Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

LEE BRIERS


  • Please log in to reply
141 replies to this topic

#81 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 408 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 06:13 PM

Warrington's former Welsh international captain Lee Briers scored a 60-metre interception try to help relegation-threatened Swinton to a precious 30-24 win over Whitehaven in the Kingstone Press Championship.


60m!!! :) Briers has written that himself, it was from inside the 'haven half.

#82 duffymoon

duffymoon
  • Coach
  • 2,584 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 06:25 PM

A master stroke by Swinton including Briers last night! Not just for the effect he had on the field but his appearance attracted around 400 or so WRrington fans that boosted last nights attendance.Personally I'm not in favour but maybe the other DR clubs could consider including some big names S a means of increasing support.

#83 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,383 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 06:37 PM

Of course there is interest in Fev, but do you think this is because all those fans think Championship rugby is great and they love watching Fev play it??

Where's the big interest in Fax?

You know full well the big crowd is about a club heading for Superleague so superleague is the draw.

You should also know full well that clubs who fail in superleague and lose all the time like Salford, London etc get low crowds.

So if Rovers went into Superleague without the money to compete and were losing every week what crowds would they get?

Remember Halifax's crowds dipping below 2000 in 2003 when they could not compete??

That's how it is and trying to make out Fax and Fev would do well on crowds compared to London and Salford just goes against how it is, i.e. reality.

 

Why would they not get money. You don't know that and Fev and Fax are already doing well on crowds compared to London and salford and London and Salford are and have been for years in SL

 

The evidence on non competiton is sketchy. Huddersfield, Hull KR and Wakefield give the lie to that argument.



#84 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,383 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 06:38 PM

I'm pleased to get the facts from you once again.

I'm torn between what you say and what the boss of Hunslet who holds the purse strings says.

Maybe I should toss a coin here.

 

 

No, the boss of Hunslet holds nothing. it's the boss of Leeds who you need to talk to.



#85 Marauder

Marauder
  • Coach
  • 11,800 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 09:06 PM

60m!!! :) Briers has written that himself, it was from inside the 'haven half.

Half-way to try line 50 metres (normally)


Carlsberg don't do Soldiers, but if they did, they would probably be Brits.



http://www.pitchero....hornemarauders/

#86 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,182 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:10 PM

Why would they not get money.

I said IF they did not get money.

All the riches Fev are said to be taking into Superleague are promises only.

#87 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,182 posts

Posted 03 May 2013 - 10:11 PM

No, the boss of Hunslet holds nothing. it's the boss of Leeds who you need to talk to.

No, I need to talk to Blackpool Hawk.

#88 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,383 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:27 PM

I said IF they did not get money.

All the riches Fev are said to be taking into Superleague are promises only.

 

As are the TV deals and rich sponsors promised by Toulouse.

 

On the Lee Briers thing, it seems like he single handedly won this game for Swinton. If this ends up sending Barrow down because of the points Swinton obtained here this will be travesty and a mockery of the Championship. Briers is an integral part of Warrington's first team. He should not be playing for Swinton.

 

Will he be available if they get to the playoffs because of this tainted win? I doubt it.



#89 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,182 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:52 PM

As are the TV deals and rich sponsors promised by Toulouse.

Yes I know, so what?

#90 bearman

bearman
  • Coach
  • 2,375 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:59 PM

As are the TV deals and rich sponsors promised by Toulouse.

On the Lee Briers thing, it seems like he single handedly won this game for Swinton. If this ends up sending Barrow down because of the points Swinton obtained here this will be travesty and a mockery of the Championship. Briers is an integral part of Warrington's first team. He should not be playing for Swinton.

Spot on

Edited by bearman, 04 May 2013 - 03:00 PM.

Ron Banks
Bears and Barrow

#91 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,800 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 04:26 PM

As are the TV deals and rich sponsors promised by Toulouse.

On the Lee Briers thing, it seems like he single handedly won this game for Swinton. If this ends up sending Barrow down because of the points Swinton obtained here this will be travesty and a mockery of the Championship. Briers is an integral part of Warrington's first team. He should not be playing for Swinton.

Will he be available if they get to the playoffs because of this tainted win? I doubt it.

I assume you are against all loan deals too? I saw two Wire players playing for Bradford last night. I remember Danny Halliwell being on loan at Wire over 10 years ago and scoring tries which pretty kept us in SL.
It's pretty normal for clubs to borrow players and these players play an important part.

