Don't disagree with most of what Chapylad, R-R et al are saying. I guess where I'm coming from is that there have been several opportunities for Webb to take the stand off slot and the coaching staff have always avoided it - is there a reason, something they see in Webb, that makes them think that playing him at 6 is not as good an option as many of us think it might be?

Just because he's named at stand off doesn't mean he has to defend between the centre and winger.

If you wanted to save some energy for him to get involved with ball in hand he could always drop back and defend at full back with whoever is named at full back moving up into the line when Leeds are defending.

so he will return the kicks and then get involved as our main pivot. will the player defending in webbs spot also be linking up in attack where webb would normaly fit in as an extra pivot out wide. not sure if that will work, will it be too much messing around, its not for a couple of weeks its for 4 or 5 months. the person fitting into the line to defened must be upto it and beable to attack. mcguires' defence has progressed to the point where he puts some real solid shots in and comes up with good defensive plays.

Agreed. It's all becoming pretty much irrelevant now-a-days anyway.

I remember Wigan '09 when we named JJB at hooker. We just played with 5 forwards. I reckon he must've been at Dummy Half like 10 times max the whole game??

How many times do you see a different scrum if we're defending to if we're attacking?? Practically every time. They don't enforce the positions on players. You don't have Silverwood forcing Kirke in at second row if Delaney packs down instead.

It's just about getting the ball playing attacking players on the pitch. Name who you want where you want these days. Name Webb at 6. Whether or not he stands exactly where McGuire stood in the line doesn't matter as long as there's no gaps.

Plus we'll have half a season to work on it anyway. I think the main crux of this "Replace McGuire" debate, is... pick ONE PERSON to replace him and stick with that (a side from injury to the replacement). Trying Webb one week, then Sinfield the next, the McShane etc. Use preseason and training for that. But then give [whoever] and the team a chance to settle to the role.

The stand off doesn't get involved in the first couple of plays after a kick return on most sets. They tend to be either dummy half runs from the outside backs or hit ups from the forwards. Webb can bring back the kicks then chip in on tackles four and five in the attacking play.

If it is BJB at full back, he runs good supporting lines and picks up offloads rather than playing as a pivot anyway - a completely different style of attacking full back to Webb and more of a direct replacement in that sense for McGuire.

Yes agree with your comment re the bench. I was meaning more so if we had to play a back on the bench. But take your point that we have enough SR`s to fill in if needs be.

Completely agree with this and i personally would prefer we lined up this way.

I agree. But more importantly for me is that Sinfield is one of our best defenders in that team, constantly making about mid 30 plus tackles per match. The only time he did not achieve that was when moved to half back, which you would expect from a half back. However, taking Sinfields defence away from the pack is a harder job to fill than a lot realise.

Which probably goes back to Remarkable Rhinos posts previously that there is a bigger change to the team as a whole putting Sinfield to stand off than putting Webb there.

It's been a success in the past like, but that is not a given that it will be going forward.

Agreed. I think it is a part of his game that is overlooked sometimes. You go away remembering the big hits ie Kyles and one that sticks in my mind Bailey putting Moz on his .but sinny does get through a lot of defensive work and still performs in attack!