Definitely Sneyd.

You give praise to Kelly but then damn three other players. Campese kicked well, most commentators mentioned this. He did the simple things well and made two telling passes. As his first run out in a new team after only three weeks with the club don't know what more you expect. To say Weyman is a plodder shows how little you have seen of him. At fullback I suppose we need a player who defends like Shaul?

If you overall are very pleased with the runout you must be easily pleased. If the match stopped at half time I could see your argument but to concede so many unanswered points must be a cause for concern even to the most blinkered supporter.

League matches nowadays seem to have 8,9,10 and 11 as replacement candidates, with at least 10 of the starting line-up staying on at any one time, subject to injuries, of course.

Getting 10 substitutes on the pitch to get some game time is bound to cause disruption.

It might improve performance, but more likely it will not.

You're right. Whoever was our last man in the line (and I didn't think it was Talanoa) was well off the wing. Mind you, my eyesight isn't great at that distance.

It was Sneyd, but it was on a free play, so you can't blame him for trying it.

Rovers fans saying they played poor in first half because they have not played together? but second half they did know each other play, well what takes a side weeks to get to know took Rovers only forty minutes,some going that.I take nothing away from Rovers win they did well but injuries and interchanges coupled with lack of possession did not help.Happy with run out ..yes ..happy with result i would be telling porkies if I said yes ,friendly pre season or not I want to win ,worried definitely not

I think both teams showed up well personally, was one of the most enjoyable friendly games i have been to. A lot's been said about too many derbies but i would rather watch that in pre season then go to like huddersfield with a few hardy souls, no atmosphere and less intense game.

Hull looked dangerous first half, first 20 especially. I do not think it was a case of us not knowing each other, but to go from training intensity to derby intensity is hard to adjust to without no game first. We were blowing very early as the game was so fast, and credit to hull for that as they were very intense indeed. Once the cobwebs were blown and the game started to get a normal intensity to it we got a foothold in the game.

2nd half i am not so sure why Hull faded so badly. We had some moments of magic and defended much better, and as mentioned our kicking game was very good making you start sets from your 10/20. I still feel as though you had enough quality on the park to create more, never materialised really. 1st half you had plenty of options and runners, second half went a bit one up rugby. Can't read to much into it though with pre season.

The result is irrelevant really, but i think we will be the happier camp as we showed resilience and character to come back from behind and win, and winning is a good habit to have. I think we both could shock teams though and could be a good season for both. Both Hull clubs in the 8 is a good result from last season.

Your top 3 players for me......minichello, ellis, sa, ( sneyd tried hard and kicking was good, just got overshadowed a bit)

We've seen enough times in the last 2 season how poorly we cope without ellis so I'm half suspecting that his injury had a big bearing on our apparent collapse. Something radford needs to get to grips with and a worry even if he does come back quickly from his injury

This.

No need to half-suspect.

I fully agree with this, it takes a side with as many new faces as Rovers have weeks to gel. They will need to build upon a reasonable second half performance to trouble the better teams in Super League but have massive room given time to reach their potential.
Hull fc, with only a minimum of incoming players gelled far better so match fitness apart, and most of yesterday's team, Westerman apart had played last week, could be said to be far nearer to their best than their opponents yesterday.

Was a decent run out , what was a bit of a concern though was how much the intensity dropped when we made the subs in the first half

Too many people reading too much into this game, it was only a friendly, we made a few changes, dropped a few balls, silly penalties, Rovers got a roll on and we didn't handle the kicks well enough. In the past we have looked really good in pre-season including beating Rovers and then performed poorly during the season.

I have seen enough to suggest we will be better than last year and have much better options all across the park, our halfs will get better the more we play, we are certainly miles ahead of last year.

Also good to have options on both sides of the field for a change.

I think the problem was that we have often dropped off in intensity, dropped a few balls, and given pens away in recent years. At some point or another we're going to have to change this if we are ever to become serious challengers. Yes it was only a friendly, yes there was nothing to play for and yes it's early days for the side with brand new pivots but there's never a better time like the present to start removing these traits whatever type of match is being played. I'm not downhearted but there's a tinge of disappointment that we couldn't prove that we can close out a 22-6 lead - the reasons for which are the same as they've been for donkey's years.

Spot on. The appearance of all the familiar failings from the last few seasons is, to put it mildly, disappointing.

Ellis said as much on RH this morning. When Dad's not there to marshall them it all goes pear-shaped. Those weren't his words but they're mine.