I don't see Philbin as anything other than a prop (or a prop playing at lose forward), I also don't see a problem with the quality of our second row. We know that Currie is class and that his fitness has returned. Hughes is solid.

In a world with a salary cap and a finite pool of quality players you cannot have top draw Internationals from 1 - 17. I don't know the details of Hughes', or for that matter Jason Clark's, salary but I doubt that they are 'stealing a wage'.

My issue is with the coaching / tactics. I'm sure that there is far more potential to Hughes' attacking game than is being realised under the '5 drives and a kick' mentality of Mr Price.

Apologies in advance for the moan here but Hughes isn't an attacking threat

He's a good squad man, more of a solid workhorse type whether that's him or the coaching is debatable, but I'd say in the time he's been with us we've had more steady Eddie years with him running lines that are easy to predict and often into blind alleys with perhaps one really good one a couple of years ago IMO

Not unhappy if he's in the 17 but if he's missing I'm not generally thinking if only he was playing.

Back on thread Philbin stays at prop for me '

I think it is very difficult to be a real attacking threat all the time ... defence is king. When we signed BMM I thought blimey he is it. Then I have watched McMeekin at Cas, Farrel, Ben Currie ... they all have quiet games (like everyone). He played for England only very recently. He's good.
He is very much an attacking threat if there is a clever man to shove him through a gap.

I can’t make up my mind if Hughes suffers from the lateral movement on that side or causes it. I’m tending to the former but I can easily be persuaded the other way. Who would be a coach...?

I just don't think the attack threat is there from him, he's never been an exciting player to watch. But like said above i'll never complain about him being in the squad, he's solid, dependable, very good defensively and puts a big graft in. I thought Gelling would have made a great attacking second rower but i guess we'll never know now. I would like Hughes at 13 but i can't see who would take a starting 12 position, i really like Robson but i think more experience before taking a starting spot is needed first. And if hughes went to 13 Price would simply put J.Clark at 12. I'm happy with Currie and Hughes as starting second rowers this year. Dependable and Currie is slowly creeping back to top form.

Philbin as a starting no13 with j clark on the bench for the first 20min to grind them down bench him for clark then put him on as impact second rower Ala bmm would be the option ?

do us a favour and re-read that, especially the bit, 'clark as an impact second rower, ala BMM'

He meant Philbin as the impact second rower.

ahh, reyt.

I read it as philbin starts then jase Clark comes on as a (very) low impact sub and then philbin comes back on as an actual impact sub.

We don’t need back row cover. Our backs are as big as backrowers.

So are you suggesting King to second row or is it Lineham ?

Keep up, Lineham is a middle.

Ok I’ll bite...
Neither, but both could do a job there, with King obviously being the preferred, but both of these players are good in the air, why would you want to move them in to the middle?

I’m my opinion, letting Livett go was a dropped bollox. There isn’t a utility player in SL I’d rather have sitting the bench than him....well technically GI, but that IS technically.

He is also a very naughty boy.