by tomogull » 29 Jun 2015, 15:39
Dazza wrote:I wonder how many of those players that Chris Hargreaves 'held over' awaiting notification of the playing budget will reappear on Friday as trialists. We are now desperately short of money and obviously those based locally may wish to see if they can make the squad possibly as 'part timers' . However I have to say that if strength and work rate are the yardsticks this year I am not too certain about their chances.
The thing is, us old guys have been here many times before. Players leave and we get excited about new players coming in, but half way through the season we realise that the new players that have come in are no better, and in many cases, worse than the players they've replaced. That's why we are where we are now. In the final month of last season, we won 3, drew 2 and lost 1. Okay, it can be argued that it was the end of the season and therefore teams had nothing to play for, but there were some signs that Hargreaves was at last starting to get a reasonable side together, although it could also be argued it was because the defence looked more secure as a result of Dan Lavercombe being brought into the side.
What I'm getting around to saying is that with the limited budget that Paul Cox has, I wouldn't mind seeing McQuilkin, Campbell, Dawson and Daniels invited back so Cox can have a look at them - even if one or two of them are only offered 'prove yourself' six month contracts. For me, Cambell is a better option than Ashley Yeoman. As much as I wished Ash could have made it, the weakness in his game is that he gets knocked off the ball far too easily. Dawson has not had much chance of first team football but I feel that he has the attitude and the ability to develop into a decent player. Forever said on another thread that he didn't think Mcquilkin was Cox's type of player. He's probably right. Daniels showed what a decent player he is and I bet most fans would be happy to see him back. I think the difference between Cox and Hargreaves is that Cox will get more out of his players than Hargreaves was able to. You can put it down to experience or whatever, but I feel that will be the big difference we will see next season.
[quote="Dazza"]I wonder how many of those players that Chris Hargreaves 'held over' awaiting notification of the playing budget will reappear on Friday as trialists. We are now desperately short of money and obviously those based locally may wish to see if they can make the squad possibly as 'part timers' . However I have to say that if strength and work rate are the yardsticks this year I am not too certain about their chances.[/quote]
The thing is, us old guys have been here many times before. Players leave and we get excited about new players coming in, but half way through the season we realise that the new players that have come in are no better, and in many cases, worse than the players they've replaced. That's why we are where we are now. In the final month of last season, we won 3, drew 2 and lost 1. Okay, it can be argued that it was the end of the season and therefore teams had nothing to play for, but there were some signs that Hargreaves was at last starting to get a reasonable side together, although it could also be argued it was because the defence looked more secure as a result of Dan Lavercombe being brought into the side.
What I'm getting around to saying is that with the limited budget that Paul Cox has, I wouldn't mind seeing McQuilkin, Campbell, Dawson and Daniels invited back so Cox can have a look at them - even if one or two of them are only offered 'prove yourself' six month contracts. For me, Cambell is a better option than Ashley Yeoman. As much as I wished Ash could have made it, the weakness in his game is that he gets knocked off the ball far too easily. Dawson has not had much chance of first team football but I feel that he has the attitude and the ability to develop into a decent player. Forever said on another thread that he didn't think Mcquilkin was Cox's type of player. He's probably right. Daniels showed what a decent player he is and I bet most fans would be happy to see him back. I think the difference between Cox and Hargreaves is that Cox will get more out of his players than Hargreaves was able to. You can put it down to experience or whatever, but I feel that will be the big difference we will see next season.