#92 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,383 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 04:54 PM

I assume you are against all loan deals too? I saw two Wire players playing for Bradford last night. I remember Danny Halliwell being on loan at Wire over 10 years ago and scoring tries which pretty kept us in SL.
It's pretty normal for clubs to borrow players and these players play an important part.

 

You do know that Warrington have registered their whole squad as DR Swinton players, I assume. If so, how can you justify this ?



#93 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,800 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 06:23 PM

You do know that Warrington have registered their whole squad as DR Swinton players, I assume. If so, how can you justify this ?

I can't - I don't agree with it in it's current format. My issue is when people in their outraged state widen what the actual issue is.

 

An example:

 

People would be very happy for Warrington to send five players to Swinton as long as they are young lads. Now these lads would still be taking the place of Swinton players, could still have a massive impact on the club, and could still be called back and not available for playoffs, yet people would be happy with that. It would still be Warrington 'forcing' Swinton to use their 5 players and many of the original complaints would be there, but people would look the other way. We've seen that quite a few times this season.

 

I'd rather people were 100% against it or for it, by picking and choosing parts of it, often people are contradicting themselves. Not you btw, if I understand this correctly you dislike DR in all it's forms.



#94 oldrover

oldrover
  • Coach
  • 6,036 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 06:44 PM

I said IF they did not get money.

All the riches Fev are said to be taking into Superleague are promises only.

a bit like the stadiums that kept cas n wakey in


joe mullaney is a god
the only good tiger is a stuffed tiger

Posted Image

#95 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,662 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 08:46 PM

I can't - I don't agree with it in it's current format. My issue is when people in their outraged state widen what the actual issue is.

 

An example:

 

People would be very happy for Warrington to send five players to Swinton as long as they are young lads. Now these lads would still be taking the place of Swinton players, could still have a massive impact on the club, and could still be called back and not available for playoffs, yet people would be happy with that. It would still be Warrington 'forcing' Swinton to use their 5 players and many of the original complaints would be there, but people would look the other way. We've seen that quite a few times this season.

 

I'd rather people were 100% against it or for it, by picking and choosing parts of it, often people are contradicting themselves. Not you btw, if I understand this correctly you dislike DR in all it's forms.

 

Most posters against DR are in favour of under 23's only being eligible for DR.

To me that makes a whole load of sense.

If these lads without a lot of SL experience to then get some game time in the Championship because the reserve team competition isn't fit for purpose (another thread on its own, and why has there been no real investigation and accountability why this has come to pass after years of Super League riches and so called Academy development) then the CC its the better place to be.

The under 23's need game time as part of their development. They are not a seasoned SL player like Lee Briers and are not expected to be leading lights in every CC game they play. If so, they'll be quickly whisked back to where they came from. And rightly so.

My club has had one player on a regular basis. He has been caught out at times and is in no way a rock-on top player, first name on the team sheet. I hope he continues his development and attains his goals, but as the season has gone on, then has started to struggle a bit, maybe as the intensity has stepped up, and has become slightly out of favour. That is what development is, not Lee Briers playing for Swinton.

If Swinton stay up by a point and Barrow go down, you really have to question the integrity of the whole competition. And I'll continue saying that even if my team decide to play a similar type of SL player such as Briers for an important game. If we can't assemble a good enough squad at the start of the season, and develop players, tactics, team cohesion and game plans during the season the we don't deserve to stay up. Check my posts.



#96 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,383 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:01 PM

Most posters against DR are in favour of under 23's only being eligible for DR.

To me that makes a whole load of sense.

If these lads without a lot of SL experience to then get some game time in the Championship because the reserve team competition isn't fit for purpose (another thread on its own, and why has there been no real investigation and accountability why this has come to pass after years of Super League riches and so called Academy development) then the CC its the better place to be.

The under 23's need game time as part of their development. They are not a seasoned SL player like Lee Briers and are not expected to be leading lights in every CC game they play. If so, they'll be quickly whisked back to where they came from. And rightly so.

My club has had one player on a regular basis. He has been caught out at times and is in no way a rock-on top player, first name on the team sheet. I hope he continues his development and attains his goals, but as the season has gone on, then has started to struggle a bit, maybe as the intensity has stepped up, and has become slightly out of favour. That is what development is, not Lee Briers playing for Swinton.

If Swinton stay up by a point and Barrow go down, you really have to question the integrity of the whole competition. And I'll continue saying that even if my team decide to play a similar type of SL player such as Briers for an important game. If we can't assemble a good enough squad at the start of the season, and develop players, tactics, team cohesion and game plans during the season the we don't deserve to stay up. Check my posts.

