The two points were not from a 'high' shot!!! It was Harry Smith offside + he told him not to get involved. It's those cranks on punditry that said it was a high shot

Good news, cheers Brian.

Yes but bonkers. But then the original ban was even more bonkers.

Isa and Hampshire for Nsemba and Shorrocks. Isa at 13 and Smithies at 8.

I keep thinking about what happens to Shorrocks when we have a stand off available and it feels like he deserves a spot somewhere in the 17 but I’m not sure where you’d fit him in. I’d go Isa and Farrell second row and KPP on the bench, O’Neill deserves a bench spot and you’d want a couple of props on there as well. The only way I could think of was Smithies to start at prop and Shorrocks to go in at loose forward. One thing is for sure, his time at 6 should now be over until the next times there’s an emergency.

Utility is his biggest asset and that's what will hold him back I think. He's not a player who thrives in one position and is capable of playing others. He's someone who can 'do a job' in several positions but doesn't really stand out in any. His performance against St Helens was a little overhyped really - some great defensive efforts and the coach smartly gave him a very limited and pre-defined role with the ball.

I recall a thread on the other forum after the Saints game, asking where he should play long term and some thought second row and some loose forward. I just said he’ll always be a utility and that is absolutely fine. I’d keep him at the club if we can, on a contract of a decent length but with no expectation that he nails down a position. He is a decent player in many positions but I don’t ever see him excelling in just one. If that is enough from his pov, I’m not sure but he’ll always have a sniff of a first 17 spot with his versatility.