You do realise at the time of us signing Brough he'd been at 5 or 6 clubs and never really settled at any of them, yes, he won the cup at Hull on 05 but after that his career seemed to stall, he was actually playing in the Championship 10 years ago.

He was a bit of a journeyman with a fairly dodgy reputation and a lot of our fanbase, me included, we're very wary of his signing.

He wasn't a 'proven' class player, he was, as he still is, very good on his day but also hit and miss and petulant at times.

Turner may well prove to 'be another Brough' we just don't know but don't forget when we signed Brough it wasn't much of a difference to signing Turner at the time.

"what we signed him for" was used a lot when we announced Danny Brough too.

When the signing of a proven Super League player, a Grand Final winner, at an age when he should be in his prime, who was identified by the NRL as being potentially top class gets so much criticism, I do wonder what on earth some fans expectations are on who we should be signing.

Agree 100% with you there.

And I think Ferguson, Clough, Gaskell, Mellor and O'Brien have done OK for us so far.

Certainly no worse than some of the rest.

If (and I know it's a big IF) we had beaten Trinity we would have been 7 points off Hull in fourth.

It's been an odd season with some very odd results.

Still plenty of points to play for with 5 of last games at home.

Looking forward to Perpingnan.

He was settled at Wakefield and unfortunately he got himself into a spot of trouble financially, and true to form uncle Ken came to your club's rescue with the chequebook offering him the moon on a stick if he signed for you simply because he was a class act and not a liability as you would have us believe, so why don't you say it as it is, out of interest who were the other six clubs he played for before joining shudds.

Ok then maybe at Wakey he was but he was still seen as a bi of a dodgy character when we signed him.

and the others i can think of we're Dewsbury, York, Hull, Castleford, Wakefield - ok then 5 others but my point is still the same - the criticism aimed at this signing is he has had a number of clubs.

What has he been criticized for exactly.

Daz This was not a thread about Brough, I did mention him to make a point and i said we took a gamble on him, But it was because of his rep rather than his ability, And i don't remember many people saying "why have we signed him", because most people recognized his talent, and i would say his leaving clubs had nothing to do with his ability.

My whole point was not about comparing players, It was questioning the policy of long term contracts, It was not about Turners quality , I have said a few times he is a decent player, and certainly good enough for the Giants, That somehow is being construed as being unrealistic , but we have come unstuck before with these long term signings, And yet when we have had genuine class players we have failed to give them contracts, Hogson , Devere, Drew are examples . What did it cost to get rid of Mason when we wanted Kopzac.

Brearley makes a good point , some players go to Oz, don't make it, and come back better players, I'm fine with that, But the fact he didn't manage to break into the team must tell you something, and that's why I'm questioning the length of the deal, Had he been Graham, Hodgson or any of the players who have made a big impact over there it would be more understandable.
So rather than taking your usual stance of defending anything and everything the club does, give us your opinion on long term deals, are they a good or bad thing. The lads from Bradford for eg, Mellor and Obrian, both young lads up and coming, the others all on the way down to one degree or another, and all who i'm told we are stuck with for quite some time.

Again it's not a criticism of the players , Things are what they are, but do you think we are well placed to go forward if we survive.

The sad thing is Jo and this is how I see it - We as a club are not exactly appealing to players. We play a crap style of rugby most of the time and we don't have a great fan base .... along with been a bottom 4 club at present, so the only thing that would attract a good player to us is a long term deal which is what we have to do now to get good players like Turner.

I do question the Gaskell 4 year deal though, that is a strange one and so was Daniel Smith 4 year deal - that was a joke.

They play a crap style of rugby because they have a crap coach to start with.....
Top 6 SL teams have English coaches? Says something doesn't it?
A good coach will attract good players! That's the first building block to success.......

Well it also says something when a player leaves an English coach and can't even get picked by an NRL one..

I'll leave that one with you..

Obviously an RL officianado. Who understands everything about the game! The Giants are going nowhere with the coach and the coaching team they have got! You can look forward to your last season in SL until things change from the top! And where did I mention English players. If you're going to reply to my post at least discuss the point I made! And whilst we are on the subject of Jordan Turner? Do you blame a player to take the money and try NRL. It also says something about the player being actually considered good enough in the first place by the NRL. Rick Stone came to the Giants with the worst record of any coach in Australia! And is keeping up that record here with the Giants!
Fact is Giants need a whole new coaching team to begin with. Then a clear out of a whole load of playing staff? Quote Shaun Wane "I want thirteen Wigan born kids who have come through the academy in my First team" and he is close to that now! The Giants simply don't have that desire from top to bottom!

Has anyone got an opinion on the policy of long contract signings. GJ makes a good point about not being able to get players here without a big incentive and It's a point i have made myself.

