Leyland was fit, least injury was not cited as the reason for absence.

Nah Sam dropped a bollock there with that selection. Why sign a back up half and play him in all the preseason if you are not going to play him when your first choice half is out? What happened to "next man up" ?

Are we really going to see Ratch at halfback vs Wigan in Vegas?

I think the Leyland non-selection has been one of the biggest selection shocks, for so many, for some time. Why did we sign him? He'd looked so lively in the early games. He is likely to get his chance but he must be gutted.

Sam's selections have been refreshingly bold thus far, so yes, this one raised eyebrows all round, I think (except for Abe!). Leyland knew he was in a fight with Hayes for a starting spot, but he probably didn't expect to be behind Stef in the pecking order. It will be interesting to see if Sam sticks with Stef. As Wires71 suggests, taking on Wigan with Stef in the halves would be a big gamble, even by Las Vegas standards!

Even legends like Sam make mistakes, but as alluded to earlier, we did win after all. It's a different argument if we lost/lose with this selection.

My guess is Sam is just more confident with Ratch in there, I would imagine defensively he's a better option as well.

That said I expected - and hoped - we would see Leyland in these first 5 games to compare vs Hayes, I thought Leyland took the line on more and his kicking from hand was much better than we've seen from a Wire player in a couple of years.

As I said earlier, he has no pace, no kicking game and offers no creativity. At least Leyland can take the line on and has a half decent running game.

His team also finished the season bottom of the league.

Interesting how almost everyone on here knows better than Sam.
I can seen Steph being 7 in Vegas, and should we win that game, they’ll be some eggy faces on here.

If Steph is selected I’m sure we will all back him. I would like to see Leyland selected though, otherwise what was the point of singing him?

I don't think anyone is professing to "know better" than Sam, they are expressing their opinions. You do this all the time often with wild projections that turn up a bit wide of the mark. The opinion seems to suggest that playing a 37 year old in a crucial position that he has not played in much/effectively during his earlier career is a bit of a backwards facing choice when we have recruited an understudy.

Sam is, by his own admission, a new coach who will make mistakes like the rest of us. A classic example was the preparation for the CC Final which completely back fired. I also think our prep for the start of the season has been so-so based on the Hudds game.

But everyone is behind Sam, just raising eyebrows as we are entitled to do so. Plenty on here been watching the Wire long before Sam, and will so long after he has gone. He is not beyond critique.

As for eggy faces, I'll cope if we get the 2 points in LV, I just worry about Ratch not being able to lay a finger on French and us being nullified by the Wigan defence which will be a significant upgrade on Huddersfield's.

We will see.

So, following your rationale...why sign him?

Why play him in the pre-season games and not Ratchford?