Who compared him to Farrell and Robinson???????

I just happen to disagree, what more does Smith have to do in RL to not be "A Good young player with a good future in front of him "?

Karl Pryce didn't attain full international honours before he went to Union.

He didn't play in a Grand Final, let alone win a Harry Sunderland trophy in one.

You may have seen more potential in Pryce back then but its' hard to quantify why.

Smith's is a top quality outside back and a loss to RL. Not a loss to Leeds. We have plenty of quality coming through in the three-quarters.

Farrell was at the tail end of his career when he went to Union so in a sense he wasn't as big a loss.

Become more than a good young player with a good future ahead of him

So at the same point in their respective careers Smith had played nearly twice as many games wining consecutive grand finals playing a major role in different positions and also had international honors.

If you want to talk about extraordinary players, how many British “extraordinary” players can you name currently playing?

I can't be bothered looking at the RFL web site but as with the "2nd tier players" who areoutside the main £1.6m salary cap there is a limit to how much you can benefit from the 10 year rule. So if you had, say for such long serving players and 50% of their wages came to £110K then you would only get something like £50K of that not counting in the cap.

What has happened with the salary cap is that when it came in at £1.8m there have been several changes one of which was a reduction in to £1.7m and then £1.6m when NI contributions were removed from it (which in theory makes it worth the same a £1.7m cap).

When it did go down the idea was it was indexed linked but I think it has only had the index link increase applied once. What has happened is when other changes were to the rules made such as not counting the wages of junior players who are not one of the clubs 1st or 2nd tier players they used this as an excuse for forgo the index link increase.

I never hear this index linking mentioned any more so I think it may have quietly been pushed under the carpet and done away with.

It certainly suits clubs with at the lower end of the financial scale but even the most ardent pro-cap person has got to accept that at some point it must increase. It is no use saying we can't compete with RU anyway so we may as well leave the cap at £1.6m. This is just simply preventing players from doing what most of us expect in our working lives - get a pay rise to cover the increased cost of living.

Dave

Damn, that's me too embarrassed to sleep tonight.

Smiths in a very very good team, thats why he's been in two consecutive grand finals.

And sadly i can't name many British extraordinary players, which shows the sad or our international side.

Same Point!

Pryce was 19 & Smith is 22!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hardly the same point! If Pryce had stayed In RL theres no doubt in my mind he would have an equal if not better record!

But don't worry, let Union Ruin him then we can take him back ala Pryce & Walker etc and we can pick up the pieces when theyv'e had enough of them!
Why should we worry abpout RU though!

As for the other bit, Exactly! But yet we keep getting told that were producing better players!

There speaks the attitude that will eventually sink Rugby League.

And you lot used to accuse us of being arrogant.

Never mind. Keep it up son. The RFL (sadly) will be proud of you.

But not at the point when he left!

You know your wrong, just admit it!

Don't talk soft, he's a gutless waster.

WHHHOOAAAAAA!!!!!

Have a look at what was posted!

He used Smith's record of tries to games ratio has proof that he was Very Good!

We pointed out that Pryces record was better, not that he was a better player etc etc!

At the point that Pryce went to Union he had an equal record if not better to Smith's, correct or not?

Not - when Pryce went to Union, he hadn't played for England or won individual honours.

Even when scoring those tries you speak of, Bradford fans lamented his lack of heart and lumbering in defence. Funnily enough, the same traits that see him playing in the reserves of a poor SL team.

G1 said he will be a loss to RL, beyond that I just think he is proud of the lads coming through to replace Smith.

So with some of your follow Wigan fans saying Smith is average do you think he is a loss or not?

Of course he will be a loss!

ANY player that chooses to play RU & Not RL is a loss to our game whether international or Amateur!

But the opportunities that RL provides these day are nowhere near enough incentive to keep them in RL.
The same people that stand up for the Salary Cap in it's current format are the same people telling us Wiganners that were wrong in stating that the SC in its current format is Hindering international & SL progression!
See the 30 page thread about SDL and tell me were wrong!

The decline in standards between 1992 and the pitiful 2000 world cup has nothing to do with the salary cap, it didn't exist. In case you've forgotten we lost to NZ 49-6 on home soil in the world cup semi in 2000 to a side that got thrashed by the Aussies in the final, compared to 22-32 in Australia last year to the eventual winners.

