Interesting to see who we go for . This failed move for Jock Madden , the Brisbane halfback , indicates the club wants more cover than Croft, Connor and Sinfield next season.
Only 1 year for McDonnell is a bit odd but glad he is staying, he?s been good this year
1 year for McDonnell is interesting, I'd have been happy to see him sign for 2 years, but not a problem. Will be interesting to see what Bentley and the club do. I'd be offering Holroyd 2 years and Gannon 3 years.
In terms of a replacement for Frawley (who must be leaving) if we didn't sign anyone, our 4th choice halfback would probably be either Cam Smith (who I don't think is much of a field kicker, and lacks pace) or Fergus McCormack (who is completely untested at this level). That's a risk and why I think the might go for someone else. Perhaps the club also now see Jack as a future 9 rather than 7 in which case you can expect another decent quality half to be signed.
I like Croft. However, a club of Leeds' ambitions has certain expectations of a marquee half-back.
Is Croft up there with the very best halves in the competition? While there have been glimpses and occasional game-breaking performances, let's be honest, he's just not doing it enough. He's no French or Lewis (at Leeds), not even close.
Is Croft up there with the best Leeds halves we've seen in recent decades? The answer is a firm 'no', but perhaps he still has time on his side, especially if the Arthur message keeps to bed in. Definitely behind the likes of Schofield, Harris, McGuire and Sinfield Snr. As good as Gale (factoring in Gale's kicking game)? Being better (at Leeds) than Sezer, Frawley, Sutcliffe, Austin etc isn't really the hallmark of the player we're looking for.
I would say if the price is right *and* a better player is available, we should move. These things are unlikely to happen though, and we're probably better off with him for now.
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