 

Furthermore, a team with it's own ground, supplying many of it's own players recruited from the Furness area and representing a fair sized town in an area devoid of other clubs will be sacrificed for Warrington A playing in the Wigan area which already has two teams in the league and who do not have a ground of their own and not many players of their own.

 

Where is the sense in that from the point of view of the greater good of the game.?

 

Even more important, Barrow have about twice as many supporters as Swinton and if they were to survive and consolidate in this division have the potential to be in the 2 to 3 thousand attendance area. Swinton never got more than 6,000 average even when they were two time winners of the 1st Division ( akin to SL) in the 1960's and playing their own iconic ground in Swinton.

 

I've nothing against Swinton and if they could achieve stuff on their own, then good on them, but to do it as a meaningless appendage to Warrington is just plain stupid.

 

The same would apply if Hunslet, York, Keighley, Batley, Whitehaven or Workington were to pip Fax, Fev or the Eagles to the championship of the division and render all their independent development work, from juniors to stadia irrelevant and meaningless just to keep the various SL reserves happy. It's mind bogglingly stupid and short sighted.

 

It's just another example of what happens when SL runs the game for the benefit of SL and not from the point of view of the whole game from top to bottom.



#97 Larry the Leit

Larry the Leit
  • Coach
  • 2,593 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:06 PM

I assume you are against all loan deals too?

 

I'd like to see rules around loan deals sorted out.  I'm deeply uncomfortable with loans within the same division (SL to SL) and I would stop them, I think it devalues the integrity of the competition.  I'd also like to see some operational rules brought in about loan deals when a player is loaned to a team in another division, perhaps something along the lines of the club doing the "borrowing" must pay at least 75% of the loaned players' wages (from their cap) to prove intent, but the wage still counting on the parent club's cap and the loan deal be for a minimum period of a month.


Edited by Larry the Leit, 05 May 2013 - 06:55 AM.

The Unicorn is not a Goose,

#98 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,800 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:33 PM

Most posters against DR are in favour of under 23's only being eligible for DR.

To me that makes a whole load of sense.

If these lads without a lot of SL experience to then get some game time in the Championship because the reserve team competition isn't fit for purpose (another thread on its own, and why has there been no real investigation and accountability why this has come to pass after years of Super League riches and so called Academy development) then the CC its the better place to be.

The under 23's need game time as part of their development. They are not a seasoned SL player like Lee Briers and are not expected to be leading lights in every CC game they play. If so, they'll be quickly whisked back to where they came from. And rightly so.

My club has had one player on a regular basis. He has been caught out at times and is in no way a rock-on top player, first name on the team sheet. I hope he continues his development and attains his goals, but as the season has gone on, then has started to struggle a bit, maybe as the intensity has stepped up, and has become slightly out of favour. That is what development is, not Lee Briers playing for Swinton.

If Swinton stay up by a point and Barrow go down, you really have to question the integrity of the whole competition. And I'll continue saying that even if my team decide to play a similar type of SL player such as Briers for an important game. If we can't assemble a good enough squad at the start of the season, and develop players, tactics, team cohesion and game plans during the season the we don't deserve to stay up. Check my posts.

But if you are worried by another club's players having a big impact on the season - surely this applies whether they are 22 or 32?



#99 LOYALION

LOYALION
  • Coach
  • 919 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 11:56 PM

As are the TV deals and rich sponsors promised by Toulouse.

On the Lee Briers thing, it seems like he single handedly won this game for Swinton. If this ends up sending Barrow down because of the points Swinton obtained here this will be travesty and a mockery of the Championship. Briers is an integral part of Warrington's first team. He should not be playing for Swinton.

Will he be available if they get to the playoffs because of this tainted win? I doubt it.


Watch the video. He didnt single handedly win anything!!

"no-one knows what it's like to be the bad man.........behind blue eyes"


#100 LOYALION

LOYALION
  • Coach
  • 919 posts

Posted 05 May 2013 - 12:06 AM

Whitehaven had Jamie Rooney playing for them. Hardly an up and coming young player. Are we saying that only young players on the up should be allowed to turn out in the Championship to progress the game? Its within the rules that Haven can sign and play Rooney (and Doran who used to play in Swinton's A team many years ago) as can Workington play Thackray. It was within the rules that Swinton could play Briers to help the young players in their team.

Change the rules before castigating teams!

"no-one knows what it's like to be the bad man.........behind blue eyes"





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users