Yeh could be a good game to try Gelling out in the SR actually, we are pretty short there and I don't think he will ever nail down a regular position in the backs. Thornley is one of the most frustrating players to watch, he was brilliant against HKR and Wire, then had a bit of a stinker against Cats. He never seems able to kick on from a decent performance.

A few changes but nothing more. We're not exactly firing on all cylinders at the moment and the next 2 games could provide us with an ideal chance to get some combinations going ahead of Good Friday! Lockers and MM should deffo be included and I agree we should let Thornley and Burgess grow as a partnership. Perhaps (big perhaps) have a look at Sarginson at full back with Hampshire at stand off? Just a thought!

I think Gelling will get a game as he has nowhere to go on dual reg but not sure at who's expense.

Hasn't Dudson along with several others been up at Workington? If so they won't gain anything different playing for us v Dewsbury than for Workington against other championship sides. So I would not disrupt the first team to give a players games v Dewsbury.

As others have said Lockers needs game time and MM will need to blow the cobwebs off as well.

The temptation must be to give more players a go given the stupid U19 rules but the team needs to gel so I not sure it is wise to do so at this stage.

No harm in throwing a few fringe players in there IMO. They may well give that extra 10% to impress if they don't usually make the first grade. I'd go:

FB 26 Hampshire
RW 31 Manfredi
RC 23 Sarginson
LC 4 Thornley
LW 32 Burgess
SO 6 Green
SH 27 Williams
P 16 Dudson
H 9 McIlorum
P 10 Flower
SR 14 Hughes
SR 12 Farrell
LF 13 O'Loughlin

S 5 Gelling (used at SR)
S 15 Tomkins
S 22 Pettybourne
S 24 Clubb

Then give the senior forwards that play this game a rest v London with the others returning. Whilst there are a few rested there it should really be plenty to beat Dewsbury. I'd rather give fringe players game time when it's our choice than have to throw them in the deep end against a top team when a crisis hits

Why can't gelling go out on dual reg?

Work permit issuesi believe.

When we played Featherestone the other year they were leading well into the second half. We had the full team out that evening and only just won in the last 20. I don't think we should underestimate the opposition who will give everything.

For me play the same team as last week (with MMc instead of Williams) and then rest Bowen, Burgess, Lockers and Bateman and play the likes of Hampshire, Gelling and Sarginson against London which will actually be an easier game than Dewsbury.

Not allowed to due to this visa. He can only play for us and of course since he is older than 19 that means in the 1st team or nowhere.

Full back is one that throws up a bit of a debate with me. Hampshire could do with the game time and you would assume he would be more than comfortable at this level given his form to date, but Bowen is really starting to find some form and gets better with each game.

On the face of it I am comfortable with either of them playing at 1 but I would like to see whoever does not play get the start in the game vs London.

Don't forget that London beat StH this time last year - we've been guilty of complacency a few times in the last couple of years.

As poor as the Broncos team was last year it was still more capable of competing with SL teams than their current team is. Sad to see though it is the Broncos game probably will be less of a challenge than the game at Dewsbury. Part time the Dewsbury players may be but they are also two things that the Broncos squad definitely is not - experienced and in-form.

If it were to turn out in two weeks time that we had taken one of the two opponents too lightly and lost one of the games it is a much better situation to have lost a SL game with a too greatly weakened side than to be knocked out of the cup. The cup game is the one to take the least risk with selections for out of the two. If there were to be wholesale changes I would rather they were made for the SL game and not the cup.

Personally I think it is best to not tinker too much for either game, but whatever the team selections I would hope that Hampshire and Gelling get to play in both and that Bateman, Farrell and at least one of the halves get a week off prior to Easter.

I think Waney will put out a strong team for Dewsbury, or at least he should. The Challenge Cup is trap-door football, no second chances, and any slip up would be very, very embarrassing for the club. If anyone needs resting or anyone needs game time, do it at home with London the following week where the consequences of a loss wouldn't be as great.

I actually think that using the kids to spice it up and give them the opportunity to stake a claim for a place may be better than putting out a 1st XIII who may feel complacent.
Wane has shown that if you play well, you get to keep the shirt, and players like Manfredi, Williams, Hampshire, Gelling are all squad players that would get a regular outing in other SL sides.

We're not going to put out a complete 2nd string, so why not use this to give players an opportunity to prove themselves ?

Agree. There's no harm in putting a couple of hungry players in to guard against any complacency. We've got a few lads chomping at the bit for a game that won't take any quality away from the side and they'll add competition for places by pushing the current first choices.

I'd go-

Bowen (keep his run going to build confidence/form)
Charnley
Gelling
Sarginson
Thornley
Hampshire
Smith (ideal kicking practice hopefully)
Dudson
Tomkins
Crosby
Farrell
Pettybourne
Lockers

Subs
Clubb
Taylor
Hughes
McIlorum

I'd go with something like that. If that team isn't good enough to win a game against Dewsbury with plenty to spare then we can't blame Wane for picking that side.