I'd go for Kearney and Jeffries to point the team around the field. If those 2 can form a decent partnership then we could have some real speed attacking the line. I know this means playing one slightly out of position but it could work??

Also..... Just watched the highlights against Harlequins. Jeffries seems to make a clean line break in every game he has played. I know everyone was a little down when he signed but he seems a different player to the one that was signed previously. Seems to have much more freedom in his game.

Our attack seems much better but I'm still not convinced by the defence.

We're looking like being very light up front Presumably Langley or Elima will have to do a stint at prop?

Shad will be staying at FB. Kearney into the halves with Jeffries.

seems a shame not to utilise briggs' kicking game. IF we do go kearney/ jeffries hope we dont continue the swapping idea. If kearneys playing SO then he plays it in attack and defense.

FB) Royston
W) Ah Van
C) Platt
C) Crookes
W) Raynor
SO) Kearney
SH) Jeffries
P) Lynch
H) Diskin
P) Kopczak
SR) Elima
SR) Whitehead
L) Langley

B) L'Estrange
B) Burgess
B) Olbison
B) Addy

Agree that it is hard on young Kyle mate but you can't keep out one of the best players of the last three weeks or move him out of his favoured position IMO.

It's a shame about Herbert but such is life.

shifting royston to strengthens a weak spot in team and allows us utilise kearney in his best position and use kicking briggs kicking game. seems more logical to me.

Seems pretty spot on, problem area in centre strengthend by a good solid player, as long as his positional sense is good at centre and slides instead of stepping up by himself (platt). kearney briggs Jefferies all 3 can cause problems and can create space for each other. Best combination in my eyes

Which side would you move him to? He doesn't look like a left centre to me and Ah Van has played well on the right.

I don't disagree that Briggs, Jeffries at half is best and BK is an exciting option attacking from FB but it just feels like a lot messing about. We're never the same set up/structure 3 weeks running. Bringing Herbert back in was strange and now we're thinking of changing the SH, FB, one of the centres and as I'm assuming we're not dropping Whitehead or Ah Van either a second row option or a winger.

Even when playing reasonably well and winning, Salford moved the ball across the park better and quicker than we did because they are more familiar with their attacking structure. Just as we're fighting for a little bit of form we're shifting most of the key pivots in the backline. I'm not sure this is wise.

I'd try Herbert at 13. Langley offers no creativity there, he's just a workhorse forward. I suppose it depends whether Potter wants to play safe or not.

and yet way we're set up now we have kearney,whitehead and ah van all playing out of position. In team I suggested whitehead kearney and ah van would all go back to their strongest positions and briggs would play his strongest positionwith only royston out of position, albeit in a position where hes already done a decent job this year. In terms of which side, I'd pair him with raynor, with platt and ah van on other side.

Just think we need a better kicking game against saints as they'll certainly bring one to table and could keep us pinned in our own half with fosters boot.

Yeah, fair enough, I'd just like us to stick with something for more than a fortnight to gain fluency across the line as I don't think our outside backs are as bad as they're made out to be if they got the ball a little quicker.

What I think will happen:What I'd like to happen

Royston Kearney
Ah Van Ah Van
Platt Platt
Crookes Royston
Raynor Raynor
Kearney Briggs
Jeffries Jeffries
Lynch Lynch
Diskin L'estrange
Koppy Koppy
Whitehead Elima
Elima Langley
Langley Addy

L'estrange Diskin
Addy Whitehead
Burgess Burgess
Olbison Olbison

Team I'd pick.

Royston
Crookes
Platt
Whitehead
Ah Van
Briggs
Jeffries
Lynch
L'estrange
Koppy
Elima
Sibbit
Langley

Olbison
Burgess
Diskin
Hargreaves if he's fit, if not Addy.