Gelling won us the game against Hull KR with a try i dont think Thornley would have scored. He has more chance of winning us the game than Thornley does but i agree that he does have more chance of losing us the game. For me Gelling should play, i think he deserves it.

hey, its my money and my choice. If Wane in one of his last games at Wigan cant see that Dudson doesn't even look like a Wigan player, then thats up to him, same as its up to me to go or not.

Gelling averages around 11 more metres per game than Thornley. It's not a massive difference; it's the equivalent of about 2 carries (and Gelling averages 2 more carries per game than Thornley).

Gelling scores more than Thornley (0.8 tries per game compared to 0.6) but that is surely offset by the fact that Thornley is 5 times as likely to make a try assist. Thornley averages a try assist every other game whereas Gelling averages a try assists every 9 games.

Gelling is twice as likely to make an offload and more likely to break a tackle but Thornley averages over twice as many clean breaks. Gelling is nearly 3 times more likely to make an error, 3 times more likely to concede a penalty while they both average around 1 missed tackle per game.

There's not a vast difference between them except for when it comes to try assists, errors, penalties and clean breaks.

Gelling's couple of dropped passes and picked up by Lineham or Shaul and they'll go 80 mtrs to score. With Tickle as their kicker that's 12 points we can't afford to risk!

I think Hampshire is perfect to take the traditional hooker bench spot for Wembley.

Mic needs more minutes, when he comes off Smith to 9, Hampshire in the halves or 1 with Sam moving forward.

It's a big pitch with wide open spaces and his pace off the bench could cause Hull all sorts of problems.

1. Sam
2. Pat
3. Gelling
4. Golding
5. Josh
6. Green
7. Smith
8. Mossop
9. MM
10. Taylor
11. H
12. Faz
13. Locky

14. Crosby
15. Tuson
16. Flower
17. Hampshire

Because Logan doesn't deserve to be in the team on current form and McIlorum can easily play the full 80 anyway. Changing the half backs mid way through a game is generally more disruptive than anything so I think putting Hampshire or Powell on the bench could end up being a waste of a sub. Plus our forwards have been making hardly any yards lately so an extra one will help keep them a bit fresher.

Equally Thornley could be put in a scoring position twice and get tackled like usual whereas Gelling could score. That's 12 points we can't afford to risk!

Last night was a straight shoot out IMO for that centre spot at Wembley and both were dreadful. I'd probably mark Gelling 5/10 and Thornley 4/10 so on that basis Gelling just shades it.

Fair enough, I'd have thought our props ought to be fit enough to manage 2x20 minute spells. An extra prop would just dilute the quality IMO. Having Hampshire on the bench could not only offer a change of direction if things aren't going well, but it could also push Green and Smith to up their games so they don't get benched. Plus he's an unknown quantity who could be a gamebreaker if given a decent platform

I would have Hampshire on the bench and brought on when MM is replaced ,with Smith going to hooker and then when MM comes back Wane has to asses the situation.

If Hampshire is going well and causing Hull problems he must not be afraid to replace Smith, Green or even one of the centres to maintain the initiative.( I am pretty certain that Green has played centre on the odd occasion).
I know that this may mean one less forward sub but be brave.

He who dares wins.

I agree, 2 props and a backrower on the bench is plenty for forwards. I just get that feeling that Hampshire is going to have a breakthrough game soon where he really tears a team apart and makes a name for himself. Sadly I think he'll be in the stands with Jack Hughes in his place