Superb. Not many will manage that.

I agree with what you said earlier. Of all the stand offs I’ve seen down the years, Kelly is the best.
He’s got everything.
Been an honour watching him these last couple of years. He also seems happy in our environment

I really like this idea of attacking with Kelly as a full back and Connor as a half and then switching in defence. It takes all the pressure off Kelly and and allows him just to do what he does best, which is running at the line and beating defenders. Throw in Westerman aswell and it's an extremely exciting and varied attack. So many different things that defenders have to think about.

The only question is. Is bringing Kelly off the bench against tiring defences an inspired move, or is it a mistake to not have your best players on the field for as long as possible? It worked great the other day, but would it have worked better if we had just gone with Connor at FB from the start?

Players have come and gone at dizzying rate in recent years - there are few we have had much chance to get very attached to. Or, sadly, whose departure has been hugely worrisome. Not since the likes of Michael Dobson or Josh Hodgson.

But, as the Tralfamadorians said to Billy Pilgrim, ‘ignore the awful times and concentrate on the good ones.’ Given our different perspectives (mine and thine, not mine and the Tralfamadorians), we inevitably assign subjective importance to different things. That’s where I think Irregular Hoops missed a little leap of empathy or imagination in his post, in that thinking about what might have been with Scott Taylor wouldn’t have been fun for Rovers fans so many of us won’t have much, and 7 years on there’s whole load more poop on top of it in the ignore pile. That was a long and inelegant sentence, but hopefully the gist is clear. There’ll be loads of stuff that you’ve forgotten or conditioned yourself to ignore, that i’ll treasure for many years to come. Makes it bearable, dunnit?

"would it have worked better if we had just gone with Connor at FB from the start?"

No.

Absolutely stunning display by Albert Kelly on Friday (said so at the time). Not seen a player in a Hull shirt play like that since the days of Peter Sterling.

Agreed he was superb, can't argue with that.

But why not?

I'm not knocking what Wynne did btw, he was very good again and looks a star in the making, but we were a different beast when Kelly was on. Why wouldn't you just have your two most dangerous players on the park from the beginning? Or is holding Kelly back until the second half getting the best out of him?

Anyone with a more insightful response than just, "no"?

Two super displays by AK from the bench, don’t fix what isn’t broke

The half back situation was alway going to be a conundrum if all three were fit. Leave one out and you can bet there would be a transfer request in .

Radford has taken some flack for not using youth. Here he is integrated Wynne into the team at a time he has the luxury of jiving the kid a breather with Connor moving to FB.

On the flip side to this, we are seeing Griffin started at centre and moved to the back row, Connor goes to centre.

Then Kelly gets introduced. Fresh legs against tiring players.

Fair play to Radford for working this scenario

As he's such a danger man for us, teams target him in defence, to try and take the energy out of him. I think Radford has been therefore keeping him out of the early exchanges and bringing him on when the game opens up a bit. It seems to be working out well. .

Exactly, and the likes of Wynne, for example, can be used as young kids should be used, gradually introducing them. Unlike last season when a few of the lads suffered due to being over exposed. Massi though it seems is the opposite, as he has come through a torrid end to last season, developing into a great find.

Steady on, we'll be having Denton trying to get back on here to tell you its lies, all lies.

For what its worth I'm with you all the way, it was a masterstroke!!