Just looking at our 2018 squad, possibly our second-best squad in SL after 2004.

1 Scott Grix
2 Tom Johnstone
3 Bill Tupou
4 Reece Lyne
5 Ben Jones-Bishop
6 Jacob Miller
7 Liam Finn
8 David Fifita
9 Kyle Wood
10 Anthony England
11 Matty Ashurst
12 Danny Kirmond
13 Tyler Randell
14 Justin Horo
15 Pauli Pauli
16 Tinirau Arona
17 Craig Huby
18 Joe Arundel
19 James Batchelor
20 Keegan Hirst
21 Max Jowitt
22 Jordan Baldwinson
23 Chris Annakin
24 Mason Caton-Brown
25 Ryan Hampshire
26 Luke Hooley
27 Jordan Crowther
28 Lee Kershaw
29 Lewis Wray
30 Christian Ackroyd

To me, it looks like we went with 4 out and out props, two middles and a project.

Fifita - Fifita
Huby - Green
England - Tangata
Hirst - ?

Arona - Arona (Prop/LF)
Pauli Pauli - Tanginoa (is there any doubt over who wins this one?)

Baldwinson - Aydin

So as far as I can see they are pretty similar, just one out and out prop short. No offence but when you consider that prop Hirts I don't think it would be too hard to replace with similar. In fact, is we get Battye it's a far superior swap. Also, Aydin looks a far better prospect then Baldwinson.

Truth is if we can get Fifita back on track, get Green fully fit, and Tangata and especially Arona find their top form we are ok. It clearly demonstrates that it was the lack of injuries in 2018 and the endless list of injuries in 2019/20 that was the killer, not the lack of numbers, assuming people realise we can only afford so many players.

Apology to Titus, I'd got the wrong end of the stick and I have been rightly chastised. I'm not sure why Wakey didn't keep him on but for whatever reason he was let go it wasn't for the reason I eluded to

I always thought Chris Annakin never reached his full potential, he was an animal at academy level. Shame.

Sadly never had the size to carry it into SL.

Great effort and endeavour but just lacked that weight and size.

I think it’s a shame he wasn’t groomed to be a 13 who can cover 9. He looked like he had the game for that role.

Yes he should of been transitioned into a 9 at SL level. Think he’d of been decent.

I liked Chris. He was a good honest grafter. Local lad and while not a superstar he gave what he had to the trinity 110%.

You must mean transition to 9 in his young years because he couldn’t have been further from a 9 the last few years he was at trinity. His ball handling skills were always suspect in collision and never really saw him lay out many passes. The guy would run into a brick wall. If he was a few inch taller he would have been a very very good damaging forwards. Can hold his head high though. Albeit a squad rotation player the lad lived his SL dream.

All clubs have these mystery players, where you wonder why they were never pushed in a new direction. It was obvious Anakin would never be big enough, some like Belly get away with it but Anakin didn’t have that X factor. He should have been re trained as a no 9 at a guess, assuming of course he had the aptitude but for some reason they carried on pushing him as a back rower. He had some blinders but without the physicality to back it up he just couldn’t compete on a regular basis.

Worse still he didn’t fair much better in the Championship. Mishandled career I suppose.

There is an obsession in the U.K. game that your position is set in stone, despite these positions often being rather randomly handed out to kids as young as 8 or 9. Frankly it’s ridiculous, there are so many factors that can change as a player grows up.

Imho when a player enters the scholarship system at SL level they should be regularly be re-evaluated.

Simple example. Although Jowitt is now cracking it at FB did anyone ever look at him at some point and think, this lad can lay on a good pass, perhaps SO is a better option? This is at ages 16+.

Or as some players go through growth spurts do the clubs look and think a change in position is worth a look at? You could argue that just because your tall doesn’t mean your prop and that’s true. However be scientific about it, look at the father, is he tall and skinny or is he thick set and obviously capable of carrying some weight. Its genetics and its a well known science.

Maybe clubs do this but I do wonder. One thing I’m certain about is that it’s never too late for a player to find his true calling.

It happens in Australia all the time but in Australia players can drop out and re learn their craft at bush level. Then they get the chance to trial again for NRL clubs, something that doesn’t seem to happen in SL anymore, whatever happened to A N Other?

Instead we have a never ending merry go round of players from an ever decreasing pool of club trained players, many of whom are well past their sell by date.

As a game SL really needs to start thinking more outside the box where talent is concerned.

Rant over.

It happens more than you think. I seem to remember Max playing six during his Scholarship days, and Chester has used him there as well. Hampshire is another, viewed as a half but is used more at full back and even on the wing at Cas. Didn’t Danny Kirmond start out as a winger at Fev? Even Joe Arundel, played centre all his professional life, is seen as an adequate second rower these days, even if it’s just cover.

I doubt though we’ll see many do what Nigel Bell did, start at scrum half and finish at prop! Closest I can think of is Tony Clubb. I’m sure he played centre for England and now he’s prop at Wigan?

I think the other problem in England is the mantra that big lads go in the pack.

I always felt that if Mal Meninga were English he'd be a prop. And probably an average one.

Lucas Wallshaw, centre as a junior but Agar decided he was big and played him at prop. That would be fine but Wallshaw was happy at being a centre and didn’t want to prop.

I know the lad had issues out of the game but in his case imagine what he’d be like now if he’d have got his wish and his head together.

So yes it works both ways but maybe some coaches shouldn’t always assume they know what’s best for the player. Give the players a chance to work it out for themselves. May take longer but the results may be better.

Not in the current era, but Don Fox did and was top class in every position he played.

Getting back to prop forwards for a moment.

There may be a logic going on here that we have not taken into account.

Bit of bored speculation on my part, no actual evidence at all.

Now I’m not being cynical here just totally realistic. It soon becomes obvious that the season will be delayed, personally, I think it will start late March.

So why bother at this late date to sign/loan a player who isn’t actually needed just yet. Why not instead save the pennies so that if the time comes we are in a position to go for the best we can get?

The horrors of Covid aside this is really good business. I suspect we already have players in mind and deals worked out. All ready to be implemented but only if needed. This is especially relevant with any loan signings, let the parent club pay for their keep, not us.

I’m not brown-nosing MC but it is very much in keeping with his ethos. Yet as I say it’s not cynical or exploitative, quite to opposite. I think the club has used this forced hiatus to give an extra two Academy players a leg up that they otherwise wouldn’t have go, which to me is a good thingt.

Still as ever may be totally wrong.

I know there are massive differences between the 2 sports but I coach junior football and the FA's ethos is that at junior level players should be played in all positions to get them comfortable on the ball and to let them naturally develop towards what their final position will be.
It is also the main philosophy of the very successful Ajax team that produces some exceptionally talented players. Right through there youth development they are encouraged to play everywhere from goalkeeper to striker and everywhere in between.
As you say people develop at different rates and choosing a position for someone based on where they played at 10 or 11 is not always going to work.