Really squaring up to a 17yo rookie is a bit of mongrel I call it embarrassing and he was being a bully if anything there's a difference same as the reason baily was generally disliked and disregarded as a good forward as he went after the smaller guys

Hill has been way off mark this year as have many in the team but his pens are always in bad positions first or last tackle on their line or on our own which is probably why sticks in mind more than some others and again born out of frustration at the teams performance and his own being below par from his own high standards!

Hills a solid prop but if we're hoping for an enforcer or for him to step into westwoods boots then hill is just not te man for all of his attributes then that's not one of them julien has put more big hits in this season that I have seen hill in his time with us again not a derogatory observation just don't think it's part of his game



I'd be looking at someone like Taylor or watts from hull to fill westwoods boots rather than anyone we have to step up.

Maybe he's been reading up on tactical biff.

Believe that Taylor only left Wigan because he wanted to be closer to home. This was before Hull's resurgence too, so I doubt he'll be going anywhere any time soon.

Correct. Taylor was desperate to play for his hometown club and when they showed some interest in him, Taylor signed a contract with Hull to move back over to East Yorkshire after his contract with Wigan was over. He did this though without telling/discussing it with anyone at Wigan first.

Wayne understandably hit the roof and that's why he hardly featured for you lot towards the end of his career at Wigan. He was frozen out.

Or so the story goes allegedly.

I only wish he had. No his penalties are daft nothings messing about in a tackle. Pathetic stuff really.
And for come on RD....no one is beyond critic when they are playing poorly. His niggles in defence cost us meters and another set of six to defend against.
Dumb.

I know the penalties are stupid. But so is the suggestion that because of those penalties we would be better off without Hill.

I haven't read that from anyone on here and neither have I said suggested it.

Isn't that what you meant? Because that is how I read it.

I read it as do his pros out weigh his cons?? I think this question is more often asked when he's just given a penalty away in our line

Westwoods pens are generally du to a bit of over exuberance hills just seem a bit out of character given his general high standards. I think he is prone to a daft penalty but his lack of fitness is probably adding to the count also so hopefully we will start to see that lower as he gets back to 100% match fitness

"better off without him" and questioning his on field presence on occasions, are two very different things.

Hill has some way to go to acquire the status of "penalty machine" which has rested firmly in the grip of Jack Hughes all season.

I don't want to get hung up on semantics. BUT "questioning hi on field presence" can only be interpreted as you feel we may be better off without him playing because the number of penalties he gives away outweigh his on field contribution. If there is another way of interpreting it please let me know.

He did something similar to Cuthbertson that got missed too.

Already posted

Sorry mate I didn`t see that on a previous posting.
I was just picking up the comments from this latest one.