Yes but as has been pointed out its about the defending in the middle. McDermott put Handley in and put the likes of Duckworth and Minns in other times. He's been more than happy to play Stevie Ward at 2nd row when he's been fit over the year even when he looked to small to do the role asked of him and has played the likes of Keinhorst and Walters at 2nd.

However you think of Singleton having to bide his time for a few years, Mulhern now. McShane, Hood and Robbie Ward at hooker. It's surely the issue of whether they can hold their own physically in the middle when defending.

Just wondering what your 17 would be if Burrow, Watkins, Aiton, Sutcliffe, JJB, Keinhorst are all injured.

I agree that those payers are not ideal to be in the squad at this time of year, but I think we're a bit stuck on selection. I think Sinfield at hooker with one half back is way less affective than squad member at hooker with Sinfield and McGuire in the halves.

I know you said injuries aside but I'd just be interested to know what you'd play with the squad we have available

I would say these days Sinfield struggles in the middle - Saints exposed him twice in one move. Didn't he ask to be moved into the halves because he didn't want the tackling work of a forward? Hooker is the most demanding physical role in the team so why everyone is suddenly saying he is as good as a specialist hooker is beyond me.

The less said about his ponderous distribution the better. Stevie Wonder can see playing Sinfield at hooker is not working now the intensity has ramped up a bit. He is a quality half back/organiser the most important player in the team in that role moving him to hooker causes too much disruption. Just because McDermott picks him there doesn't make it right - everyone makes mistakes including the coach.

Sinfield isn't defending at hooker though. Cuthbertson is. Might add that Sinfield was arguably our best player in the wind vs Wigan and Hull. Like I said before, it he played there and we had two halves , say McGuire and Sutcliffe it would be fine. If Aiton was playing with only McGuire in the halves I doubt it'd great as well.

I'm not into naming fantasy 17's. Is it confirmed Watkins, Burrow and Keinhorst are injured?

I recon you pick your best 17 players. Injury will always play a part at this time of the year.

With all due respect, and I mean that because you are entitled to voice an opinion, but you are in Australia are you not? so unless you have been popping over for weekends, I think I am correct to assume you have seen neither player in the Championship? you have seen neither player in the Under 19's? and all you have seen is where our matches are shown live, which probably would not have included the Hull game?

So don't you think, and I did say no disrespect intended, you are near the bottom of the list for judging the two players in question at this stage? I am not saying you are wrong by the way, just that I fail to see how you can confidently make that statement.

Sinfield is still defending in the forwards and has looked less than solid as Saints and Sigismeau showed.

Playing Sinfield at 9 is a mistake - he is far too slow, ponderous and predictable. He doesn't present an attacking threat in that position. If Aiton was playing and McGuire it would be better - not ideal - because both players are in their natural positions and obviously Aiton is step above Sinfield in that position.

Saw the Hull game. Seen Lilley and Ward in the first team. That's what I'm basing my opinion on. I would think the 19's and Hunslet would not tell you much about how they will go in the play offs. You can rank my opinion how you like.

Sinfield is defending where he normally defends, around 3 man in from the right. Digits mean showed Singield a clean pair of heels, hardly the most shocking or breaking news to realise Sinfield isn't the fastest.

And whilst yes he has looked less solid in defence the last two weeks I say the same could be said for the team in general. Aiton and McGuire with no other HB might be "better" but it would exactly be ideal either or successful.

There is a lot of 2+2 making 5 comments going about.

Talk of a playing "a proper hooker" as though this magically will solve our injury crisis is all based on the assumption that this "proper hooker" will be better than Sinfield.

To be called a "proper hooker" it would seem folk rate a big tackling performance when surely the distribution passes and runs from acting half back are the most important aspects. The tackling duties can be shared out between the other forwards. It is this expectation of a hooker having to make a high number of tackles in addition to arriving first at every one of the attacking play the balls that leads to a bench position being reserved for a replacement because very few hookers can physically keep it up for 80 minutes.

So IMO the choice of the hooker should be based on their distribution and attacking runs from dummy half and not their tackling ability. This is why the role is now more akin and suits the skills of a half back

I have not seen a lot of Robbie Ward but the coaches have and I would go with their judgement on when he is ready for SL. Because he comes under the heading "proper hooker" does not make him a good "proper hooker" by definition alone.

Some posters are assuming that had Aiton not been injured all would be well. Again this view takes no account of the other injuries we have incurred, plus Wembley hang over and drop in form of several players. IMO it is the injuries to Aiton, Burrow and Watkins combined that have dulled our attack. When the latter two return our attack should improve dramatically. Burrow can interchange with Sinfield to give us more direction and more space for McGuire.

I agree with sgtwilko we have to select our best and most reliable players if fit.

I reckon when fit we need to now get Burrow on the field from the start alongside Sinfield and McGuire again.I am in the camp he is most effective from the bench but with the current situation of Aiton being done for the year, and none of the young lads really ready to be trusted it is the only logical solution. Have Sinfield and Burrow jumping into dummy half at various points of the game and having all three on the field will keep the opposition guessing at the end of sets.

What bit of "not ideal" in my post confused you?

You cannot play with one half back against the better sides on a regular basis and expect to win - you become far too one dimensional to create any kind of meaningful attacking option

I agree we can't and the week of Wembley I said we should have Burrow back in as the Cuthberyson experiment was understandable vs Wigan and the weather that night but not long term.

However the way some are going on its like they think we'd have been fine the last two weeks had we had Aiton....we wouldn't. Catalans would've still done a number on us and Saints, whilst we had the score line close at HT we were comfortably 2nd best. You just seem determined to lay all the blame at Sinfield's door (when the problem is a team wide issue) even going as far as to incorrectly claim Sinfield is defending in the middle.

If we keep coughing up the ball and missing tackles like we have done in the last 2 games then it doesn't matter who plays hooker, we won't win.

Mr James Child is the referee... Woohoooo....

I am not blaming Sinfield he is doing his best he is just a round peg in a square hole - that is a coaching issue IMO.