He has answered a lot of questions people was asking but they're still one more thing I don't understand only playing 16 men in games and sometimes 1 sub would only get 10-15 minutes at end of a game

For me we shouldn't even have the question "is his defence going to be as good as Zak"......it should simply be "is his defence going to be good enough", I have no reason to think it won't be. I see nothing in his abilities/attribrutes that are an obvious weakness in that regards. His main weakness at the moment for playing FB is just his lack of experience in the role but that surely will improve with time, a preseason under his belt there, and more games.

If the prerequisite for a new FB is that he has to be as good defensively as Hardaker then we'll be searching for one for a long time.

Our first choice pack including subs is as good as anyone , our centres and wingers are as good as any other team , we may get away with Sutty at fullback the jury is still out on that one . Where we will lose out is the crucial positions of halfback and coach .

Very good points. Sutcliffe has quality. He looked very good before his injury. I hate to do this but I am tending to now agree with JC, who some time ago suggested his best position would be centre. I don't think he looks relaxed or happy at FB but when he sits out on the right when playing 6 he looks very natural there.

I think if he has the desire to improve he can be a brilliant 6 as he has all the attributes for it. If he keeps working on his kicking game and game management (which should come with more games anyway) then I think he could become an international mainstay.
If he doesn't improve then he may well end up at centre or possibly fullback.

Or Featherstone...