Because it simply isnt true. To state it again, We beat everyone, at the business end of the season, with Burrow at hooker. We have managed to do so, many many times for over a decade.

The idea that our struggles this year, and our small struggles last year, are down to not having a 'proper hooker' simply arent born out by the facts. It has been proven, time and time and time and time again that we can and do win with Burrow at hooker, it has been proven with Millard, with Falloon, and
yes with Aiton, that swapping out Burrow for a 'proper hooker' doesnt result in victory.

I dont think Watkins looked any better outside Fallon, no more energetic, nor more potent, less if anything.

What Segeyaro has proven is that top bracket players will make us play better. But we arent going to get another top bracket hooker. We will get a Falloon, a Millard, or at best an Aiton, players worse that Burrow.

Because it is your argument, your point that we need a 'proper hooker' and that Aitons position as a 'proper hooker' made us play soooooo much better. Its simply not true.

But Aiton, and most 'proper hookers' dont make that difference. We know this for a fact. Burrow has been doing what Burrow does, whatever number is on his back, for 15 wildly successful years.

England havent won 7 of the last 12 tournaments they played in with Rooney doing what Rooney does. If they had, and people will still arguing about his position people would think they were mental.

What it is closer to is Barcelona playing Messi as a false 9 and people still arguing about whether you can win without a proper number 9.

No we haven't because Burrow hasn't been playing at hooker for a decade. Most of the trophy haul you listed above is misleading in this argument because they came from playing in the halves. He started games at hooker in 2012 but we brought in Lunt who played an important role. 2013 we pretty much went with Burrow alone after McShane wasn't favoured and it was our only trophyless season under McDermott prior to this year. Burrow was the starter in 2014 with Aiton on the bench and we finish 6th in the table, Aiton was the starter in 2015 and Burrow on the bench and we finish 1st in the table.

Falloon was an absolute dud, goodness knows how he ever got a gig in the NRL but he offered us nothing. He wasn't good enough for the Championship, Aiton was miles better, so the fact he changed nothing is of no surprise at all.

Watkins looked far better first half of last year, he was ripping it up. No coincidence off the back of the quick plays, neat dummy half work and link up between Aiton and his forwards in second phase ball with offloads from the like of Cuthbertson (another whos game has fallen away since then surprise surprise) giving him space and early ball. So Watkins then became a tackling machine again for the last few weeks when we forced to go back to Burrow. Not his fault, but annoying having your rolls royce attacking weapon having to do donkey work to hide others imo.

Again, Burrow is a great player and like Printer said, one you wouldn't mind having to cover for the odd game here or there. But, for the benefit of the TEAM moving forward we need... yes you've guessed it, 'a proper hooker' as often as possible

Put whatever number you want on his back, Burrow is playing how Burrow plays. He isnt a different player because of the number on his back, same as Sinfield isnt turning in to Paul Gallen when he lined up at loose instead of in the halves. Even then he won a Harry Sunderland award as an impact hooker.

Players are players, not a list of skills that fit a certain position. Burrow was never more a proper half than he was a proper hooker. He was Rob Burrow.

That is a big part of the problem.

That he might be, but he wasn't going into dummy half nearly all game when Matt Diskin was here. Defenders weren't having to shuffle in one because we had to defend two halves on one side. So yes Burrow might still play like Burrow, but our centres weren't having to do extra amounts of tackles, our props weren't missing a 40 tackle a game hooker defending next to them so you're again completely missing the point about the balance of the team. Other people's games have to change if he plays there, and not for the better.

Segeyaro might start 28/29 games next year and then get injured and Burrow might do the exact same thing as 2015 and come in and start the last few and we win a GF.....but if we have Burrow starting hooker week in week out for 30 odd weeks it won't lead to success. You point to a 3 game cameo to say it works but me and others are on about him playing there every week throughout a year and their's no evidence to support that working.

Falloon had a better NRL career than Aiton. The idea, based on half of this seasona and half of last that Aiton was somehow on a different level to Falloon is nonsense.

Is it? its been pretty successful up to now.

Have you read anything i have put the last few pages?

You seem to have this balance thing all confused. We balanced Burrow's lack of defence whether he played 9 or in the halves, because when Burrow played 9 we played an extra forward and moved Sinfield to half. When Burrow played half we played Sinfield at loose, losing a forward.

Other players didnt need to make extra tackles when Burrow played 9 instead of half. It didnt make a difference. We had Sinfield, Burrow and McGuire on the pitch. When we lost defence at 9 we gained at 13, when we gained it at 9 we lost it at 13. This idea that a hooker needs to make these tackles is just wrong.

Sinfield has gone now, we don't have that workhorse at 6 anymore those days are gone.

Also, i don't want my halfs doing 30/40 plus tackles a game i want them fresh and running the game not gassed.

Name me another team that has the hooker doing only a few tackles a game and hiding him on the fringes, because i can't think of one.

And AGAIN, i appreciate that. Burrow still has a role in the team like i have said, for the very reasons you marked out above. Impact sub suits him down to a tee now and may also prolong his career.

I'd see it more as a very experienced team managed to adapt very well at the back end of last year. But they looked absolutely gassed by the time of the GF, and I doubt very much that they could have done as well last year had we only had Burrow all year. I've rewatched the GF a few times and Watkins, who takes a lot of stick when he's not attacking well was absolutely immense. He was often covering 30 yards of the field on his own and having to make calls about whether to come in or stay out. He got it right almost every time. In fact one of the few times he was defending a bit wider was when Sinfield got skinned for Wigan's first try. Watkins' role was massively underrated, but he couldn't and shouldn't be expected to put in a shift like that every week.

Burrow's an impact player. If he doen't add impact he isn't worth a spot in the 17, never mind the starting lineup. He's a poor halfback and a very average starting hooker. Add in the issues with the defensive reorganisation and you have a problem over a season. That's why I'd be very keen for us to have a genuine alternative starting hooker even if Segeyaro stays.