Thoughts?

Well hindsight is a wonderful thing. However I would look alright playing behind that Wigan pack.

No.

Deacon is good in a dominant team.
He certainly isn't a "go to" player.

He compliments Wigan's strong pack and other classy backs.

He certainly wasn't pulling any trees up when he left, was he?

Agree



Who was, under McNamara ?

Deacon does a very simple job for Wigan and is a real team player because he basically is just used to get the ball to our more expansive runners. If we took guys like Sam, Leuluai and Roberts from his side he would struggle but at the point he's at in his career he's perfect for us and we're perfect for him so both parties are happy.

Bradford will be fine when you can get your halfbacks on the field. I was in Cardiff last week and I was impressed with Briggs debut. He looked a good allround halfback and he'll go well for you.

Don't think he is what the Bulls need but did an excellent job for Wigan today and we invariably look more cohesive when he plays than when he doesn't

Looking back, maybe. But he certainly owuldn't have done much playing in that team last season, not sure about this one.


At the time it was definitely the right decision to let him go, he was picking up knocks all the time and his form was going downhill. I think it was best for him to go and have a good couple of seasons at Wigan rather than keep going downhill at Bradford. This way he's remembered for the excellent player & great servant he was for us.

No. Southernwood needs some game time in the less challenging games. Better to bring him in as and when we can.

In one.

i'm not too sure I buy the not physically ready story. there's been a fair share of lads who only just trouble 13 stone but do well in super league.

i know it's cynical but is potter not really meaning that he's not good enough?

You may well right, still not totally convinced about him. I think a lot is made of him because he's a young English half back. Might be wrong though!

I saw him v Keighley a few weeks back. It took well into the second half before I realised the SH was Southernwood.

TBH I haven't been wow'd by any of his performances in comparison to how I was with Briggs first game for us. Maybe that was an expectation thing! Also he is one of Mcnamaras signings and judging by the rest of them, well..........

Deacon was always the ultimate professional with us, and (while I'm not making any comparison) I'm sorry, but even Wally Lewis wouldn't have looked good in our 2010 team.

Also I'm sure Deacs got a new lease of life with the move, but even though Wigan clearly rated him to sign him as back-up, I bet he's surprised even them with what he can do. Only his ludicrous detractors claim, nuttily, that we won what we did [idespite[/i Deacon, and if they had half a brain they would finally give him credit for what he achieved with Wigan. But I won't be holding my breath.

As to whether we should have got rid, well, of course signing Awford was the thing, and as we couldn't really have kept them both, I don't think the question is valid, with the benefit of that wonderful thing called hindsight, you'd have signed Matt Lucas before Matt Awford.

Orford looked fantastic in your 2010 team. Lewis looked fantastic in a crap Wakey team.

Deacon has been given the 6 shirt by Mcguire but he is still behind Brett Finch in the pecking oreder. Finch has still to play yet.
He does well for Wigan and when he goes off the team loses it's composure. Deacon has been a very good signing for Wigan.

I think following his last two seasons at Odsal and Orford arriving Deacs was going to be on the outer anyway if he hadn't signed for Wigan.

Bradford will do ok this season to me. Get your half backs in the 13 and things will take shape. Great crowd too but it was very cold!!!

Blah, blah blah . . . but there is really no point in debating Deacon with you, you'd rather cut your nuts off than give him an ounce of credit

Deacon has been sensational at Wigan mainly because his job is to organise, lead and kick. He does not have to create and support and score tries. His job is a simple one at Wigan which is why he is so effective. He would not look the same in a bradford team without Tomkins and Leuluai making all the plays IMO.

This is why you missed Orford so much last year, even at the end of his career he can do everything that Deacon does for Wigan as well as creating chances.

I seem to remember Noble saying something similar about Sam Tomkins. Deacon does a good steady job for us

I've got a long enough memory to remember that the general consensus on this board was to get rid of Deacon.

There may have been a couple of exceptions but the majority view was, great servant though he had been, his time at Bradford had come to an end. To be fair, most of us wished him well on his move to his home town club - expecting him to be an occasional backup, safe in the knowledge that our new signing Matt Orford was taking his place. As such we were confidently looking ahead to 2010

Hindsight is wonderful thing isn't it

Thanks for the evidence of your keenly honed debating skills. They must stand up well in court. Anything incorrect in my previous post?

Sorry if I hit a nerve, but still there is zero chance of you ever "debating" Deacon, any more than one could meaningfully debate the shape of the Earth with the President of the Flat Earth Society.




^ = illustration of "debating" Deacon with tigertot

Let's just see how Herbert and Briggs go when they're fit, eh?

Keep thinking that if it avoids the points I raised. You said Wally Lewis would not shine in the 2010 team. My view is that is rubbish & I have givne evidence to support that. You know what my views on Deacon are. They haven't changed one iota. Summarised by WB earlier in this thread.

No, I didn't! I made a hyperbolic comparison to emphasize a point with a touch of sarcy humour, as you well know. Tell you what, let's hype it a bit more, delete "Wally Lewis" and insert "Jesus Christ". Then you can tell me all about how good he actually looked walking on water etc.




Nor ever will. Which was kinda my point in declining your meaningless invitation to "debate".