Aye but he signed for Cas and it’s a very Cas-like signing. Our way of doing things clearly works better but I do admire the Cas approach sometimes. Their timing of getting players like Westerman in seems to work well. They seem to look at players who might have had a dip in their career but they wait until they see the green shoots of recovery and snap them up. Guys like O’Brien, McShane, Turner etc being good examples.

I agree to a certain level (don't really get the hype around McShane tho). Some of our fans would crucify the club if they'd have signed some of those players, but they've worked. Look at the hostility around Thornley now, or some of the responses to signing Hill as good examples.

There is a line between flogging them and not holding them back. We clearly have it way off at the minute and the two lads should really help. If they were two experienced and proven performers I’d rest a lot easier but like you say, they’re pretty much juniors in experience terms.

I’ve always felt if young players are good enough they’ll find a place in the team. To have two spots in a 17 open for young forwards feels about right, maybe three at a push but certainly not the 5/6/7 Lam has been throwing in. It’s not all his own doing but he doesn’t help himself.

It is a less demanding environment at Cas in terms of their supporters expectations, so they may not work out as well here when the pressure comes on but I wouldn’t mind seeing us go that way on the odd forward signing here and there. I’d probably put Singleton in that sort of category, where he’s not top tier but he’s a solid performer and at worst he shields the young props from being over burdened even further.

Platt Waz or the south of France….tough one that like.

A backrow of Farrell Isa and Bateman would for me be pretty pointless.
Too lightweight and zero variability.
We should never have resigned Bateman. We needed a top class prop not a 13 stone athlete who can only step off his right leg. You can read Bateman like a Janet and John book. Has he ever took the outside option????

I’d have KPP at 13. He can’t play 13 at the moment but Bateman is incapable of playing traditional 13 role. KPP has a the toolkit to develop into a decent backrow forward.

I put McShane in the rugby player class. He’s not particularly athletic but he knows rugby.
Powell could play that role if he had the nuts to do so.
He’s been permanently shackled by Wane and Lam.

I 100% agree with this.

Bateman needs to be kept as right second row where has has played his whole career to a high level. I see no benefit in him playing as 13. He doesn't have the ball skills, he will be running into brick walls, he will have to tackle more. I am actually astonished people suggest it to be honest.

Do we find ourselves next year with too many youngsters on these "market value" contracts the club talks of?

Havard, Partington, Byrne - Front row
Smithies, Shorrocks, KPP - Second row

Experienced players - Singleton, Mago, Ellis, Isa, Farrell, Bateman

We are losing Clubb (Confirmed), Bullock (Rumoured / Expected) and Clarke (Expected) but also gaining Isa back into the pack in theory as he has played most of the season as Centre.

I worry we now have too many of these youngsters tied down who may not necessarily make the cut or get enough game time?

Chris Hills numbers do not lie. Head and shoulders above all of our forwards and the majority of the league and he has been considered this year and last as under performing...

Is it not is own doing?

He has the option of playing Bullock and Clarke more than he does.

He could move Isa back into the pack and pick Hanley or Halsall more often.

Fully agree but even if he does that, I’m not convinced it’s good enough and that’s why I say it’s not all his own doing but he takes a huge portion of blame for me.

The points you make about Clark, Bullock, Isa and his lack of trust in young backs is bob on. If I picked a side when all three are available, they’d all be in my 17 and they’d all be playing in the pack.

I've mentioned his a couple of times before about Lam saying player X pulled out last minute etc. When I knew day before wor earlier

Same thing again for Gildart, was told he wasn't playing, then when named we were astonished, and then obviously not astonished when he didn't play.

For Lam to not have a plan etc for that scenario when he knew Gildart was a massive risk is astonishing, never mind if he didn't know the rules

When you factor in he has played so many players out of position (Some when he needed to and some when he didn't), the reluctance to re-shuffle and start Bullock is baffling.

Hanley and Halsall on wing when they are Full back and Centre
Hastings at Full back and Hooker
Shorrocks at Hooker
Isa at Centre

To name a few

With a full season's hindsight it's pretty obvious Lam's Plan A was give it to French and hope he could work his magic
No French = No Plan

I have no real issue with Hanley and Halsall playing wing. There's history of young backs being blooded on the wing regardless of where their natural position in the back line is. What I doing have an issue with is Lam happily flogging the young lads in the middle of the pitch, but he's been reluctant to play the young backs. Instead taking the option to move our better second row players into the centres. Also playing every Tom, Dick or Harry at fullback instead of Hanley.