I'm not so sure. We look well drilled, good defensive structure, strength in depth all across the park except in the most crucial area. Our playmaking/game management looks hugely over dependent on Gaskell and O'brien. Part of this is because Gaskell is the best player in the comp, part of it is injuries which happens to all teams, but a part of it is decision making. If OB gets injured, Halafifi will have barely played all season???? When considering our prospects for promotion all we have to go on is what's in front of us. I grant you, there's lots of positives, BUT this is a major concern.

Just win the next 5 games however scrappy, step up a level for the last two regular season games, peak for the Middle 8s.

No regular halves, players returning after lengthy injury absences and the wet weather being a 'leveller' may be amongst the reasons but it still didn't disguise the fact that we were very poor and Dews really deserved the spoils more than we did.

Plus points are we won whilst not playing well....soz, can't think of any more.

Take two play makers out of any of the middle 8 teams and they have zero creativity.

Although i did notice that Adam Brook scored another couple for Keighley today. I would love to see him get a shot as Addy at HB just doesn't work.

I suspect we'll see a halfback pairing of Mullaney and Siejka this weekend. Addy back at loose where he belongs.

Given Workington's result vs Fev I'd say it would be a good game to try a different combination.

I'm still not sure about Lauaki's contribution either but both he and Crossley were below par yesterday.

It may be to you, but it isn't to me. How many games would you "rest" OB and LG for, then? 10%? 25%? Which games? What if as a result you lost games?

I don't see Barcelona resting Messi much and giving his understudy say a quarter of the games. If OB is fit and ready then he plays. Same goes for Gaskell. They want to play, and I have never been a believer in resting players, or teams, for that matter, just for the sake of it - when did the extra week off for winning the league ever do anyone any proven good, for example? The best players want to play, and so they should.

Did I say "rest"? Or suggest it 'for the sake of it'? What is being suggested is to prevent more of yesterday in games which determine what league we're in next year.

I'd have;
(i) in the absence of our injured scrum half, played Halafifi in 100% of the games for precisely 38% of the minutes in each game, in order to add a playmaking dimension and protect OB's form (which is dipping) or,
(ii) sign a scrum half or,
(iii) give Brook a go

Doesn't Messi play a different sport?

Just watched 'Tarka The Otter'....great movie !

It's all very well saying "sign a scrum half" - but we already did that. How many scrum halves can we have? Who is good that would be available? Why would they sign if they are just cover? If you can say who realistically we might have signed that we culd afford and that would nevertheless be good, then you can make a case. Just saying "sign a scrum half" doesn't cut it.

I have always trusted the Bulls staff to look after the young players and I will back their judgment as to if and when to give Brook "a go". It's not an unreasonable suggestion but Lowes knows far better than you or I how ready Brook is to d a job. I wouldn't rule out his involvement this season.

I disagree OB's form is dipping. I think he just gets better.

Messi is of course scrum half for Barcelona. Unless I've been misinformed.

Agree on Brook but we have 8 props 3 hookers and how many full backs which I'm not knocking for minute - I love the big squad which as we all know can change in a minute, but ...... Danny Addy as back up scrum half alongside a full back who hasn't played in 3 months? Sorry, but this is a legitimate concern.

I’m sure Lowes and co share your concern. When we lost Gareth O’Brien on the eve of the season we had to recruit at the last minute after everyone was signed up already. Halfbacks are a scarce resource as it is. I suspect what we have is as good as we can get without paying vastly more than what someone is worth.

I think Mullaney is our best option at scrum half when paired with Gaskell. When those two were together we looked very dangerous. I think Mullaney and Addy is far from ideal but it’s a bit harsh to judge a pairing on one showing. I think they will improve. We just need to get more people running off Mullaney as he creates gaps with his style of running.

I agree it is a [ilegitimate[/i concern, I disagree that it's "[imajor[/i". It is what it is, but there's nothing we can do except use existing players to cover the positions, and even if there was another top halfback available, and we were flush, it makes no sense to replace Gaskell at huge expense for a month - then what? Sell? Drop Gaskell once he's fit? I don't see it.

From what little I've seen of Mendeika, maybe he could be given a run-out at halfback, he seems more than a bit useful.

If we continue to play as badly as against the Rams in Gaskell's absence then I will admit I am wrong and it is "major". But IMHO the standard of play wasn't as much to do with Gaskell being missing as just one of those lacksadaisical days when seemingly hardly anybody in the team, for some mysterious reason, can get going. Like they all have a virus and a migraine or something. They weren't as bad as they were solely - or even mainly - because of the absence of one player.

It was a blow to get backword on GOB but what a player we have in AOB. So if we have to recruit temporary cover then I propose DOB (Dara O'Briain)

Your the last poster I would have thought to have an O'Briain fart, he's a Union lad to be sure to be sure!