I don't think it will make a difference. A cup final is about who turns up on the day. I think both sets of players will be determined to be at their best in a final. You don't really need any motivation. The team talks will be about going out and enjoy the occasion. The team that can handle the occasion best will win it. I think it's an intriguing contest without the big dogs at the table. Hopefully they will produce a nail-biting final.

Having met Andy he’s a really good guy but he was and is never a first team coach.
As for kr they made a really big gamble tonight complete opposite to leigh playing their first team.
A little part of me would like to see kr get the monkey off their back as we had to for so many years. Yet kr as a club are so grubby , I just want leigh to win.

leigh havent got much choice

Could loan 17 players,?

Didn't fonua hobble off in the game before our final in 2016? Thankfully he played in the final but could easily have missed it and the outcome could have been different, so you can see why rovers did what they did

I get why they rested most of their 17, just don't understand why they loaned 3 players, when they could have played 3 more academy players, its not as if it would have made any difference to the results of the first team and reserve team.

Despite resting 10 plus players they only has 4 players in that 17 to come through the academy.

I think he carried on, but everyone groaned when he didn't get up immediately

Cas look to be in a right state, on and off the pitch.
Wakey seem to be in a better position, especially off the pitch with the new stand.

Not sure a new coach or Blake Austin can turn Cas round.

Think we rested Ellis, Manu and Watts in 2016 the week before the final but we beat Catalans 44-0 anyway.

In 2017 we were again almost full strength the week before Wembley althoiugh Albert Kelly and Scott Taylor didn't play in the defeat by Huddersfield.

Not bothered about what Rovers did. The battering their points difference took could benefit us if we take advantage. Leigh are obviously taking a risk tomorrow but they are still aiming for a home semi final 80 minutes from Old Trafford.

Sam Burgess one of the favourites for the Wire job. Can't see it ending well if he's appointed

Be a shocking appointment on paper. Thought they would go after Rowley.

He'll get the respect off the players and has big contacts in nrl

Rowley is just like Watson salford is a free hit with no expectations punching above their weight when they do well

That's enough then, get him signed, doesn't matter about his coaching experience as he has a few mates in Australia.

Are you telling me you would rather have Sam Burgess as head coach at Hull rather than Paul Rowley?

The three loan players are all 20 and will all have turned 21 by the the middle of October. Between them, they’ve more than 20 games for SL clubs, plus bits and pieces on loan with Championship clubs. The academy players are 2 years younger and those are a big 2 years for development. While I assume you’ve intentionally confused academy products and academy players elsewhere, if you don’t understand why playing seven academy [uplayers[/u away at Wigan might be the taking the step from ‘brave’ to bonkers… maybe you’ve confused yourself more than anybody else?

The results wouldn’t have been different but the scores likely would have been. 64-6 and 74-12 were big enough margins. There used to be a Leeds fan who’d encourage us to bin off Ben Fisher to give Ben Kaye a chance - because, if we weren’t going to win a trophy, we shouldn’t worry too much about winning games and we might as well give young British players a chance. Almost like he didn’t have our best interests at the forefront of his mind.

When Hull shipped 60 against Wigan with a depleted side, with Walker, Simm and Longstaff on loan - would you really have wanted to include more teenagers than the three you had on the bench that day? Would being part of a team that shipped a potentially historic score have been good for their development? Even a year later, Smith deploys them only occasionally and cautiously.

It was 1 game which you clearly weren’t giving yourselves a chance of winning. You’ve just sent those 3 20 year olds onto the pitch like lambs to the slaughter and now sent them back to their clubs. Quite why their clubs agreed is beyond me.

We intended using Walker, Simm and Longstaff a hell of a lot more than 1 game and they did improve our team at the time. No comparison therefore?

That's right.I went to a few from Christopher Wren
Water splash final one of them.Our teacher put a bet on Wakefield.Would have won a tidy sum.At Black & White MinstrelShow he was seen in the bar drowning his sorrows!!
Happy innocent days indeed.

I don't understand why Rovers fans can't get that. Our loans where long term to cover injuries, there's are for one gane so they can rest people, a bit of a difference.

I guess for game time. We sent Milnes to play one game for Wakefield (also at Wigan) when they were in the middle of their really bad run. I agree it was a bit lambs to the slaughter - but maybe better than playing reserve level rugby at this point in their careers - and the option Dave suggests turns the same thing up to 11.

You needed loan players to cover injuries for a few games last year. We needed them for one game to help avoid injuries to the cup final squad and the MRP. The differences reflect circumstances rather than any particular difference in ethos or approach, imo.

Olly? Used to chat to him on Airlie St. end of Boulevard

But you said earlier that you get why we would rest most of our first 17, suggesting (extrapolating just slightly) that it isn’t unreasonable. Our need was short-term, hence short term deals were most appropriate.

Most yes, but could have either played a couple more first teasers or academy players.

You also have two players out on loan at Newcastle you could have called back, one played today, about as experienced as the lad from Warrington.

You haven't broke any rules, but I think it's poor what you have done and it could have been avoided.

You also had 4 players in your 21 who didn't make the 17, including Fishwick who has played a few first team ganes.

I think we ate done here MR, not sure we are going to agree on this and I respect you and your opinion (even if I don't agree

) to get into this anymore.

I probably would yeah burgess has worked under the best coaches in the world and would get the respect of the players which in this day and age with player power is what's needed

So can see why wire are going for something different

Rowley done ok but I've seen coaches at Salford flop at next bigger job as salford never have any real expectations

Rowley is a steady choice at best hasn't exactly set the world alight either !

Completely agree as Warrington are much like we were in terms of needing an experienced coach with a proven track record of turning a fractured club round.
Reading the interview with Middleton their chairman in saying they all need to learn from the mistakes I’d be very surprised if they appointed Burgess or anyone with a lack of experience.

They tried that with Powell.......

Only they hadn’t really as Middleton intimated in his interview as Powell has little experience of rebuilding a squad. What has Powell achieved as a Coach of any real success? Granted he got Cas to a GF but that imploded with the trouble behind the scenes with Hardaker. Since that point they went backwards and Radford inherited a mess which he compounded further himself.