French isn't suited at all to the halves with the way we play. All you need to do is watch back the games were he's played in the halves; do you honestly think he's looked good? French isn't a playmaker to bring people into the game, he's a 'strike' player, who has speed and a step to rival anyones in SL, let him play off either half out wide where's there's space linking in the backline, he's pace out wide will frighten teams to death.

Putting French at FB is a game changer, playing him in the halves at this stage is a bad idea; the evidence is there for all to see.

I have and I’m not saying he’s looked good, my past comments will prove that but with how weak our defence has been recently we need a good solid FB who can tackle, otherwise what’s the point of a FB? We’re forgetting the core role of a FB here I feel. French doesn’t look the strongest in D either.

Regardless of whether French goes to FB/HB or stays on the wing, we won’t win the GF. I’d play him in the halves to add that attacking flair, you’d put him at FB for essentially the same reasons. Basically we’re debating two sides of the same coin.

How do you know French can't stand up in D from FB? You suggest he plays 6, but that would mean he's getting through more tackles defending in the line.

We're not debating the same side of the same coin, the role of a FB in the modern game is different to a 6.

Opposition players have made metres through him. I’m yet to be convinced on his defensive qualities.

We are in the sense that we’re debating his attacking strengths in different positions. Which centre does Hardaker go into? Gildarts? Sarginsons? Neither for me. Why change one of our most consistent players for an untested (in SL) FB when Powell looks like he is injured and the opportunity to put him in the halves is there?

We’ve nothing to lose.

Hardaker could easily be played at centre or the wing, having French at FB gives us the attacking quality link up play which has been missing all season. I'd even go as far to say Sarge was linking up better as a second pivot than Zak.
We need something else, we're stagnate in attack its easy to see.

I don't think French is as good as a defender as Zak; saying that I don't think either Tomkins or Bowen were/are in the same league defensively as Zak, but what they offered was something different and most needed as a key part in our attack.

I've seen French play full back many times in the NRL. What did you make of his defensive capabilities over there as a FB playing in a higher calibre league?

Also.. you say opposition players have made metres through him; yet you want to play him in the halves in the defensive line? Doesn't really make sense.

We are stagnate in attack but is moving Zak away from FB to centre and French to FB really going to add much to our attack given we don’t seem to play that FB link play very much?

I don’t watch much NRL truth be told so I’m nowhere near qualified enough to comment on that as you and others so I will have to take your word for it on whatever it is you say.

Though we agree we need to change our attack I do believe we’re going to have to agree to disagree on this.

So if you don't watch the NRL, when have you seen French play FB? Cos he certainly hasn't played FB for Wigan. Shall I speculate you're making a critique of French at FB without ever seeing him play there? Hmm...

So you are questioning his defence, can only be from seeing him on the wing or at 6, which ironically is where you suggest we play him. Hmmm...

You say we don't play that FB link much anymore; I agree, it's because we don't have a FB who's a second pivot link man. Whereas French is. That's why playing French there is something we should be trying.

Instead Lam will play the same team in the same way as we did last week. What's that what someone famous once said... doing the same thing over again and expecting different results is... madness?

Seems about right.

I haven’t critiqued him as a FB or any position for that matter during our debate. I’ve questioned his defence yes, is it disastrously bad? Not at all. Does it need improvement? Yes but nothing drastic.

I’m against moving Zak away from a role he’s been consistent in all season. We don’t play that FB link with Zak, why would we now change it just because French goes there? Zak has proven in the past (at Cas and Leeds) he can be that link man, and a pretty effective one at that. It baffles me how or why we’ve not used it this season. Moving French there, I feel would result in the same we’ve had all season - no link play.

It makes more sense to me moving French to HB and Tommy to hooker keeping Zak at FB. You’re right in the last paragraph and I completely agree, we do need a change or we’ll get the same result against Saints in the GF (provided we get there of course). I think that change comes from putting French at HB where he can add that attacking flair more than if he was at FB being under utilised like we have with Zak all season.

-How can you say his defence needs improving when you've never ever seen him play FB?
-Zak was never the link man at Leeds or Cas, he played exactly the same game as he does today, albeit he's arguably lost a step of pace.
-Don't know how you can say the result of playing French at FB would result in no link play when a) you've never seen French play FB at Wigan, and b) you've never seen French play FB at all.
-No it doesn't make more sense moving French to the halves. Not in the slightest. I've seen French play 6 for Wigan on several occasions now, did it work? No, not at all. Will it in the future? It might well do, but we're discussing the here and now.

All in all, you question French's defence as a FB even though you've never seen him play FB.
You seem to think Zak has suddenly stopped being a link man when he arrived at Wigan (he's always played the same)
You think the answer is playing French in the halves even though we've all seen it doesn't work currently.

Amazing mate.

- I never questioned his defence at FB. I questioned it in general

- Yes he was

- Because we haven’t played it at all this season so why would we start now by switching French to FB?

- It doesn’t make sense to you. It does to me and others. That’s no slant on you or those who disagree either.

All in all I’ve raised a concern about his defence in general and that moving French to FB wouldn’t make a difference because we haven’t linked in the FB much this season, it seems to have disappeared from our play. Zak has stopped being the link man because we’ve stopped playing it like we did with Tomkins despite Zak being perfectly capable of being such. I don’t think French in the halves is the answer, I suggested it as a possibility to switch up our play.

In all likelihood neither will happen and French will continue to go on the bench and be under utilised.

Added some quick responses in brackets after each post.

We’re just going to go round in a circle. Agree to disagree but agree that Lam will not change anything

Running the risk of re-starting here

But.....I cannot fault your logic and rationale for moving French to FB. I’m just not convinced on shifting out Hardaker to centre or that we will play a style which will bring in the FB at this very late stage of the season. Therefore I think we’d be better served with his pace and hands in the halves at this stage. Either way we both know he’ll play the bench utility role on Friday and possibly the GF.

Wherever we play him we’ll not get the best out of him this season, that’s for 2020. Give him a full pre season, work on actually utilising the FB and who knows he could be our starting FB with Zak in the centres. Or he could be a starting HB alongside Hastings.

I’ll let you have the last word