But nobody on here ever seems to address the reasons for that decline, because it's easier for Wigan fans to blame the decline on something that they perceive to be helping Saints and holding Wigan back (despite the fact Saints won back to back titles immediately prior to the introduction of the cap and the "spend what you want, free market" approach contributed significantly to Wigan RL now renting a ground from the Latics).

So you agree with me in disagreeing with NickyKiss?, thats that one sorted.


If you think I've come on here to discuss the SC with wigan fans.....
I'd rather pour boiling bleach down my one eyed snake

As I said earlier in this thread, I think he's a loss.

I also think it's a shame that only a few others seem to share this view.

It won't do RL any good in the long run if we invent reasons why players defecting to Union are ' no loss', or if we adopt the unrealistically arrogant Aussie attitude that 'we don't care if they go, because we can always replace them'.

The original poster compared him to Faz and Robinson by saying he won't be as big of a loss as those two which is correct. Smith’s loss is equal to the loss of Ashton, Pryce and Walker who were all good players with a good future in front of them and not superstars.

Smith still is a good youngster as he’s 22 and still trying to find a position of his own in the Leeds team.

After this season, imo, if he would have settled into either the centre or FB spot he would have stopped being a good youngster as he would have been 23/24 and playing in a regular starting position as well as starting to fill his undoubted potential.

There’s a massive difference in players such as Joel Tomkins, Lee Smith, Pryce, Eastmond and Wheeler imo who have yet to play consistently in one position week in week out like Graham, Roby, Atkins, Tim Smith have.

I agree and I also think it’s a loss.

Players like Smith, Pryce, Ashton, Raynor & Walker may not be superstars but they are good enough to enhance the competition which is what we need to do.

The greater number of more talented players we have in the league means the standard increase with it as well.

Losing players like the ones I’ve mentioned above instantly weakens the comp as there is less talent there.

The idea of replacing some one like Smith with a talented youngster doesn’t work as it would have been a much better for RL if both Smith and the talented youngster promoted to replace him were playing RL at the same time. Ok it they may not have been playing for the same team but others teams would have benefited then rather than RU.

It's the ultimate head in the sand philosophy to write it off as not a loss.

Smith played only on the wing until Webb got injured then he moved to FB to cover where he got IIRC 4 consecutive MOM awards for Leeds including the GF, During the off season he was "promoted" to centre where he has played all his games when not still covering for Webb at the start of the season.

I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree but I think he did reach his potential in league and will be a loss to Leeds and England.

Allow me to simplify my point so you can follow.

Smith is a loss to English Rugby League because he's a damn fine full back, earned international honours on the wing and we're criminally short of good outside backs in RL.

His loss won't be felt as much at Leeds because we have Webb at full back and, behind him a quality young lad called Ben Jones Bishop. Ryan Hall has emerged as an international winger and beyond him we're developing young Jodie Broughton who is coming along quite nicely on loan at Hull. At centre we have a real star yet to emerge in Kallum Watkins.

Now, with the exception of Hall - Watkins, Jones Bishop and Broughton are not yet international class but they are emerging into fine SL players.

Hence, his loss won't be felt as keenly by [iour club[/i as it will by the international side.

Not arrogant at all. Just a fact.

Personally, I'd much preferred Smith stayed in Rugby league even if with another club and played full back. Whilst he's not as good as Webb I think he could have been the best British full back around. Is that arrogant?

And, FWIW, I have never accused Wigan fans of arrogance because, frankly, what have you had to be arrogant about recently?

Out of interest and off topic how do you rate Ben Jones Bishop, heard very good things about the lad my self, and just wondering with him being a fullback an all whether he'll ever get a go at Leeds as long as you have Webb.

Very good. Excellent rewriting of what came over distinctly as a "we're alright Jack" post. You also manage to get a cheap jibe in at Wigan. So superb work all round.

However, as I said in a more recent post, and as Priestman said much more eloquently, making out that losing players like Smith to Union is okay because "we've got better ones coming through", is nonsensical bravado that doesn't consider the preferable state of affairs where good lads like Smith will stay in the game ALONGSIDE the exciting newcomers. (That's presuming the exicting newcomers don't themselves then get pinched, which is highly likely to happen if they're exciting enough).

Anyway, that's my final thought on the matter. I've no intention of debating with someone whose prime motivation seems to be bragging to the world about how good Leeds's youth system is, apparently unaware that losing a good young lad like Smith may only be the start.

At not stage did I say losing Smith to Union was OK. I explicitly said it was bad for the national side and I explicitly said I'd prefer him to stay in league.

Given your lack of comprehension I agree there's little point furthering the discussion.