Dobson is weak in defence, but inconsistant? no sorry you're way off the mark there, he can't perform behind a beaten pack like any half back but certainly doesn't go missing, and won many games for Rovers practically single handed.
His NRL failure is a bit of a strange one, whether it's his defence issues, or just his style of play that doesn't fit I'm not sure but he would walk into practically any team in SL.

The NRL like half backs that take a game by the scruff of the neck and just make things happen, Thurston, Cronk, Soward, Adam Reynolds, then previous generations such as Johns, Langer, Daley, Fittler, etc. All these players are solid defensively too. Dobsons form relies heavily on how the players around him are performing, if his pack is dominant, he controls a game really well. If he is playing behind a beaten group of forwards, he too is quiet, and that's not what NRL clubs want.

That is why I firmly believe you will never see Rangi Chase make a success of playing down under. He is totally unable to play to a structure and will only ever be a "world beater" when he is a big fish in a small pond. Look at his England performances for an indication.

I disagree with you. I really don't think he 'drops off for a rest'! It is clear from all the club has said that he has been recruited as our organiser and primary kicker, a bit of a Kevin Sinfield role I suppose without the leadership element. I think we need to be careful not to criticise him for things he isn't being asked or paid to do.

Alas, neither of the players who play alongside him have any mongrel about them and so we can't offer a Travis Burns complement to him. But would we want to have to rely so heavily upon one player as it appears HKR are doing yet again with Burns? I wouldn't want us to. I'd like to think we can mix and match our attacking threats, that Walsh can bring more players into our attack rather than just having to do the work himself. But also he is quite clearly capable of stepping up and doing something to give us a chance in games where we are being beaten or where we are struggling in some way, as he has clearly done so already on more than one occasion.

I also love some of the skills he shows and now that the team is getting used to him a bit, we are scoring a greater variety of tries as a result. For instance, a couple of months ago I doubt Wilkin would have scored the try he did against Huddersfield when he ran on to Walsh's chip near the posts. But the players are reading him better just as he is learning about the limitations and skills of his team mates.

One area in which he is inconsistent is his defence. Sometimes he can pull off really great tackles and then other times he gets skinned with ease. I don't know whether he just has poor technique or doesn't fancy rolling around in the dirt! But even with that weakness in his game I'm really happy he is with us because I think he's made a massive and very positive difference to us. Long may that continue!

Speaking of Travis Burns, did anyone else see his interview on Boots n All this week? He's a very endearing character. Pity we couldn't have him as well. He'd knock seven bells out of anyone in his path.

Burns is supposed to be nailed on as is Ryan Hampshire, but we are losing Walsh, so we still need a 7 IMO.

We aren't losing Walsh.

I'd be very very happy with Burns. IMO he's a top super league player. He plays the game hard and very skilful clever player. He'd certainly be my number one target for 2015 with a good prop. That's my two priority positions I think we need.

Burns would be a very competent replacement to hohaia (assuming he is going, and wheeler too) - my concern is having to pay a transfer fee for him. I can't help but feel there would be better options to go for, if transfer fees come into play. Until it's announced hohaia and wheeler are going, the top priority should be backrow and prop.

I'd pay a fee for Burns. He looks the sort that will have no problems to settle at all.

Who are the better options ?

For me, if were paying transfer fees/ player swaps - then the obvious is Sneyd - he could be groomed with Walsh for a few years before taking over the reigns. (I genuinely believe a sob story returning jordan turner to his home town club England knights international saints player of the season, would move koukash's stubborn position!) the other transfer fee option would be ratchford, who whilst may automatically written off, might be available at the right price given the talk in Warrington of the halfback over haul, and would compliment Walsh really well with his running game.

Failing that, and moving away from transfer fees, I reckon jordan rankin at hull could be worth a punt - rumour has it he will be victim to the mass clear out, and I think has suffered from hullitus - aka not being used as effectively as he could be. Strong runner and done a decent job from what I've seen (albeit limited)

I'd take Burns over Sneyd every day of the week. Burns is a proven super league player with that aggression and fire we are missing. People don't see past his "dirty" player tag but he's a very clever player.

I'd have ratchford without a shadow of a doubt but it will take a big big fee to get him and we won't pay big money for anyone.

So Burns and Hampshire are nailed on? Where's Hampshire gonna play then?

I don't think they are. I know we won't Burns and not sure how that's gone but heard nothing on Hampshire at all. Hasn't Hampshire just signed a new deal ?

Depends what Warrington have planned for their halfback clear out he's never really nailed down his position so if a reasonable offer came along at a time when they need cap space to pull off whatever audacious plan is supposedly in place you never know.

Sneyd has a key advantage over burns in time. He's not as complete a player yet as burns granted, but I think he a) has the potential to be international class and b) complements Walsh a lot better - there's a potential that burns and Walsh will clash as both try and control the team.

Rankin could be the next hooper with the right coaching, the exact type of player were missing from our squad...

Oh I agree, but having a fully fledged, peaking 6 now means 2/3 years down the road well be in the same position with Walsh moving on and burns on a downward slope. Sneyd is already better that what we have now as a 6, and can be our long term 7 if Walsh moves on. It's all about stability as you say, and buying in a 30 year old only postpones it temporarily. That's fine, but for a fee I'd like a little more stability.