Was speaking with ross heppenstall (bulls t & a writer) on twitter this morning and he said he may not be right, but he had a feeling bulls are not goin to replace lynch and are going to go with what we have. Surely not i hope? Lynch needs replacing priority!

Given that Lynch didn't want to leave but Peter Hood practically forced his hand, I assume for financial reasons, it would not be massively surprising if we didn't recruit a replacement.

it'd be incredibly ridiculous, as any sane person can see we are desperate for another couple of forwards, but not surprising.

Wouldn't surprise me but, if true, we need to see much more from the props we have and, imo, they have the ability to step up their game!

edit

Burgess, Kopzack are improving very well.... Scruton, Hargreaves have been steady away to say the least this season.... Crossley is not good enough. We rnt ready to "go with what we have got". We need another forward!!

hmm... seems rather at odds with what the same journo wrote only this Saturday, quoting Hood directly;

rlsearch is onrl

[iThe Bulls are expected to sign a new prop and wing to replace Lynch and Raynor but Hood insists the search for new talent is not confined to specific positions.
He added

So I don't think we're going with what we have, just that they don't have anyone signed up yet.

think it is a bit of a smoke screen to be honest.

it might not be a direct replacement, for example as others have suggested Langley to prop and a quality back rower to replace him there. or if you are cynical, Hood is saying what he needs to, that they are looking but without being specific, which most fans will be quite content with.

You would hope. In terms of an 'on-paper' aspect I'd suggest we might look strong enough. Hargreaves and Scruton are credible front rowers but their form dipped last year. Burgess still has some way to go but his potential is enormous, I can't over-emphasise that enough. And Kopzcak came on leaps and bounds in 2011 and could well lead the line. Like I say, on paper things look OK but the game ain't played on paper.

I'd like to see one more front-rower come through the door to supplement the quality we already have.

Luckily his feelings don't determine club policy on signings. I'm sure he is as clueless as the rest of us at the moment but i am quitely confident we will sign a player to replace Lynch or as is suggested a back rower to subsidise Langley to the Props.

Desperately need another prop. Will scruton go back to being a decent prop or Is he too injury prone? burgess cannot be relied on playing just 10 minutes and whilst on the pitch constantly dropping the ball. I'd have to say Hargreaves and Kopczak will have to step it up incredibly but will they become the work horses who are flogged like lynch was with the potential of thrn picking up injuries? Not one of them can even compare to andy lynch, his talent, game time, scoring abilities. Without a replacement we are f&cked

Nail on head. We have never been f&cked with Lynch, but clearly with no Lynch, we will be f&cked, that's the end of being shoo-ins for the top 8.

I think for me we need that replacement but we also need to share that workload around a little, one of the reasons he made so many yards was he was given the ball probably a little more than he should (in reference to sharing the workload, not his ability). It's time we played a team game and not look at individuals to pull us out of the mire

absolutely spot on AB. Hargreaves and Scrutons form has dipped in 2011 if you compare their standardised statistics eg carries per game, metres per carry, tackles per game etc for the last couple of years. If they get back to previous performance levels, and Koppy makes just half the improvement he made last season, and Tom continues to improve without losing that 9 meters per carry, then Lynchs contribution is covered. One post is using the wrong measure of Toms contribution, as his carries per game is not that far off the rest, not bad for 10 minutes on the pitch, so clearly massive scope for much more go forward from him, play him for forty minutes and he will be in Australia... where he doesnt contribute so much is tackles and his missed tackle % is higher than the other props but much higher than Andy, so thats where we would fall short. his errors as a % of carries is as the poster correctly pointed out also high. So as you say AB cover is really the issue, whether existing players being flexible or an addition.