Seems like an opportunity to me for playing Chisholm on the wing with Keinhorst his centre (or FB with Watkins remaining at centre)

When's Vickery back? And why not try Chisholm on the wing?

He never went in the first place, it was printed in error and im guessing the statement on their website was to cover this error.

anyone who is carrying a niggle should be wrapped up in cotton wool now ready for next week.

we have had 2 solid hit outs and should be able to rest a few against a depleted Salford at home.

Come on rhinoms, firstly he is not a kid, and secondly what did he do well?

Let's also drop this bog of a ptich thing, because it didn't bother the oppossition.

In order to take a jersey in this team you need to play well when the opportunity arises, and contribute something. Not "not a lot wrong". That was the point I was making, and further stated that I was talking about him in the wing position.

9 carries and 3 dropped balls, along with the missed tackle, the poor positioning for kicks, and the lost at sea stance demonstrated. A game that needed players to pull their sleeves up and work hard, and he wasn't there for it. Vickery made as much contribution last week in 20 minutes. I would have said Vickery's permonce last week was "not a lot wrong" considering it was only 20 minutes, so I can't see how this week could be compared.

I find it strange aswell that you picked out 3 players as "worst performers" and yet their contribution exceeded what Keinhorst gave us. I agree their performances were not good, although I would definitely argue that Kirke really gave us good needed yardage when asked to.

Compare all the wingers performance from that game Sunday, then you will see what I was saying. It wasn't a write off of him, I just questioned that we must have better options at winger.

He missed 1 tackle, made 3 errors and only managed 4 metres per carry (38m for 9 carries)

In those conditions he was no worse than most and as for the other 3 offering more i disagree.
Far too many times Burrow tried to play "summer RL" and ran up his own @ss or passed "shockingly" to someones feet or in Kirkes case someone who wasn't even looking.
Achurch might aswell have worn a blind fold when offloading far too many were forced and thrown down towards the players bootlaces and you rip into Keinhorst.
As for him not being a kid in SL experience terms he's very raw and young i'm not sayig he was brilliant but to just single him out when much more experienced players were worse or made just as many errors doesnt add up.
Also just to clear up i'm not knocking anyones "effort" because i thought we worked hard but a lot of our execusion and descision making was p!$$ imo.

I am not single him out. There were worse performers. I have been clear on that. I was questioning him playing on the wing, where I think he looks completely lost. Which is why I said surely we have better options for the wing.

In all honesty I think you could split the players performances on Sunday in to two camps, gave it go as expected and just awful. A lot were in the just awful camp, regarless of looking for excuses with the conditions.

It's very very rare I say anything negative on Sinfield, but he was just awful on Sunday, and yes he was joined by Burrow. Interestingly, I would have put McShane in the gave it a go higher performance, but it was the switching of Burrow at that point that really made Burrow performance drop.

Watson is fit again now but it is unlikely that BMac will drop Zac for Salford. How can you tell Zac is groggy? He always speaks like that!!!
I would have thought it best to drop Zac for Salford and save him for the biggey. Watson could come in at FB and that is definately a better option than Hall. Watson needs some game time to build his confidence, then we can start to see the brilliance he used to show in the 20s

Burrow looked average as a half? Where have I heard that before?

Signed Harrigan, 2000 and whatever to when he got shifted to dummy half.

Fair do's gotcha!
I agree re-mcshane i thought he had a really strong game and his defence at marker was improved big time.
W55ARE-Re Watson he didn't do himself any favours during his last outing for the 1st team mate at FB he looked very nervous and unsure that's why he was moved to wing.
IF he can recapture his weekly outstanding u20's form id love to see him get a chance but i think he could get left behind when Sunley is fit and firing and ZH is 100% although he may come in as a wing opition for this season until Bjb is fit.

Watson moved to wing because Vickery got a rib knock didnt he?

I agree Watson was nervous that day and missed a couple of Bombs (although the first one he was running back and Chisolm should have come for it). That knocked is confidence although that wasnt the reason why he went wing. It was always the intention to swap Vickery and Watson around. BMac needed to see what Vickery could do. The plan was also to move Watson to Hooker for a while but that didnt materialise. Watson also scored on the wing I seem to remember.

Also Sunley overtaking Watson, hmm not so sure. Sunley is a good player as an individual but Seth would agree Sunley is not a ball player and Bmac says he wants a ball player like Webb. Thats why they are pushing Zac to be more in the halves in attack.

Good luck to them both though, they have both done well. I would be very proud of myself if I was training at this level every day as they are.

A record score really could be on the cards here. We hardly have a squad as it is and will definatley be without: Fages, Howarth and Nero. And with serious doubts also about: Gibson, Wild, Gleeson and Danny Williams we could be in for a very long night.