]

[sizeno[/size

I think is one of the best posts i've seen for a while and now it coincides with Agars new deal. So, it looks like our idea of playing without any ball handlers will continue then!

This is a really good post and very constructive.

I agree entirely about Whiting. People forget he was young plyer of the year.

On the subject of playing 13 as a pivot rather than effectively another second rower, we won the challege cup with three pivots, Horne, Brough in the halfs and some other player whose name I can't remember but was more of a half than a forward playing at thirteen.

Interestingly, in the playoffs, we beat Wire playing thi formation, then tried to match Bradford's forwards by playing only two pivots when we went there and got hammered (although people often forget we played with 12 men when they criticize Kear for that game, the real criticism should have been leaving Broughy out after he'd run Wire ragged the week before).

It was sharpe when he came in who stated publicly that one of the changes he wanted to make was playing with two pivots. It worked for a while, but really signalled the beginning of a decline into relying on forwards and the ball down the middle which seems to have become a bit endemic.

Maybe Agar should try whiting at 13 against some of the teams with smaller packs in the first instance and see how he goes. Another thing about Rich W at 13 is that he is a pretty tough tackler so I don't think we'd lose out too much, he's got all the aggression of anyone whose come out of post-office road.

Totally agree, we're still left with this safety first mentality aren't we. The present system may see us sneak into 6/7/8th position but we need something extra to re-establish ourselves as a top 4 club. Does Agar simply not have the confidence in his own ability to actually try and manufacture something? Whatever the reason, it beggars belief he has been offered 2 more years at this exact time.