Like it or not, a weak defensive centre will be exploited by the opposing halfbacks and back row forwards.

It's probably the easiest position to attack.

At the moment, it's a toss up between Yeaman, who can at least defend, and someone else, who may improve our attacking options, but may give the opposition an easy(ier) way through.

The difference this season Crooks would have had Mini in front of him.Yeaman also had the benefit of having Ellis with him for most games.
I thought Yeaman was OK first two games but the last three have been very poor and whilst he made the occasional good tackle he has also missed a few and dropped some easy ball.
If Radford was true to his word about dropping players who are not performing then Yeaman should not be playing tomorrow if Lineham is fit.

Sorry, don't agree one bit. Defence isn't an issue for us at all. We need to get some flair in the team and if that means we are a little less secure in defence then so be it.

Besides, Crooks defence hardly made him a liability did it? In 2013 he played 18 league games. In that time we shipped an average of 19.27 points per game. If you include cup games that drops further. That is almost identical to what we have done this season. Last season, as a whole, we shipped 21.7 points.

No coincidence that Lineham has been distinctly average since not having Crooks by his side

What don't you agree with? Dropping Yeaman is a defensive risk, I didn't say it wasn't worth taking, but it's a risk nevertheless.
And Crooks defence was the main reason he became a liability, or have I got that wrong as well?

If Sa was fit then it would be a much easier decision, but Talanoa is hardly going to add flair, Rankin isn't really a centre, and that leaves Logan, who might do ok, but it's a bit of a risk for his development, and for the team as a whole.

I'd rather sign shillington than rapira but seems he is heading to the dobbins.

When was the last time one of our management team went out to oz to speak to players and their agents?

I think you have, I don't think he was a liability, he just had a weakness that needed addressing, much like Yeaman has with his attacking play, but it's too late now.

I'd love us to sign Crooks back next year.

So you're saying play Crooks despite his weaknesses, but not Yeaman because of his.

If Crooks was showing no sign of improvement, or just wanted to play in Aus, he became a "liability", although that word is a bit strong, to be fair.

I'd have Crooks in every week, but I'm not sure whether we'd now be top, or still struggling.

What quality player will want to sign for a Championship Club ?
If we don't start winning soon, that could be where Hull FC are heading !!

Quote: Jake the Peg "I'd rather sign shillington than rapira but seems he is heading to the dobbins. When was the last time one of our management team went out to oz to speak to players and their agents?'" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-leag ... um=twitter

Quote: Jake the Peg "I'd rather sign shillington than rapira but seems he is heading to the dobbins. When was the last time one of our management team went out to oz to speak to players and their agents?'" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-leag ... um=twitter

You never actually said that it's not a risk worth taking, but you were clearly suggesting we are better off with Yeaman than taking a risk, I disagree. By extension you are also defending the decision to freeze Crooks out and let him leave.

Crooks wasn't a liability in defence. He wasn't a good defender and its an area he has to address to take his game to the next level, but teams were hardly running in one try after another down his side.

Yes, because I think with good coaching Crooks could develop and improve his weakness, too late for Yeaman.

Presumably Crooks will be coached at the highest level in Aus so it will be interesting to see how his career develops over there.

You're really twisting my words now. I originally said
Am I really suggesting Yeaman rather than take a risk? If the risk is score 3 tries but let in 4 is it a risk worth taking? I don't know.

I'm not defending any decisions about Crooks leaving, I know as much (nothing) as most on here about what might have happened , but if he wanted away, then so be it.

Thorman also played down under and look what we got !!