Kearney has gone backwards in the time he has been with us. He was way better when he arrived, and I am sure other clubs (Wigan possibly?) were sniffing around.

Its good we now have membership cards as he'd drop all the loose change....

Caisley made the big decisions, didn't he? Bringing back Foxy, taking a chance on Robbie Paul, dumping Fox (and effectively Newlove) for Brian Smith, giving Elliott and Noble their chances. Said Nobby was the one who wanted Iestyn though.

In the years where we punched above our weight, Caisley's key calls were crucial.

I must be watching different games to some of you guys I think. Are we talking about the Kearney who's fantastic leap created the try for Sammut at Cas and scored the
match winning try later in the game? The Kearney who's kick created Crookes try versus Wigan and also scoring a try himself later in the game.That's four tries in the last two games alone that have resulted directly from Kearney. Yes his defence is weak and he needs to improve there, but so do the players in front of him. If we're looking for players not pulling their weight, there is a long list before we reach Kearney IMO.

Caisley was indeed the man behind the force and the superteam that the Bulls became. He completely ruined his copybook with Harrisgate, and I'll never understand that as long as I've got a hole in my harris, but we should never forget that we basically owe those glory years to him, however he did it.

We don't have that much class in the team, but Kearney is class, sure he can't hit the man clean through like Mumby but who can? He's certainly not a turnstile. When faced with 3 men clean through even Sir Keith would sometimes need a machine gun. Kearney also made a couple of fantastic last ditch tackles against Wigan which I saw close up from the Coral Stand. If he is not the world's greatest ever tackler, that isn't his fault, he is not a player I can readily remember letting us down and I would never accuse him of lack of effort or application. And he is easily our best f/b.

I agree Kearney is okay when the team is attacking but his defence still has a big question mark.

Under the high ball (in Defence) he does seem okay, but everything else (tackling, positioning etc) needs to improve. Don't worry, I'm not judging his poor defence based on how he performed when against 3 attackers. But when Pat Richards is running down the line and Kearney's positioning is sooo poor that he is nowhere near the ball, questions do arise.

kearneys defensive rating is in proportion to those in front of him. last round Lulia 50 % missed tackle rate and Platt 30% missed tackle rate. Kearneys 66%. A full back that can both attack and defend is ideal, but one out of the two will do if the rest of the team is doing the other.

The only situation where criticism is justified is probably the Richards break down the wing. In all the other occasions he just got stepped, simple as that. Most fullbacks in the league would struggle to stop any of those breaks.

Don't forget his positioning issues with kicks. I think the fullback is responsible for setting the foundation for the next attack, but he's always turned round, even on a poor kick.

don't want it to be a Kearney bashing thread, but just take note in future games of where he's stood on the 5th

Oh please, most Full backs wouldnt get stepped, most would nail the attacker in a 1 on 1 situation. Kearney nearly always gets stepped. If he was a Brett Hodgson or a Sam Tomkins with the ball in hand, or even a Brent Webb or Wade Mckinnon then it wouldnt be so bad because his attack would more than make up for his lack of ability in defence. As it stands now he's a crap defender and a mediocre attacking player too. Just not good enough.

Come to think of it, I would rather have Platt at FB yes, at least he makes some ground returning the ball and runs hard and fast back at the line.

And occasionally tackles........

You would think Potter of all people would be able to improve his game as he was a pretty good f/b in his day