Its embarrassing when posters get all high and mighty that a player can not play anywhere but one position.

For a number of years now coaches have gone to pains to state that players need to be flexible in the modern game, and able to play various positions.

But no, let's just pigeon hole a winger as a winger and be done with.

Some may be doing that, but some just have a different opinion to you. Hall is one of the best wingers in the game. He offers advantage over every other winger he plays against in SL, usually in multiple facets. When you do a match up against another team, its always a win in that column. Do you think he has the potential to reach that level as a second row? What attributes do people think he has which will see him excel in that role? I'm sure he'd be competant, good even, but would he be world class? If not, we'd be a world class player down IMO

Not when you have just recruited an equally world class player in his position.

Did people moan when Lockyer was moved from Fullback to Stand off? there are a number of posters on here calling for Sinfield to be moved to hooker (probably same ones questioning a move for Hall) yet he was the leagues best Loose forward, then moved to stand off.

Delaney came here as a centre, was moved to the backrow, and a lot of posters (probably the same ones questioning a move for Hall) that label him the new messiah.

Across the pond there have been a number of sucessful switches of backs (wingers mainly) into forward positions over the years.

If he plays there and it fails, then you know, but until that happens it is a perfectly reasonable switch to try.

Each case should obviously be judged on its' own merits. I see no reason to move Hall off the wing, a position he has excelled in at International level. I've not seen anything, from his running style or defensive technique, to suggest he'd be suited to the 2nd row.

Your reference to Sinfield is completely invalid, he'd played at stand off many times previously. He was never a conventional loose forward. He plays more or less the same role at 6 or 13. Besides, he was by far the worst meter making 13 in SL, I think one reason he was moved was to give us another running forward.

I don't think anybody has ever Hall couldn't play another position, just that they don't think he should because he's already one of the best in his current one.
I think if he did play 2nd row he would go very well in attack, my concern would be defence and his tackling technique.

You could flip it 180 and say it's embarrassing that some are obsessed with players playing anywhere BUT their main position. If some got their way then the Leeds team would resemble Nathan Brown's Huddersfield team.

The point with Sinfield was the ones calling for him to be moved to Hooker.

Each case should be judged on its own merits, you are correct. Halls qualities, metre maker, and a great finisher. You certainly need to be a strong metre maker in the pack, but he has the added quality of been faster than most other packmen. He's very much in the mould of a Tony Carroll like player, and I for one would like to see it given a go.

If we had a coach with anything about him, I am pretty sure they would have tested Hall there by now anyway in low profile games to see if it was worth it going forward.

I don't see much in Hall's game to make him a back row, other than he's the right size and runs hard. What he's missing is front on defence, and a passing game - you've got to be able to pass to a player hitting a gap to play that position. You don't need to have the skills of a halfback, but you do need to recognise when a support runner is in a better position. I don't see that at all from Hall. He's a winger, and that's all. He could play fullback at a push.

I disagree that Briscoe is equally world class as Hall. He is good, but I would expect he'd be 3rd choice for England.

Players move position, but in order to make them more effective. Now that can either be that they have skills better suited to another position, or that they can no longer play that position due to something such as pace.

Hall certainly still has a very good mix of the qualities a top winger has. You certainly wouldn't move him because he was no longer a good enough winger. Would he be a better second row than a winger? I don't know. He'd be good at running out wide, but would he have the durability, or the stamina, or the ability to make 30 tackles a game? To be better than what we already have he'd need to develop an offload game too, which he may be able to do out wide when he's dominated someone smaller, but its a diferent game in the middle.

I'll ask again, other than his size, why do you think he'd make a top level second row?

Not convinced Hall wouldn't have a pass to equal or better anything Delaney has but he also has a good offload game. According to Opta Hall has 6 try assists and 35 offloads from his 26 Regular Round appearances in 2013 compared to Delaney's 0 and 7 from his 16 appearances. Hall has better stats in this area than Ablett also (5 and 12 from 22) and it's not even as if wingers generally get that much opportunity to show this aspect of their handling skills.

That said Hall for me had an issue with stamina earlier in his career which he has improved and managed on the wing but it could become an issue again with a move infield so I'd be leaving him where he is.

No reason we couldn’t just run some set plays with Hall attacking as a wide running 2nd rower without moving him in to the middle and throwing all that grunt work in attack and defence at him.

I too used to be an advocate of trying Hall in an inside position, but have now gravitated to keeping him on the wing: with Briscoe and Hardaker we will have three very good kick returners who don't get dominated and pushed back. Although Hall does not have great pace like Alan Smith he is one of the best finishers I have seen. He just needs more decent ball like Ablett gave him. The only question for me now is which wing to select him on. Briscoe is a left winger and we know Hall can finish just as we'll on the right..... Soooo.
I too would say his front on defence is poor and if he does stay on the wing he probably does need to shed a few pounds

Knowing our present coach this is just what he would do to him a la Stevie Ward ( and Watkins ) in his persistence in playing Burrow at hooker.

Were they passes to a support runner hitting the line (which is what you need to at least threaten, otherwise you're a magnet for defenders) ? I'd expect Hall's assists were tips of kicks, and passes inside following a break and being two on one with a fullback.

Agree on stamina. It's a very different kind of fitness that wingers (and fullbacks for that matter) need, compared to the rest of the squad.

He has openly mentioned (last time on TV a week back) that he started out as a winger, either way you have the potential to be leaving a class winger out of the 17, which one is it going to be?

As a Hull fan I'm gutted we didn't keep Broscoe's services, a lot of so called knowledgeable fans on the Hull forums have been saying get rid, not worth the money, he's not interested, he's no good, out of form yadda yadda.

Aside from his obvious attributes the only thing that lets him down is his positional play from a defence POV (he doesn't seem to have progressed in this area IMO) aside from that he's probably the best winger in SL at gaining you a penalty running it out of your 20, is as strong as anything (you saw that last season) and has plenty enough gas to live with the best (when he isn't being played injured as we did quite often )
In your side he should be getting 25+ tries a season easily

Given the number of genuine try-scoring opportunities/passes he's likely to receive on the wing at Leeds that figure will need to be close on a 100% conversion rate.

Despite Leeds finishing two places higher on the league ladder in 2013 than they did in 2012 they scored 23 tries fewer and looking back to their SL high try point in 2005 it's 77 fewer from just the one less opportunity. Whether that's in part due to a leveling up or a dumbing down in quality terms (depending on your point of view) for me it's a lot of entertaining moments to lose.