Half back is a specialist position. The three quarters can be swapped around not only with backs but some forwards too. Watkins has played all three variants this year, Hardaker has played all three in previous seasons. Ablett has played in the 3/4s too. That argument is spurious at best.

Most SL clubs have at least 3 options if not 4 at half back to only have two - one of which is 32 and one of which is returning from a career threatening injury seems light to me. Would you really want to have Sutcliffe/Burrow as your starting half backs? Burrow is the hooking cover could now be the only hooker if Aiton is off. The squad seems very unbalanced to me - very forward dominated and little cover in the backs. A Dunneman type i.e. not massively expensive but a solid performer would be what I had in mind - perhaps the money spent on Mullally/Achurch would have been better invested elsewhere.

chris bridge, even at 31, would have been that player for me

So now that all your whinging, whining and writing off of this "tired & old" squad has been all but proved wrong in 2015, you've decided to start over on next year's squad.

You'll get it right eventually I guess.

I'll repeat myself



Talk about meeting trouble half way

If Aiton Leaves and if Red Hall pass a rule that Leeds can't sign hookers and if the world stops turning. Burrow would be our only choice at hooker. I can see why you're stressing on this.

Shhhhhhush! That's the boards resident "Realist" you're talking to

Burrow as our main 9 next year is a cause for concern .it has never worked successfully imo.

Can't blame Aiton for looking at more cash at this point in his career . If he does go then we need a hooker.If not I'd rather see R Ward given a chance.

No, no , no.

yes yes yes for me

Burrow at 9 significantly weakens Leeds in both attack and defence compared to Aiton being on the field. I'd rather see Aiton play the full 80 or sign someone who can.

With the reduction in interchanges, teams aren't going to want to use two of them to rotate their dummy halves so the "impact" hooker is going to become a thing of the past.

Burrow's role at Leeds in 2016 should be as the back-up half. IMO he shouldn't be anywhere near dummy half except in extreme emergencies.

Let's hope Alton stays or Houghton signs then.

alternatively, the impact hooker becomes even more important as the bigger forwards are made to play longer minutes.

I can't see teams using two out of their eight interchanges to take off and then bring back their starting dummy halves, leaving them just six for the big men in the forwards. Particularly not in the height of summer.

With Burrow being given another two year deal it seems likely we aren't planning on giving R Ward much of a chance IMO.

If you can get 20 mins out of your props you can get through them in 4 interchanges.

Clever use of your subs and 4 is a decent number to play with for your second rowers/hookers/backs.

The issue would trying to do it would come with injuries maybe taking a few players out and messing up your rotation.

I actually think that might be an issue with the change as a whole and I think we need to keep an eye on how it works around injuries because we need to avoid A) players being left on when injured and B) a couple of injuries destroying the competitive aspect of a game

Like SmokeyTA is getting at with his point, injuries need to be taken into account. Because of that you really do need to have a hooker/HB on your bench otherwise if your hooker limps off after 10 mins you can be screwed.

You'd just have to do it almost like RU, sub your hooker off after 50-60 mins and then he's done and doesn't come back on. Risky especially for the likes of a St Helens who wouldn't want the likes of Roby off the pitch at the end of a match but each club will have different views on that.

Agreed.Only way off getting around this would be if you were lucky enough to have a player in the starting 13 who is versatile enough to cover various key roles.i.e Wilkin at Saints.Will certainly be a key thing sides will have to be thinking about moving forward.

It's a big risk to have a specialist on the bench just in case someone gets hurt, particularly if you're not going to use them otherwise.

Maybe McDermott's use of just 3 of his 4 replacements was actually a genius piece of preparation for these changes and getting the players used to having to do longer minutes?

With the change in subs rules, I'd think the make up of the bench will still be similar:
Two props
A back row forward who can play centre, or one of the starting back rows can.
A half/hooker, ideally a quick fella to bring on late.

Use four changes to split the game across the four props. Take one second row off at 20-30 mins and bring the sub on to play the rest of the game. The second row who went off come back part way into the second half. That leaves two changes, either swapping a half/hooker twice, or doing it once for the last quarter or so and keeping one change back.

I would guess that Leeds would look at someone like Ablett as cover for hooker rather than having a bench spot taken.

Stevie Ward?!

Or a with a player like Aiton who can play loose you can include that in your interchanges.

Yes I would consider Ward as someone like Ablett, a back row forward with good hands who can do the hard yards if necessary.

Problem with that strategy is that if you use two changes on your hooker you are effectively using your last interchange at 60-65 minutes to spell the other starting second-row.

That's too big a gamble IMO. You want to have one (if not more) interchanges up your sleeve heading into the last ten minutes just to cover for fatigue/late injuries.

Thoughts on Mullally remain the same as when we announced it he's a young forward with potential who'll add depth to our Prop rotation.
RE-Aiton IF he and his agent are playing the "we've had a better offer elsewhere what are you gonna offer?" card then he's as good as gone GH doesn't Fcuk about like that we all know that.