It's hard not to agree with , or at least see a lot of sense in what 456 is saying, Even allowing for some very average signings ,"we also have made some decent ones " we still have a decent team compared with many and yet we consistently perform way below what we should.

Is it that we need a complete clear out of coaching staff ?, Is R Stone any better than P Anderson was ? " we are still where we were " Does the big change need to come higher up the chain ? It's hard to work out why we are consistently a club of such under achievers.

I get the feeling that the club is run more as a business " albeit very poorly " rather than a RL club, does anyone above field level know anything about League, or is it just like running a supermarket to them, We get x amount of money from Sky + what comes from the fans, it's just a matter of plodding on. As long as we survive in SL it will all come again next year.

That's a very cynical view and I'm not saying it's how it is, It's just how it appears at times, and it doesn't take into account Mr Davy's huge input over the years, That in fact, is the most baffling thing of all to me,.

Anyway we have got J Turner, for better or worse " and i can't see how it can be worse " We have got rid of Brierley who was doing us no good whatever, Our push for survival has started a gain, which brings me right back to the original point, Will we be OK with all these long term signings.

Good I am glad at least one person can see the point I am making. I don't want to see the Giants go down at all. They do have some quality players good enough to keep them in SL? So there is something else fundamentally wrong? Is it the players desire? Or is it at coaching level? Choose whatever happens, the Giants have to recruit better 100% from top to bottom? And thank ken Davey for his unerring financial support?

Oh "456" and "Jo Jumbuck" if only the Giants had people of your calibre and knowledge of Rugby League and expertise in contract negotiations, plus your optimism and drive to push the club forward... please join the board and all will be well. You could use your experience in what must have been highly succesful careers so far!

It apears that not all the contributors on this site understand the fundamental's of rugby league as a team sport. Nor do they like others opinions?

I've been saying for ages the club would be incredibly successful with all the experts on here!!

That's when you haven't taken your ball home eh Daz,
They might well have done better with a change of personnel mate, If their record of success ( or lack of it )over the last 60 years is anything to go by. You and some others would seem to be happy enough with that, and anyone who isn't should not be asking questions, I have asked you for your opinion on long term signings but as ever you have so far declined to answer, why that should upset you so much i don't know. Except you never question anything the club does because it's not what fans do " if they are real fans "

So here's another one for you" and Jumper" As far as i know there are 6/7 clubs in the whole of the R League with rich owners, i think all of who will be in the top comp, the giants being one of them, Why then are we such perennial strugglers ?, why have we got such an abysmal record in S league ? ( or for the 40 years before that ) I don't have the answers but there must be some, It can't just be bad luck etc.

I have just asked those questions, i haven't claimed to be " one of those experts on here", but sadly just asking questions is enough to incite some posters to hostile and /or sarcastic comments, rather than giving their opinion on possible answers.

But there hasn't been a change of personnel so all we can do as supporters is support rather than claim to know better as some do.

My only experience in R league is 60 years of watching, the last 30 years watching the Giants, A few of those sponsoring the club, in a small way.

I did run my own small business quite successfully until i retired thanks, and now i am involved with one of a different nature, and IMO of a far more important nature than Rugby, so i'm afraid the board will have to soldier on without me, Lets hope the next 20 years is an improvement on the last 20.

So who is claiming to know better ? and do you have an opinion on long term contracts, or is it just " it must be right if the club does it "

i will give you an opinion. The practice of giving long term contracts at the club was established long before we *needed to* because of our league position. It has the obvious consequence of putting players in their comfort zone and could well be our biggest factor in the ongoing malaise that surrounds the club. We all need an incentive now and then to do our best, having a secured contract for 4 years does not provide that incentive. You would assume that a longer contract means a lowering of the other terms, but a player who one year into a 4 year deal is clearly not doing the business is a drain on the cap regardless of the amount of salary they are on.

It has also handcuffed coaches (stone being the main one) in that they have very little opportunity to shuffle their personnel. Unfortunately, i imagine it is now a neccessity to get the calibre of player we require as its the only thing we offer that other clubs wont, but it has been a very destructive practice for a very long time.

club run as a business?? you dont come into rugby league to make money.

stick them all on one year deals... soon get motivation then

see it all to often, players on their final year and their performances start to rise...rapira this year....

then again...dont offer mcgillvary , brough , cudjoe and the like longer deals and you lose them because other clubs will come in

Well you have an opinion, which pretty much sums up my own Opinion, which i stress is only an opinion and not a claim to know better than anyone else.

Take your point Brearley, the only thing i would say is there is a difference between players who have proven their quality by gaining regular International selection, and ones who have been playing at championship level, or one who is a more than decent player yet has not yet gained that status.