Whilst stating the blindly obvious, we desperately need him back.

Stop making things up.

Aiton's injured.
Burrow's been our back up hooker pretty much all season, but he's injured.
Sinfield has played hooker many times including for England and won man of the match playing hooker, for England against NZ.
Robbie Ward isn't good enough.
We don't have anyone else.

The coach went with Sinfield last weekend but we lost, so in your deluded opinion that means the coach doesn't know what he's doing.
Sorry I should rephrase that to avoid confusion... he doesn't know what to do about the loss of Aiton AND Burrow and the fact that Robbie Ward isn't the answer.

Feel free to post your opinions on a message board, that's why it's here. But also be aware that people will respond to them, often pointing out the fact that you're very wrong, like i'm doing now.

What is made up? a comment was said that the coach doesn't know the solution for the loss of Aiton, and you jumped in with accusations about slating the coach. That is correct, yes?



Aiton is Injured

Burrow has not being our back up hooker, infact the club also had three games on the trot before his injury to use Burrow to replace Aiton, and decided it was not the answer.

Sinfield has played hooker, but is he effective to how the team has being structured to play this year? is he not better where we need him the most, in the halfs?

Robbie Ward isn't good enough in your opinion. An opinion you feel only you are correct on, and not allowing others to have that opinion. For a guy who it appears from your postings times, rarely goes to a match, doesn't attend academy matches, and would bet my house has not attended an Hunslet match, that is quite a big call for you to make.

We do have someone else, we have a specialist hooker, or we utilise someone else in the halves and go with Sinfield. So yes there is another solution.



Because someone doesn't agree with you it is deluded? even though you can't even get your first point correct. The coach went with Sinfield against Saints also, and we lost. The coach did against Wigan and Hull KR, and the attack (despite 50 at Wembley) was seriously stumped in comparison to what it was before Aitons injury, and on each occasion (Including Wembley) I have raised this same point. So no, it isn't based on one match.





But it isn't wrong is it? No more wrong than you. At the moment it is not working, and I bet the coach will change it. But if he doesn't and he goes with what we have, and we end up winning the GF, I will very welcome you telling me I am wrong then. But until that point, it is not wrong.

Brian McDermott has seen a lot of Ward, though, and seems to share l81's opinion on him. From what I've seen he's not as good as either of the 2 previous academy products we released were at the same age, and I don't think he'll play again for the club.

Sounds a fair assessment. Typical that McShane should choose to put in a decent performance last Thursday, found myself wishing he was still on our books. Hopefully come Thursday night I'll be glad he isn't once more.

Really it was only two because Burrow was needed at 7 vs Hull with McGuire rested. The Cuthbertson selection also made sense vs Wigan due the opposition and the weather on the day to have a load of beef in the middle.



Again to point out the Wigan match took place in very wet conditions that was always going to nullify our attacking style. The Cup Final we did ok, granted not as attacking as other times but you find that is usually the case in a final. The Saints match, the whole team looked knackered and we had Burrow, Watkins and Hardaker missing.

Im more worried about the Giants than Wigan and Saints. Living in Huddersfield, my life will be pretty crappy if they win the GF.

But the argument is that he is our back up hooker to Aiton. They could have used him then at hooker.




The point is though, is that the opinion is made not on the result, but on the performance. Hardaker, Watkins are backs, and Burrow wouldn't have started the matches anyway. Yet the forwards are the ones not performing, because of how slow we are at dummy half, and that there is only one outlet at half to move them around.

To put it another way. The decision in how we are playing, with Sinfield at hooker and one half would have happened regardless of Burrow available, so far. Do you think he will continue with that selection? I don't, and why I said he has not come up with solution, because he hasn't. I however, expect him to change that now, which will be an alternative solution, and one I suspect could have already being available for him to utilize.

If he goes with Burrow at nine on his return then he did come up with the solution....about 4 years ago. He just tried a different one first this time.

