You said "he hardly breaks any tackles", I found that rather surprising, so I checked it out.
You appear to be supporting your claims that Griffin is a poor signing by making statements which are clearly untrue.
Nothing new there, I guess.

Fully agree. Both bring something different to the team and have played a full part in another Top 3 finish and successful Challenge Cup campaign.

Never well that is surprising you checked it out
Thats all you do on here stat man try and belittle certain posters for having a different opinion to you and some of your pals.
You still have not answered the subject question Connor or Griffin
lets have your opinion either/or and nothing to do with trying to create a case that Griffin is not a disappointing signing by checking and quoting stats.
Given Griffin has been given an extended run by Radford in the centre and Connor hasnt there can be no doubt on his few performances as a centre that Connor is a far better option than Griffin and deserves to keep his place.

Skirted around the topic
you have not answered the subject question Mrs B
Connor or Griffin

And after a good game game in the halves some wanted him to replace snyed hahahahaha I cant stop hahahahaha , but on topic, id go for connor over griffin imo

Stat man, that's a new one. Do I really use them that much (if at all)?
So it's ok for you to use stats (incorrectly) in your argument, but not for me to correct you when you're clearly wrong.
I'm happy with either player at centre, if that not too hard to understand.
I also don't feel the need to criticise players at every opportunity, but I'm more than happy to defend them when it's not justified.

Depends on the opposition and associated gameplan as they both bring something different, physicality vs guile. Personally I like Connor but can see what Griffin brings to this very good squad. Good to be having the debate, a couple of years ago this was about Sa vs Whiting vs Arundel or some such.

Given that Griffin has been given an extended run in the centres by Radford and Connor hasn't would in fact suggest that Radford has been of the opinion that Griffin is generally the better option in his view.

There isn't much between them and the final decision probably rests on fitness and the nature of the opposition. Thankfully Radford doesn't seem to use blind hatred of individuals as a selection criteria.

Just received the result in from Caravan Park by pidgeon as follows;
"We vote for Connors unanimously"
"Can't say we know much about the lad Griffin, anyway, we've never seen him show the kind of guile, footwork and pace you need to be a decent centre and win the big games."

No it doesnt
Connor hasnt been given the chance to have an extended run at right centre.
His versatility has probably worked against him fitting into several other positions when injuries have dictated.

Now that made me smile!

Connor for me has teh xfactor plus cockyness too, Griffin doesn't do enough for me

I like both of them & think both of them offer something different to the team. I think Griffin has found it difficult to adapt to this season but his performances of late have been good.

For me though if I had to choose one I'd go for Connor as he has the ability to change a game. He was excellent on Friday (regardless of the 3 try's he got) and his work rate and reading of the game. The other thing I like about Connor is he is one of those players you love if he plays for you or hate if he plays against you, he gets under the skin of the opposition and something we've lacked. Think having both Connor & Carlos in the centres give our back line a much greater attacking threat.
Though I still rate Griffin but feel from what I've seen this season Connor would be in ahead of him.

It is a tough call. Griffin gives us better go forward, Connor is more skillful and seems to make things happen a little more often. Not much to separate them in defence. The trouble starting Connor at centre is that he is a very useful option to have on the bench to be able to change things up if it isn't working or if there is an injury to a back. However if we are just going to have Connor on the bench and swap him for Griffin after an hour as we have done a few times it's pointless.

Next week I think I'd be tempted to start Connor at centre and have Griffin on the bench instead of Fash to play back row, and it still gives an option to change things up if required. You get something out of both of them then, and whilst I like Fash I think Griffin carries the ball stronger.

Id stick with fash , why have a on the bench to play out of position when fash is in good form. Like you say connor makes things happen and can always be moved if injuries elsewhere