Re: Crosby to Warrington

OJ · Post by OJ » Sun Oct 09, 2016 3:54 pm

Morph wrote: his mum lives in Birchwood!!

So do I but can't stand Wire so where you live doesn't really matter

cpwigan · Post by **cpwigan** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:34 pm

shaunedwardsfanclub wrote:
Josie's friend wrote:
shaunedwardsfanclub wrote: My point is that he can't go anywhere if he is contracted to Wigan unless we agree to sell him. If he is not then the reality is that Wigan don't value him as high as Wire.
IL has said he wont stop any players going to the NRL, Union etc, if he wants to go then he'll go contracts seen to be irrelevant.
True but this is a competitor.

If Wire had another quality prop with Cooper then they will have an excellent front row for 2017.

fozzieskem · Post by **fozzieskem** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:53 pm

Must admit I if it where me wouldn't let him go to a direct competitor that's for sure,

Panchitta Marra · Post by **Panchitta Marra** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 6:06 pm

On last nights performance, Dom Crosby was streets ahead of Simms and better than Hill too.
I think much of that was down to how strong our players are with excellent fitness to nullify most things they threw at us.

Taking one team of 13 players from last night's squads of 34 in total, how many Warrington players would have got into that best performing 13 on the night?
Players from 1 to 13 who would you have picked, try not to be too bias.

Josie's friend · Post by **Josie's friend** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 7:36 pm

If it's a given that Mossop is going and we need to offload a prop then imo it's Flower every time. The main issue would be is that would any team come in for him, I always thought we resigned him to get a transfer fee.
Crosby to NRL this year or next is believable but to Wire makes no sense.

cpwigan · Post by **cpwigan** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:11 pm

Money!

Josie's friend · Post by **Josie's friend** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:29 pm

cpwigan wrote:Money!

If it's that I'd be disappointed, winning stuff is more important than a bit of extra money (at his age anyway)

cpwigan · Post by **cpwigan** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:44 pm

Josie's friend wrote:
cpwigan wrote:Money!
If it's that I'd be disappointed, winning stuff is more important than a bit of extra money (at his age anyway)

It is and it isn't. Very short career, high risk particularly at prop. Bing may have developed with age but a TA who came across his as high school student said he wasn't the sharpes tool.

fozzieskem · Post by **fozzieskem** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 9:40 pm

cpwigan wrote:
Josie's friend wrote:
cpwigan wrote:Money!
If it's that I'd be disappointed, winning stuff is more important than a bit of extra money (at his age anyway)
It is and it isn't. Very short career, high risk particularly at prop. Bing may have developed with age but a TA who came across his as high school student said he wasn't the sharpes tool.

Lol the sharpest tool what's that supposed to mean?

cpwigan · Post by **cpwigan** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 10:36 pm

fozzieskem wrote:
cpwigan wrote:
Josie's friend wrote: If it's that I'd be disappointed, winning stuff is more important than a bit of extra money (at his age anyway)
It is and it isn't. Very short career, high risk particularly at prop. Bing may have developed with age but a TA who came across his as high school student said he wasn't the sharpes tool.
Lol the sharpest tool what's that supposed to mean?

What Alex said below. The TA liked him a lot but I think thick as .... was used. He is not the first BTW.