we dont want to go back to the days when Sharp tried various players at full back without any success , we need to get one in now Grixie has gone , pity they couldnt give Grix another contract but i guess the two years at Wakey swung it for him ,

Ellis has the correct traits for a hooker, also has a good kicking game out of dummy half, something hinchcliffe doesn't have. Also, hinchcliffe has played majority of his career as a forward whereas Ellis has played in the halves, a very similar role. The role of a half is actually fairly similar to a full back, which is why Brierley was tested there. The role of a winger is far from the role of a full back. This is why i find it a strange move for Ormsby to play there. I don't see any traits in his game to give any reason whatsoever that he'd be a full back...

Ormsby would be my starting 5 next season
Ellis I'd go at 9 to spell with Leeming - actually the other way round

Brough and Brierly have to be our halves

Obviously none of the above posters want a hooker who can scoot from dummy half then. He does not have that accelaration from Dummyhalf. He is not a tackler in the Houghton mould.
Pick and pass pick and pass that will have SL defences in panic mode.

Well at least we know who everyone wants to set up as scapegoat for next season

Ellis would never be a 80 min Hooker.. you have Kruise to come on to speed things up. Kyle wood has filled that role in perfectly in the 8's.. if you want a hooker who can do it all, then your options are Josh Hodgson, Cam Smith and probably Danny Houghton... I'm trying to work with what we've got and find a balance. All well and good saying you want this and that. But let's try and keep it realistic...

For e.g. Brad Dwyer is a scooting Hooker, a nice blend would be Ellis and Dwyer... I wasn't saying Ellis would be our only option at Hooker and have to play 80 mins week in week out.

ellis is not hooker defensively he would get found out massively, id rather have kyle wood and leeming as are hookers personally. regarding gene ormsby think it was a panic buy and is no better then what we already have half decent player to have in the squad though. as for the fullback position i really think we need to sign an out and out fullback we tried playing people there who are better in other postions and it hasnt worked so hopefully we have learned from that. in rick stone we trust big changes needed if we want to get that top 4 finish.

It's easier to defend in the middle than it is on the edges, so I think he would be ok... not brilliant, but not as bad as what you may think.

And yeah, we 100% need a fullback, there isn't anyone in the squad who is ready to fill that role.

Newton's second law.

F=ma

Ellis is carrying a lot of "m". If he's wants a bit of "a" he needs to go on a diet.

Ormsby did nothing but impress in his appearances for us this season, he has pace and scoring ability a plenty

Murphy is very solid, dependable and experienced but he's never going to go 90m or pull back a break

I don't see Ormsby as anything other than the rumoured Bradford signings - a squad player as back up, but haven't been impressed at all.I know we all see different things in players but I can't help thinking we have at least as good coming through the Academy, and I don't rate him any better than Murphy. Maybe a full pre season and some proper fitness will bring something I haven't really seen.
The big question seems to be can Rick Stone bring in enough of his own choices to make a difference? The right temparement as well as ability is just as important

full back - mamo

hooker - they may stick with hinchcliffe and leeming, wood going. been linked with a hooker called randell from newcastle though too

in stone we trust! he did the great escape

Speculation in Newcastle is that you are getting Randell, Mamo and one other (possibly Jack Stockwell) as a swap for Joe Wardle and one other.

Who might be the other one