I believe Hodgson was probably the best goal kicker we've ever had, certainly in my memory, and stats don't tell the full story.

But over a longer period of time, stats do paint an accurate picture.

When you look at Hodgson's kicking average over 13 years by club -

Wire Average 78%
Huds Average 78%
Wests Average 77%
Eels Average 79%

13 year career average: 78%

Regardless of age, club, style of play, this is Brett Hodgson's goal kicking return.

I wouldn't use these numbers to prove how much better he is / isn't to Ratch or Roberts or Patton, but I would say that it does show how fantastic Brett was. He was an amazingly metronomic and reliable goal kicker, the likes of which we've not had since. Consistently (and consistency is key) getting the 2 and turning the screw on teams is a real killer.

I would hope these stats at least add to the debate and provide a different perspective or talking point for the other uberfans to debate around

Then why bother if we are trying not to play those exceptions

Our squad is currently 30.

"I'm pretty sure you can do the maths", take away a match day 17 from 30 and that means the 'A team' would need to find 4 more players. take into an account of injuries ect, an squad of 40 players could sufficietly field 2 teams a week.

30 from 40 is??? 10 players like I said.

We want to play the exceptions, the likes of Wigan must have done very well with U21's coming in to the first team squad and not counting on the cap, but we need them to be ready for the first team when they are called upon.

The club believe a reserve competition is the best way to turn 19 - 23 year olds in to regular first team players. As a bonus it also keeps fringe players match fit and allows players returning from long term injury somewhere to play rather than being thrown straight back in to first team action.

I think the reason we have seen a plunge in the quality of rugby league in the UK is down to the low numbers of school age kids playing the game. Fewer players coming through results in fewer SL quality players at the top of the pyramid. For some time there have been club reports of matches being played with only 13 aside and even a few with 11/12 a side. I think releasing the Scholarship players back to their clubs will help somewhat, but lets remember that they only play 6 competitive games for the U16's during the year anyway. And of course ideally we also want the best quality coaches (Wire ?) overseeing their development if possible such that we at least get the full potential from the smaller numbers that continue to play.

If we had plenty of youngsters we could have U16, U18, U21 and Reserve sides, but we don't. So the problem we face is not really about what age groups we need, it's how do we get more local youngsters playing the game. Until we ( all RL clubs) solve that one we will continue to see 35/36 year old players extending their contracts and more poor quality matches being played out. If the sport fails to hold the interests of the viewing public we could easily see a fall in the Sky monies that underpin the game over here, or as has recently been announced with the Sky cycling team (with Froome and Thomas), Sky could pull out altogether.

I think to be successful and not come up short towards the back end of the season injury and fitness you would need 45-50 players in the squad. We got 30 now for one team and still get headaches injury wise through the season how will ha bing another 17 members of the squad playing a competitive game help this? We will have 34 players in a 40 player squad playing competitive games every week how many will be fit come the end of the year.

I want every team to have a reserve team but not if its not practical financially.