Hull tonight has two young 18 year old kids in first time action who looked more than capable....Crooks and the FB borrowed from Wigan.

Why do we hesitate so much in giving our good young 'uns a regular place....? I'm talking Hood, Singleton (both older ?), D.Smith, Chisholm and Ward at least....How old [iare [/iall of our 'kids' here mentioned ? Twenty is too old ....get any of them that are at that age in NOW

ward looks very promising, saw him against our (fc) under 20s today and ran rings round the whole team, albeit it wasn't the strongest u20 line up we had out

AS much as I disagree with your obsession with yout nantwich, it gets harder to see what Kirke offers over the likes of Singo or even the use of ward on the bench with Bailey at loose.

That said I expect a few to play next week.

Also Jimmy Keinhorst was 18th man to day, whats the story with that why not mcshane, or Ward?

I was thinking during the game that a bit of youthful enthusiasm would have been handy, that should have been Stevie Ward.

Thought we were crying out for Burrow off the bench to just give us some momentum going forward and get their pack on the back foot.

I said on the walk to the ground that we would win purely because burrow was injured. You had no real 'impact' coming off the bench, players were much the same style as who started.

As for Phil Clarke moaning about us 'borrowing' Russell, failed to mention you borrowing
Lunt

Think there is a bit of difference between Lunt and Russell

Yeah ones an up and coming star of the future who Wigan think highly of, the other is a cast off

Phil Clarke is rapidly becoming tedious and ignorant just like wiggy.

He was bemoaning the fact that Wigan played a young Cook islander (Gelling) in place of a young Wiganer (Russell) on Friday nights games against KR.

The fact that Russell was already gaining first team exposure with FC to the benefit of Wigan, Hull and the player did not even get on his radar. The fact that at the time Gelling was having a pretty good game made it even more curious.

To add more insult to injury we fielded Lockers, Mossop, Mclorum, Hansen, Tomkins, Tuson, Charnley, Hughes, Hock, Goulding and Farrell. All of whom are ex Wigan academy players (not sure on Mclorum mind you). With 7 of them being born and bread Wiganer's.The whole commentary setup at Sky has nothing to do with providing good honest analysis, comment and commentary.

There are fans of many clubs who hate Clarke because of his perceived pro-Wigan agenda. I can tell you that there are plenty of Pie Eaters who cant stand the mouthpiece either.

Does nobody else think that Griffin, despite a highly promising start to his Leeds career, has failed to impress ?

For me we could already be using:

Singleton as a regular over Lleulai ( The latter still has much to offer, but is retiring ...so why not use him as the injury cover only instead of keeping Singleton on the sidelines ? )

Ward over Kirke ( somebody please tell me why not ???? )

Daniel Smith over Griffin ( for the reason offered above. Griffin can still regain his spot with improvement )

Hood over Lee Smith ( bit more tricky this one as Smith seems to be recovering a bit of form. However, when Burrow regains his obvious best position - bench replacement - both Hood and Smith might be pushed out anyways. )

Chisholm over Webb ( [iHardaker to FB, Hall to centre[/i. Webb is becoming far too petulant and is leaving at the end of this season. We need to adopt and perfect new plays without him: can we not start now ?? As with Lleulai just use Webb as the injury cover ).

Why would you have relatively highly paid players sat in the stands? Not getting much value for money out of them!

Swap their wages



Seriously I don't care....if the "highly paid players" are playing crap, or are becoming an ever increasing liability, or are looking less likely to produce the enthusiastic goods of the young keen lads.......then yes 'stick them in the stands'. It might encourage more effort or a more postive team enhancing swan song.