OK sent/offered, we shall use your definition, if he is offered to Fev he will not be going there to be not in the side. Of course we are all assuming he will be sent on loan, he may start off with 5-6 games in academy to get his RL skill back up before going anywhere, he may bypass dual reg all together and go straight into first team squad, we simply do not know how good he is yet. Yes he has not played open age pro RL but has played open age Scottish pro union.

Our two main halfbacks have just signed fulltime deals so I don't think we need him. Bringing in loan players can disrupt a squad so no thanks this time. We'll keep Lilley I reckon when his deal runs out.

Agreed, it seems to have worked pretty well for both sides, I think because there at least appears to be a bit of give and take from both sides.

Rejects Mullaly etc

Particularly when it came to the 8s split and one on the partners struggled to put out 17 players.

I know and the other partner was awash with fit players and not trying to avoid relegation.

Lolohea can play 1 or 6. At present you'd say the most likely is for him to start at 6 with Walker at fullback. However, I have some doubts about a Myler-Lolohea combination being able to control games (no doubt they will show flashes of brilliance but not sure they have much game management between them).

Given the fact that McClelland will be on wages far higher than anyone with his complete lack of experience in first grade, the club clearly has huge wraps on him and expect him to force his way into the team sooner rather than later. I've no doubt he might start on DR, but I personally wouldn't be surprised if he ends the season as our starting 6. Mind you, he could be another Richard Gunn as well.

I wouldn’t mind a Lolohea/McClelland 6 and 7 in another year or so. Myler has done well since joining us but he’s a player I’ve never got enthusiastic about personally. He has a nice passing game but doesn’t offer enough overall for mine. We need to be sticking players in their preferred positions and letting them develop. We’ve f’d around with lots of second rowers at prop, Sutcliffe at ?, Moon at 6. I never thought Burrow was a hooker in a million years and it frustrated me we didn’t play him at 7 all the time (he should have played far bigger minutes for Leeds in his career latterly). Even now, is our interest in Merrin or Taupau as big back rowers or as cart horses? For me a balanced team is a successful one and for too long we’ve been winging it. A balanced unit with different and complementary threats will usually beat a side of talented individuals IMO. We haven’t been near good enough in the pack for years, the links haven’t been working and the good back line we’ve had therefore hasn’t had much chance to shine.

Interesting how Myler was brought in to the side as some sort of saviour and that Lilley was deemed not good enough.
What is the main difference between the two when it comes to the following:
passing in broken play.
passing from dummy half.
short kicking game
long kicking game
taking the line on
putting players in to space
tackling/defending
and finally pace.
Fwiw I see little difference in the two but then again I`m no expert.

I never understood signing Myler, felt like a desperation/ need some one type of signing.
We have needed an organising HB since Sinfield left, still don't have that three years later

Myler seemed to be going well at the start of the year but agree with those that suggest he just doesn't offer quite enough for me. Particularly in big games. As early as the Cas game at Elland Road he dropped his chips in front of the posts when we were on the hunt to get back level. Obviously, there were far bigger issues than Myler last year but always strikes me as a player that scores a hat-trick when you when 52-16 but rarely comes up with a match winning play.

To pick Myler out after the complete turd show we served up last year is bizzarre start with an ageing weak pack a non existent 6 and a Coach with no idea before even getting to Myler.