone says owt i think he deserves a new deal think hes proved himself already and if he wasnt to stay i think he will get snapped up elsewere and come back and bite us on the ar-e.

Wonder if we can arrange a deal where he plays somehwere else for a season then comes back to us

very interesting, but we need him now!

We have been told we have a space available, he l currently looks the best forward we have, we have a good enough side for me for next season we a decent 7 coming in to use what we have.

I'd play a combination of Hall, Briscoe and Yeamo in the centres next year and wouldnt recruit one. I'd play Long and maybe R Horne at 6. I'd see real value in keeping Moa to have a bench of Moa, Lauaki, Manu and Houghton.

Sounds good to me Dave.