When did that happen ? ok bring young vievers in give him a chance and he can kick goal too.

Phelps
Roberts
Gleeson
Carmont
Richards
Flanagan
Tomkins
Prescott
Riddell
Fielden
Tomkins
Mossop
Lockers

Davies
Leuluai
Farrell
Coley

Thats what I would go with. I didn't see the point in posting what I think Noble will do.

He's as slow if not slower than Paul Wellens

1.phelps
2.richards(to mark king)
3.gleeson
4.carmont
5.roberts
6.flanagan(best position and allows sam to play his favoured position)
7.s.tomkins
8.prescott
9.riddell
10.coley
11.hanson
12.tomkins
13.o'loughlin
subs
leuluai
farrell
fielden
mossop
not saying leave feka out every week but if we dont change tatics for this game wire will do exactly the same again

Roberts is getting the stick (again). Shouldn't it have been Gleeson marking King?

I knew Roberts was playing on Saturday, he took the ball up when no one else would but Gleeson.... well.. if I had not heard his name called out before the match I would not of known he was playing. The first time I noticed him was when...... oh no errrm did he play.

Overall I am happy with Gleeson atm.

Roberts was a pointless signing anyway. He has shown bits of what he can do but he is very highly paid and needs to do more.

Certainly didn't get the protection that he needed and, as has been pointed out on another thread, King is excellent under the high ball.

If you get chance to watch it back, it's worth listening to Jonathan Davies' opinion of him. Although I'm not one of the people to go around critising Roberts for his high ball skills, it is safe to say he's no Steve Hampson. Davies was constantly refering to Roberts as being 'excellent under the high ball'. How much RL has he watched this year?

Give over. Not getting half as much as some others despite proving yet again that he is no better in defense than Ainscough. Your point re Gleeson may be valid - he was terrible too - but doesn't change the fact that Roberts' success ratio in defence is not good enough.

EDIT:
Just noticed the "ainscough" thread!

Serious question.........would you have said that if Ainscough had been the man at fault like Roberts was?

I agree that Gleeson should have provided more protection but Roberts actually got to the ball the majority of the time but couldn't hold them. He has a weakness just as big as Ainscoughs under the high ball yet it's not allowed to question him over it- why?

I won't hammer either player for it but every single player should be treated the same. Ainscough got shown to have a weakness so got sent to the reserves to work on it(or at least i hope they're working on it) and maybe Roberts should follow suit.

It can't be a case of one rule for one and a different one for everyone else.

The only way the team can progress is by the coach being ruthless in his selections imo. He should back his players as far as he can but when the same weakness keeps getting shown up he should be taken out of the fire.

Same goes for Feka with his defence.

Is Bailey out? If so id go with.

1.Phelps
2.Roberts
3.Gleeson
4.Carmont
5.Richards
6.Tomkins
7.T.L.
8.Prescott
9.Riddell
10.Coley
11.Hansen
12.Tomkins
13.Locky

14.Feka
15.Mossop
16.Flanigan
17.Farrell

If Bailey is fit Farrell to miss out with Tomkins dropping to the bench.

Personally i would only use Fielden if we cannot field 4 of Prescott, Coley, Mossop, Feka, O'Carroll.

With the remaining time of the season I do not think using Mossop will be caused too much trouble by coming off the bench in the frontrow.

Fielden offers nothing, the lad is shot, the only chance he has to get anywhere near an accepteble standard of performance again is if we bring in a miracle working new coach who can somehow freshen him up.

It is also crucial we use Feka correctly ie bring him onto the field when we are in posession of the ball not with defending with poor field position.

I also do not go for this idea of shifting Richards around any half decent half will be able to exploit this, what I would suggest is the players work on there positioning in coaching to protect our defender of the kick and also ask them to actually put some pressure on Briers rather than giving him free licence to put in the perfect kicks he did on Saturday.

I would go with the same except for using Fielden instead of Feka. Of the two Feka is the one we should drop. Fielden cannot make much impact going forward as his energy is sapped through having to defend for himself and Feka. Bring Fielden on with Mossop rather than Feka and you will have two effective props in defence and attack.

Higham got criticised as a one trick pony. Feka is just that, he can barge forward but struggles in defence and as Wire graphically demonstrated if he is made to defend then he can't even do his one trick.

I personally think people are going a little OTT about Feka's defnce, yes it was exploited on the weekend but in my opinion that was as much to do with the fact he was brought on when he was and we proceeded to not touch the ball for the next 10-15 minutes.

While defence is not his strongest point it has not been that poor this season to date.

Fielden on the other hand regardless of when he has been brought on the field or started a game has been dominated by his opposition forwards, we need a platform laying and Fielden is totally unable to do this, Feka can, for me this is why Feka gets the nod, but unless he is used correctly then noth him and Fielden are a total liability in truth.

goulding needs full shoulder re-construction

I think we should start Mossop in the second row and drop Hansen to the bench. It would be great to see Liam Farrell given a chance in the next few games, use a bit of squad rotation. Maybe drop Feka on Friday.