Sam at 6 used to make 20-30 tackles a game he now makes 2-8.
Keep him at 1 as that gives him the attacking options rather than him spending his time and energy making tackles.
I said he "Might" get hurt not that he would and that was the reason for keeping him at 1.
Full Back keeps him fresh and able to run at tired men, at 6 doesn't.

Tomkins best game v Wire was at 6.

Yes but the OP has a point. Given that TL, Finch and Powell were hurt I believe our next best option was for Sam to go 6. IMO Sam should be our emergency 6 from now on.

It's certainly a fair point. Wane said we had no other option but to play an unfit Finch, we clearly did. We had a player who was considered the best stand off in the league before he was moved to fullback.

I can understand why people wouldn't want Sam moved from fullback and long term there's no reason to do that. He's the best attacking threat in the league at fullback when the team is playing well. However when the team needs cover in the halves I can't see why he wouldn't be one of the best options available.

Jack Murphy showed signs that he would be competent at the very least when given a chance at fullback, so we have cover in that position.

I just don't get this idea that Wane had no other option.

From your avatar pic , id say keep your eye pealed

.Its hard being a Cowboy in ROCHDALE



.

cherry.pie was right. The idea he should not play 6 because he might have to tackle more is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read.



He might get hurt playing 1 as well. Or is he supposed to run away form making any tacke these days? It's Rugby League!

He started out as a 6 and having to tackle is no reason not to play him there if needs must. Given Lockers is just plain wrong at 6 its about time Wane stopped playing him there. If that means Sam to 6 until people are fit then that is what he needs to do.

The pack getting beat v Wire is irrelevant anyway (as a reason not to play him at 6 as opposed to how it affected the Wire result) in that this happens occasionally and the half backs have to put up with it and deal with it as best they can.

Sammy Powell isn't injured he was the 18th man but didn't make the team when finch passed a very late fitness test. Wane wrongly told the press he was out with a back injury!

Inglis = fullback, barba= fullback, bowen=fullback, Slater=Fullback.
The NRL is the toughest teamsport in the world, where defence is king, and there is nothing between the top 10 sides, and the position that has the most influence to crack these defences? The fullback. The ozzies sussed this years ago, wake up you unconverted children, SAM PLAYS AT FULLBACK END OF

Surely you've missed the point that was being made. With Powell not fit, Finch not fit, Leuluai absent and O'Loughlin pretty much an essential in the pack, we do actually have another option in the halves, contrary to what Shaun Wane suggested.

There aren't many that don't agree that Tomkins is a fullback, but when you've got a choice between moving him back into the halves or letting an unfit player struggle on against the strongest side in the league it would be madness not to consider moving him to a position he's familiar with to avoid carrying an unfit player throughout the whole game.

Also, when it comes to Tomkins at fullback, he really does need to start playing to his potential in big games. He's played well sometimes in big games, he's also had some pretty terrible performances in big games. I can't remember many big games where he's been outstanding. That's why he's not in the same class as Slater, Inglis, Barba, Bowen etc.

These players would not move to stand off.
You wouldnt ask Cavendish to lead Wiggins out into a sprint.
I agree Lockers cant play at 6, but we can (and should) sign another player or get Sean Long(only joking!)

Hard being a "Warrior" in Rochdale this week.

Mash, so what you are saying is if every halfback in the club is injured ,either experienced or not we must stay as we are.
By that I mean if we have a young promising fullback who has only ever played fullback and as never let us down,it is Sam who stays at fullback even though we have to juggle forwards about to get a team on the field. Weighing up your options and making a decision which brings the least dissruption to your team is what is required.
An example would be If Pat Richards is fit for the last few matches and Wigan still had major problems at halfback what would you do,Leave Sam at fullback and move Pat to standoff or use the commen sense approach. I would love to see your answer.