Mitch Brown most definitely is a full back, he looked comfortable, returned the ball with purpose and linked well in attack. I was impressed with him.

I was also impressed with Willie Tonga who I think is still a top SL class centre with plenty to offer. Leeds got no joy down his flank all night and he was a threat to their defence each time he touched the ball.

The question for me now would be is Mitch Brown still a full back if Tonga or indeed Crooks is ruled out?

I am inclined to say yes but it does pose us a big dillema.

Harold ,needs must every time, don't forget we have Curtis Naughton to choose as well , it seems Curtis can play full back, wing ,or centre and has pace to burn, why bring him on season long loan if we don't intend playing him, I've heard nowt but good reports about him.Charlie knows.

I'd be inclined to switch Higson to if called upon and Naughton to wing.

Who would you leave out at centre? Tonga or Crooks?

As I said Cokey,if called upon! Is an option if either is unavailable.

Reynolds and Drinkwater play as individuals when together.We are missing a combination. Brown has his position, Hampshire requires his.

Higson would get mullard at this level at centre, very good on the wing but would get crucified inside that defensively.

I think he's stepped up to the level required very easily, would promote his game.Only an opinion.

I think the team is settling down a bit, we know the back 5 they are quiet settled. Drinkwater is cemented at 7, there is a lot of competition at 6 with Ridyard, Hampshire & Reynolds.

There's good competition in the forwards, so all in all I'm not worried. Even if we finish bottom, its not the end of the word as we restart in the middle 8s and hopefully fight for survival.

Hopefully we will not finish bottom but, as you point out (and as HRJnr so sagely did on another thread a couple of days ago) we now have the beginnings of an SL squad - NJ just needs to find his preferred starting combos. A settled SL team that are clued in to one another should waltz through the M8s if need be.

Another game or two in pre-season might have helped but this opening set of fixtures was always likely to be a write-off ( 'though there's a big what if 5 mins from the end of the Leeds game) and with the butcher's bill mounting already in a smallish squad, Neil might be found to have been quite prescient.

Speaking of him, he sent a quick thanks PM to Bongser yesterday agreeing with B's bold statement of last week. Yes, folks, Mitch Brown is a full back

Brown was excellent on Friday and showed his experience by staying deep and covering breaks something which a lot of full backs don't do today, preferring to be in the line and scoring tries.

Does anyone know how Hock is, he only did a 20 minute spell and never came back on.

Think I've seen it somewhere that Hock had a dead leg so I would think he'll be good to go Friday.

Without doubt Mitch Brown at fullback is a major positive to surface from the first two games.
Before the Cas game I had said on here,(along with others) that I thought FB would be Mitch's best position! against Leeds Mitch proved that he is indeed a FB and, a good one too! He had shown some bad defensive flaws at centre and, I suggested he had his bottom smacked for that so, whoever took on that task, it worked a treat
Regardless of what other coaches have said about Hampshire, in the halves, I do think that is where he can play/cover for us he is very lively and enthusiastic on the pitch, all the ingredients required from a half back!