Im being serious, the debate has been had before, we never normally carry a back on the bench, we almost always go with 2 props, a 2nd row and a hooker. We have back rowers that can cover the backs should we pick up an injury, such as Manu, Lee or even Berrigan. Why carry a back on the bench? (without the sarcasm this time!)

I'm with Big Dave T on this one, I don't see the need for it unless one of our starting backs goes into the game carrying an injury. We'd be going from carrying a 10 minute substitute to one who may not even be required at all.

I would not have any back cover either, waste of a spot tbh, the likes of Washy and Berro can always play there is anything drastic happens.

Remind me where it gets Leeds and Saints etc?

Thats my point, thats why i'd go for a big bench with impact like King, Thacks, Manu and Houghton.

Tony would be ideal for the bench spot

As do we with the players we have such as Berrigan our international centre and Washy etc etc

Rubbish again. Why are our 2nd rowers doing 80 minutes every week?

Manu = one of the best impact 2nd rows in SL using in 2x20, how do we play him??
Tickle, we have 2 other goal kickers in the side, he needs to have a rest.
Dowes and Cusack dont need to do more than 45 mins each, the work needs to be spread across our pack. This way our backs may not need to come in and do so much graft to allow them to be dangerous out wide when we have the ball in advanced positions.

Sorry to say it but Agar is starting to look like the Phil Brown of superleague!!