I don't see what Logan offers, if rumours he's joining Sam in NZ next year are true it'll be a long time before he plays first grade rugby league again.

The reason Wane is in love with Mcllorum is that he's by far in a way the best nine you've got. I think he made he captain to see if the responsibly would have a positive effect on him. Although, he doesn't look captain material to me. He brings a lot to your team his aggression can be a positive, and as he develops hopefully he will learn to control it. It's not just about red/yellow cards he receives, you can see him getting wound up on the pitch, and then his game goes to pot. He's an old fashioned hooker, but in the modern game, you need to be more of a thinker to play the role effectively. A calm Mcllorum can do it, but when his head goes?

He may develop into a world class hooker, but at the moment, he's a long way from it. And a long way behind names mentioned in this thread. You've suffered through injuries to your creative players, and he should have been able to step up and take some of the responsibility, and has failed to do so.

I think he would be great if 1,6,7 and 13 are firing, but if not, he will struggle as his game is a bit limited. Which would not be a problem if 1,6,7 and 13 are on top form. I also think that regardless of what others do, to win the big games, you need a hooker that can be a bit creative, and in that regard, he's a long way from the finished article.

I have always rated MM and I don't see any reasons not to at the moment.

When he was playing 80 mins a match people said he was worn out. He has not done that this season with Wane subbing him by the clock at about 10 mins before half time and leaving it at least as long in the 2nd half before he returns.

I think for the final MM has to be an 80 min player. Logan isn't ready and the same 20 mins rest for MM will be 20 mins for Hull to make hay.

Agree with this. I said a few months ago I thought it would be a good idea to spell Micky with Logan/Sam Powell at the beginning of the season to save him a bit (and give game time to those 2) and then start to use him for 80 minutes with 4 forwards on the bench at the "business" end. I don't know if that's what SW's plan is but I hope it is. The drop in our attack when LT comes on is very obvious and could cost us in big games. I'm not writing Logan off at this stage btw, he is young and still learning, I just don't think he has justified a place in the first choice 17, and an extra forward on the bench with McIlorum playing 80 would benefit the team much better IMO.

Spot on for me...

MM is my player of the season this year closely followed by SOL.

people say he gives too ill disciplined and gives away too many penalties.

He's 35th overall in the league for penalties conceded. below a lot of supposed whiter than white charachters.

IMHO Mickey Mac is top class, and to compare him to Lunt based on stats is wrong, Mcilorums job is to take a couple of steps from dummy half to engage defenders then move the ball on. Lunt regularly runs from dummy half so will score more tries and create more assists because of all this.

He's behind quite a few hookers in SL for me but he does a good job and I do like his agression because as others have alluded to, we lack this (I happen to think the best way to beat us is to play a big pack and house us). Last season when he got himself red carded and banned from the whole play offs over a cowardly cheap shot in a nothing game I called him rotten but he does a lot more good than bad. I'd play him for 80 at Wembley with Hampshire taking the extra bench spot.

No, you're right. Apart from hte 8 times as many tries, 3 times as many assists, more tackles, twice as many metres made, 4 times as many busts, more kicks in play, more clean breaks, more marker tackles, more offloads, less missed tackles and more carries Lunt is not a patch on MM. Those couple of steps from dummy half make all the difference.

Keep Logan away from the first team and we'll be right. He's like a turnstile in defence, Brett Ferres highlighted that fact last Friday despite the pass being forward yes I know

350 tackles in 16 games (most of which he's coming off the bench playing less than half a game) isn't too bad for a turnstile. I bet he mustaverage 2 tackles a set when he's on. I'd drop him and play Hampshire off the bench but I do think you're being a bit harsh

Yeah I mean if you're gonna have a go at Logan at least get your facts straight. His defence is actually pretty decent, probably the best of all of the "ball playing" young players in if team, but he probably offers the least in attack.

The tackle stats are given even if you contribute 3rd man to a tackle with 2 props. He misses SO many one on one tackles and teams target it.

Soz opta How do you explain him being 7th on our tackle count despite only playing 20-30 mins a game, and not being picked for quite a few? He very obviously has a very high work rate in defence. Perhaps he's trying to do too much while he's only on for a short spell, which is seeing him occasionally get caught out

Logan does seem to miss a lot of one of ones for me, perhaps the stats suggest otherwise, but i'd much rather concentrate on what he's actually doing rather than compare his stats against mickeys and then his against lunt etc like a game of real life top trumps!
logan has offered little in attack during his limited game time for me and this is the reason i much prefer mickey at present. we have seemed to go nowhere of late when mickey has been off, yet i remember logans first few games well and he looked a great prospect. not sure whats happened!
mickeys aggression and therefore the occasional brain fart have their pro's and con's but he's still a country mile ahead of logan for me and why the hell is higham playing so damn well these days?!!
still say we got rid of the wrong tomkins (joel) though!!!