Also think you're trying to lump too much of the last 2 games on the hooking role alone. It's a team wide problem of hitting a dip. Like I said the other day, had we had a fit Aiton in France then we'd still have taken a beating.

Don't get me wrong I'm a big Aiton fan and the last time we had a 'Who is your player of the year so far' thread I picked Aiton around Round 20 time. But the last two weeks/performances are about much more than the just the hooker situation.

but burrow wasn't replacement as he still only came off the bench. even then sinfield still jumped into dummy half.

I am trying to teasel out what your solution is, as you are being deliberately obscure. You stated that we should not play a half at hooker so that must mean you would play R Ward at any cost? Or any one else except a half back?



Well what is certainly not in debate is that that you enjoy the full allowance to voice criticism as is your wont.




No the back up hooker is Burrow or Sinfield. The coaches know from the training field if a player is ready to step up. Robbie Ward has had several chances in the 1st team and again at Hunslet and although I am not privy to their thinking it is obvious to me that they have serious doubts about him currently. So you should not be critical of the coach for not putting RW to the test if they deemed him not ready. Whereas Lilley and Golding are regarded as ready.



"better" in your opinion but not at all costs surely? you are failing to acknowledge that young Ward may not be up to it yet. You have no idea how he has performed in training or if he has progressed or regressed neither do you know his mental toughness. The coaches have a duty to young players and you cannot expect a 18/19 year old to be physically up to a long stint at 9 with limited SL experience. Moving Sinfield to 9 is not disrupting the whole team. And he has high level experience in this position. Are you saying young Ward is a better hooker than Sinfield?




I do understand this point but we have been faced with a set of unfortunate circumstances having to play without Aiton, Burrow and Sutcliffe meaning a compromise somewhere.

You have been making out that this is all down to the loss of Aiton which if so would mean the most important thing is to replace Aiton with the best person for this position.... which is what Mac has done.

However it is not just about the loss of Aiton is it? Burrow has quietly been very effective off the bench whether at 9 or 7 and his loss should not be underestimated. Add to this Watkins being injured on top of losing JJB and finally (I hope) Keinhorst and the side is totally disrupted. Once momentum is lost form and timing can go out the window. While all the the top 8 rested we have had to play a Wembley Cup final in the middle of all this which always has a draining effect too.

So there is no guarantee that had Aiton played in our two recent losses we would have won because most of the other players were well under par while both opponents put in best performances.

And I was going to go to bed too...

Stop making things up as in, stop putting words in my mouth. You do that alot on here.

Burrow has been back up hooker for MOST of the season like I said. Him and Sinfield between them have covered hooker all year when Aiton's been off the pitch. So he didn't play hooker in a handful of games, so what.

Yes our attack isn't as fluid without Aiton (it was good enough to beat Wigan and put a record score on at Wembley though) Guess what? We don't convert as many tries without Sinfield, we concede more tries without Hardaker at the back, make less offloads when Cuthbertson's off the pitch... Not really sure what your point is there other than to state the bleeding obvious.

Robbie Ward isn't good enough in the coach's opinion. I maybe didn't make that clear in my last post but it was pretty obvious in EVERY post I made before that. Do you really need things spelling out? I've not seen enough of him but when I have he's hardly set the world on fire and the thought of him running out as our hooker in the semi is pretty worrying..

As SGTWilko's just said on another thread....



Cannot be d replying again, we're just going round in circles.

But.... Sinfield and Burrow by plenty.

And in what role? Because you seem so keen to have a bit of a fit each post, you seem to have actually lost what has being put and what you are actually arguing.

I'm worried about Wigan, Saints and Huddersfield.

Us, Saints and Wigan were all poor at the weekend whereas Huddersfield have really stepped it up lately, the only thing that might let them down is big game experience but they are more than capable of beating anyone at the moment.

The next four weeks certainly look interesting.

I am more worried about us!