Unfortunately true, unless Moore manages to get Agar to actually select based on ability.

I'm Radfords biggest fan i think on here but even i can see that the only place he fits is at prop in place of Dowes. It's a close call between them for me.

Burnett is a better back rower than both Radford and Tickle. Radford should never be named as a 3rd prop at 13. (although Agar gave me the impression he may still go down that direction at the fans forum)

If you think Radford will be prop next year, you can't count.

Well he did all last year.

Up front we have;
Cusack
Dowes
Radford
O'Meley
Moa

Lauaki will play 2nd row.

So how cant i count?

Needs to improve if he wants to avoid the 'average' axe next year. Cusack and even Radford can do the 'work horse' role better then him.

Would keep him with Cusack going personally.

I'm sure the rest of SL would be greatful if we offered Dowes another contract, I can only think of one or two SL teams that consider taking him off our hands.

Maybe but lets not forget....English props are bloody rare and when they come available they are snapped up....you dont see many props moving clubs do you.

Fitzgibbon plays as a 3rd prop from 13, which is what i expect us to go with.

Fitz gives more than a simple 3rd prop option though from 13 which Radders didnt do imo.

Ive said elsewhere that my starting props would be Cusack and Dowes/Radford with O'Meley and Moa off the bench. Radders is on par with Dowes for me currently although may just tip it with effort.

Would you care to elaborate Dave?