Diskin and Buderus are both seventy minute plus number nines. That is where all the 'what now for Diskin?' questions came from after the Buderus' signing was announced last year.

As Buderus reaches match fitness and sharpness it makes less and less sense having Diskin in the seventeen except for the general lack of available forward options.

It takes time for an overseas player to settle into a new enviroment both on and off the field. I think Buderus is finally getting there.Might be a while before he gets invited to Sinfields house for his tea though.

I couldn't agree more, i have a high regard for Diskin when he's bang on form, but he will sadly never be in the same class as Buderus is, so which player is going to get the majority of game time when it comes to the big games when both are fully fit, or are both players going to be in the 17?

Will the player omitted from the starting 13 be a compliment to the side on the bench, or will they be taking a spot better served by an extra prop/second row?

I personally havn't seen enough proof of how the side will be better served with both players in the 17 each week, although i'm not saying that it can't work, i personally believe that we are weaker in the go forward department when we have two nines in the squad

Could we ever envisage the scenario that Bluey could leave one of them out of the 17 entirely in the GF if we made it?

Broughton was loaned to Hull (is he still there?). It hasn't made that much difference to his 1st team experience. Played in a home defeat to Wakefield and hasn't featured since with Hull preferring Graeme Horne on the wing.

I'd look to send McShane to Featherstone (if Powell was willing) for the rest of the season and take Jon Fallon in exchange to have a look at him in SL with Leeds.

That would be a good idea if it could happen a good Coach who knows how to bring Young lads on, To leave him playing in the Reserve Academy isn't doing much for his career IMO and a Loan out to the Co-operative Championship in a competitive side which also happens to be local would help him out alot...

Don't agree with dropping diskin and bringing in mcshane. I personally and i doubt many others know how well he is playing, and i think suddenly dropping diskin would majorly disrupt the team. I think Mcshane is a real Gem that like Watkins should be carefully developed. I don't think throwing him into the deep end will help. There is plenty of time. If Diskin continues this run of bad form yes very well bring in mcshane but not ATM imo.

Why do you dislike Buderus?

Thought buderus played well we are seeing what he can do. If he keeps playing well and play like he does in the origin games he will have been a good buy for the club.

If Buderus is going to play for long spells as we know he can, it's hardly throwing McShane in at the deep end by giving him 20 mins a game.

How is McShane going to prove he can cut it at SL level without playing SL?

If that was to happen then Diskin might as well look for a new club?

Life is hard, isn't it.

In an ideal world he'd stay, leaving us with a Diskin McShane tandem for 2011.

Nobody is suggesting playing McShane every week just yet are they?

I am certainly not, just pointing out that it's difficult to get experience without playing.

2011 is only a season and a half away. what do we do then if we don't have Buderus or Diskin? Buy another top class aussie hooker to spell with McShane?

What are Saints going to do without Cunningham?

Roby's only been in the team as regular for two full seasons. He's got his experience from playing. Next year he will be Saints number 9.

Funny because if McShane was Buderus number 2 for next two seasons, it would be a similar situation.

Roby is only used to playing in spells. With Cuningham gone he is the only hooker unless they sign someone. He would probably be knackered if left to play a full game.

They have scott moore to return from the giant's!!

Correct. Because they sent him out on loan to super league teams for 2 years. Good planning if you ask me.

Saints got rid of a good hooker in Higham, to make way for Roby to play the spells in tandem with Cunningham. They sent the next in line out on loan to super league to get more experience ready for when Cunningham finished.

It would be the equivalent of us getting rid of Diskin to not hold McShane back. Use McShane as the second hooker to Buderus, and send out the next person in line out on loan for more and more experience.

Of course you have to build into that risk factors, such as can Buderus go injury free'ish.

plus the fact that when we don't have diskin and buderus in 2011 our first choice and only hooker is a teenager with very little experience

What if!!!!

Leeds have had offers to Loan Macca but Macca has said he'd rather train and keep pushing for a First Team spot?

Roby has over 150 appearances albeit about two thirds as sub. I know his debut was early 2004, but with an average of 35-40 games a season, thats at least four years of near regular appearances.

The other difference of course is that Saints sent Moore out on loan to clubs they knew weren't a threat to them in terms of league position. Are there many clubs in that position who Leeds would feel comfortable lending first team squad members to?

Good point Mr Gilder.

Although the club previously have stated that they would not hold back a player from playing against his club. They let Scruton and Botham play against us whilst on loan.

I'm not suggesting McShane playing every week but unless Brian McClennan is thinking of playing him in 8/10 First Team games this season i'd rather have him out on loan than playing Reserve Academy level...

Well Scott Moore is out of contract at the end of the season so it's a case of whether St Helens want him or whether he wants to go back to them ...