Quote: MOPSEY LIVES ON "Hampshire is not a full back in a million years hes an out and out halfback. you give your best players as much ball as possible hes pace to burn support play, engine to cover the field can make breaks from nothing, give him a chance or hopefully someone else will. look at his try percentage in the academy half to full back a remarkable dip from 30 to 40 a season to about ten. modern day utter bull, read bill ashursts comments about ryan the best half at the club a future international at half and why split George and rocky up he says would you split Edwards and greg. bills final comments were some people have a clue and some don't. modern day my booty.'"
I remember reading similar rants when Sam Tomkins was moved to fullback...
The fact is, whether FB is Rocky's preferred position or not, he is still capable of doing a job there. No 20 year old in the country can make demands about where they should or shouldn't be playing, and I hope any rumours of that being the case are wide of the mark tbh. Hampshire did very well tonight in the situations he has struggled the most with, dealing with the high ball. If our attack was stuctured with any depth there would be no issue with Hampshire at fullback as he would be perfectly suited in the deep-lying 2nd phase playmaker role (a la Sam). The issue is Wigan's attack is so pathetically flat and laboured it's painful to watch.
Bottom line, I don't buy the whole "he's never a FB in a million years" line that many like to churn out on here, but until we sort out our clunky and shambolic attacking structures it wouldn't really matter who we had playing there.
