For me, it HAS to be one or the other.

Towards the later stages off each half, brining on Mark Riddell had no effect on the game what so ever. In fact, at a stage where we needed to be speeding up play and catching out defenders we were actually slower and found it hard to gather momentum to attempt to lay the platform and create opportunities.

Both McIlorum and Riddell are starting, organizational hookers and having one on the bench is pointless. Apart from giving one of them a rest, an interchange between the two offers us absolutely nothing and it's simply swapping one style of hooker for one that is exactly the same.

Without sounding as though I'm just bashing an overseas player, I wouldn't select Riddell next week. He currently isn't our best no.9, is he? And he isn't an effective impact hooker, is he?

Both are averge at the moment. Playing one on the bench offers bugger all, yet we did tonight. Both are starting hookers, neither is worth a bench spot, yet our coach and ex hooker does?!

I backed Riddell during the week saying that he'll pick his form up at some point...............theres always next week i suppose

He offered nothing tonight and has for people who say his passing is that much better then McIlorums i've yet to see it. He throw a couple of wild ones tonight to Tomkins who had to pick them off his bootlaces.

Must do better.

Mate, I think McIlorum's been superb.

Our best player behind O'Loughlin.

I agree that Riddell is offering very little, and I'm not having it that a guy McIlorum's age needs a rest during the game. Like you, I don't want to appear as though I'm playing 'blame the Aussie', but I just think that we're holding McIlorum back, and taking up a huge amount of the cap on a player who produces, at best, a couple of half decent runs from dummy half per game.

Watch the game again, I will. But McIlorums discipline and missed tackles are hurting us.

I think it was him who gave the penalty away and then missed the tackle on Monaghan for the match clinching try.

Agreed.

Best hooker on the field tonight. He is savage in defence, made good metres out of dummy half and distributed the ball pretty well.

Him and Clarke i though both showed up well whereas Riddell and Higham were poor.

Im with you Alex, McIlorum has been awesome especially in defence and when he has to take the ball in he often makes the hard yards for us and takes it in like a prop. His distribution has improved so much since his first game for us.

Have to disagree, he gives his all, but when he needs to produce quality he falls just short. Bad miss on Monagham 1 on 1. He looks for the big hit too much rather than completing the tackle.

We need to lose 1 or the other if we hope to be a competative team.

Will have to watch the game again, as i was looking after 5 week old twins so only had a corner of one eye on the first half, but our distribution from dummy half seamed terrible, which in turn let warrington get up on our line and pretty much boss us.

I personally, think MM should start, as he punches well above his weight in defence, however bigger fish to fry tonight for me was the lack of penetration in our pack, we were only making 20-30 meters per set for most of the first half, and not much more in the second!

Obviously riddell has been a massive disapointment, (never saw him in the nrl, but going off what others said) without stating the obvious, he jsust doesnt look upto speed. Perhaps that nock he got pre-season was a little more than a nock. A bit like Craig Smiths first season.

Might well be the case - I was probably too busy trying not to swear loudly in front of my son

I just think he never gets a decent run in the team, in order to build up experience, and that Riddell has shown nowt to justify that being the case.

Correct on both counts Yoda.

Gives his all but lacks the quality when tested.

Riddell = cack.

I think Riddell equals= massive dissapointment 'so far' would have been closer to the mark.

Not cutting the mustard i'm afraid and that has to change for his and our sake.