Just on the size of backs, surely by now scouts will realise that tiny nippy lads are likely to only be viable as halfbacks? Are we still in the mindset of "you're big, you must be a prop" thinking at junior level? If anything the trend to bigger outside backs is increasing. There's barely a small threequarter in the whole NRL now - most get peppered to death by crossfield kicks and end up being replaced by bigger guys.

To be honest, I wish the sport would do something about kicks. All this hoof-the-ball-sky-high stuff is a depressingly negative style of play more suited to god-awful union. It's getting that way now that teams are better suited to scoring points from kicks than they are crossing the line ball-in-hand.

The fact that we are now picking bigger and bigger players in the backs smacks of the same retarded thinking which killed football for two decades in this country.

Scrums are also a joke! slows the game down so much as players use it as a time to take a breath, one time players used to pack down quickly.

For many, many years Wayne Bennett didn't consider tries scored from kicks as a defensive mistake. He'd say something along the lines of [i"once that ball hits the foot it's a lottery what happens next".
[/i
There's something seriously wrong in the game when a beautiful piece of skill nets you no more points than a ball which is finger-tip touched after ricocheting off three players and a post.

I thought you were picking him up from the airport?
Ah shucks!

KC confirms signing (sorry if already posted) www.superleague.co.uk/article/32 ... et-to-sign

KC confirms signing (sorry if already posted) www.superleague.co.uk/article/32 ... et-to-sign

It remains to be seen whether this guy is any good. It is disappointing that we've not gone with one of the kids, tho.

If the coach thinks no-one is even close to breaking through at full-back with a few games of the season remaining then it seems very unlikely that anyone from the juniors is close to making the step up in six months when the new season starts.

Sometimes you've just got to think outside the box and try players in unusual positions. Wellens is a classic example of such thinking. I don't think ANYONE seriously believed he'd make a career at fullback when he first emerged into the first team.

Heaven forbid this guy gets a serious injury too. We'll end up in a farcical situation.

Not really as he's only signed to the end of the year on loan. The club could also have built a caveat into the loan that he would return if he received a season ending injury. Eels win as it gives him first grade experience and a chance for them to review his progress and also provides a shop window for him and the club if they choose they don't want him next year. Win, win if we've been prudent over the arrangements.

I would rather give a kid a go too. However it is hard to see which Junior could adapt to the role. Ricky Bailey is injured and had a dodgy start to his career against Hull at Easter. While no one else to mind fits the bill.

I suspect that if we had to made do we would use a player like Swift, Charnock or stick with Percy. Then get a young player like Ashworth or Fleming to cover in the back line. So you are weakening two positions and you are one more injury away from completely being up the creak without a paddle.

If the club have the space they should fill the gap and then if things get worse we can have a reshuffle.

Quinlan sounds like a useful player and from what I have heard will be good cover for 6,7 and 9 also.

I'd just play Charnock. Sure, Quinlan is a more experienced player. But any advantage in experience must be weighed against the experience someone like Charnock already possesses working with this bunch of players. Quinlan has all that to make up.

Most overseas recruits don't begin to show their worth until six-months-plus into their first season. Which means whatever talents Quinlan possesses we aren't likely to see them in full.

Charnock isn't a full back though. Yes he played there a but for the 19's but he's visibly bulked up now with a view to playing hooker long term.

Neither was Wellens. Neither was Paul Atcheson. Neither was Lomax. Looking at the size of Quinlan I'd say he was a half-back before anyone selected him as the last line of defence.

The truth is players tend to start their careers in other positions and then move toward full-back. This is why I don't have a problem selecting someone like Charnock.

I mean, given Percy's fly-paper hands, brick-wall defence and rugby brain I reckon he'd make a cracking full-back.

Of course he would, it's not the point though is it? Roby would probably make a good fist of it too but he's needed elsewhere.

If we want to take out the title I think it's important we have a threat in the centres on both sides of the pitch.

Percy in the centres and AQ at fb is the way to go IMO unless AQs line defence shows up as poorly as Percys did last weekend.

I'm very happy we've brought AQ over, after all were bound to pick up more injuries in the backs at some point.

Charnock is definitely not a full back. It doesn't matter if Wellens, Atcheson, Lomax weren't when they started, they have the build to play it and have always been backs. Charnock has bulked up to play hooker, you will not see him playing at full back again.

If anything, he started as a full back (I think) and moved into the pack as he's grown. He won't go back now, he's too big.