Ive thought quite a lot over the weekend and it wouldn't surprise me lam went with the same 17 except for Sarginson in for Hankinson.

We've got SOL, Flower, Greenwod and potentially Powell who are not match fit and the only only way they are going to get fitter is to play against Salford. Risky but Lam can lay the gauntlet down and ask for a performance to go some way in paying back for Friday's lacklustre effort.

It's not necessarily what I want but this approach wouldn't surprise me at all. Salford will come down the middle so at least we can plan accordingly.

Another defeat wouldn't surprise me but neither would a convincing win.

I hate to sound pessimistic but I don’t think any change we make will make a difference. I still think we’d get beat by 12 or more.

I honestly don’t believe we have the players to win. More so in the forwards than elsewhere. They’re too big, strong, quick and powerful as it stands.

We've got to beat Salford first and that is far far from certain.
We deservingly got hammered but no point in even thinking about Saints unless we beat Salford first.

I know we are in for one hell of a tough ask on Friday. Far from guaranteed as you say.

I’m just working on the hope we do best Salford and play Saints again but my point re the forwards also stands for Salford. If they play like they did on last week, we’re up the proverbial creek without a paddle.

Chopping Tommys right foot off would help,stop him kicking as its shocking,never recovered from 2 bad kicks at the start

Your point stands regards just what an awful kicker Tommy is but in fairness to him, no kicker in the history of the sport would thrive keep having to kick from his own 30 metres. Our first two sets were pretty embarrassing in all honesty, with us struggling to out of our own twenty.

Any way you look at it, it comes back to the forwards being comprehensively owned.

Big and brave decisions are required from next week onwards.

Names alone do not win matches against genuinely good teams.

Smithies has to start. He makes such a difference in defense

French to FB. Playing as a second receiver pivot off the back of Tommy and Williams left and right pivot. Then we have speed and link up out wide.

Hardaker to centre or wing. He’s too good to sit out.

Smithies to 13, Lockers as a prop. Either starting or off the bench.

Greenwood to left edge. Faz to right. Controversial call but for me the right one.

Drop Clubb. He’s awful. Has been for years with the occasional purple patch which makes people forget.

Drop Isa. Too slow to be a centre, doesn’t make enough impact going forward as a SR.

Contemplating using Sammut as a sub. At times when you need that spark of life, I don’t know where else to look.

No changes according to Lam in the press conference. Only possible change is Sarginson for Hankinson. He wants to give the players a chance to redeem themselves.

I wasn't expecting wholesale changes at this point but I can't get my head round not at least making a couple of tweaks. Surely it's worth giving Greenwood a crack.

My question would be why couldn’t they get up for the game in the first place and why do they need a chance to redeem?

That game was playing our biggest rivals. A team we’ve not beaten all season in a game which secures our place in the GF.
If you can’t get up for that then there’s something wrong.

Lam’s strategy suggestions there was nothing wrong with tactics or performance, just attitude.

What must Greenwood think? Watches he’s team hammered, sees players who play in his position play poorly and still can’t get in because the head coach wants to give those who couldn’t get up for a Wigan/Saints game a second chance.

Surely dropping him off was enough, no need to go giving the guy a crack as well.

Salford sold 2.5k and counting, we'll be outnumbered at this rate

The seat map makes pretty grim viewing. Unless there is a surge of ticket sales the crowd (Salford end spart) will be poor . Think Lam has had enough of moving Faz around to accommodate Greenwood so he has binned him .

Regards EW