I don't agree with dropping back line players that are doing just fine. They, far more than forwards need to play together consistently to understand each other better. We've had a fair bit of chopping and changingwith only Shaul who has been the fixture.
Dropping Micheals for Talanoa sends out the wrong message and against the grain of playing those in form.
Whilst rightly you could say Talanoa is better getting fast ptb/penalties resulting from that and has more size, he isn't as fast as Micheals, is a far poorer defender in all aspects (and.particularly frail under the high ball) but they both finish equally well. Micheals can play left or right side of the pitch in either wing or centre position too without any bother.

There's really no justification at this moment in to change IMHO

True enough. I think most would agree you get a reasonable read of the competition after 11 rounds. If we lose both the next couple of games we'd still be 6th/7th, but obviously there's a chance to step on as the games in hand unwind. I'm sure this isn't lost on the team so hopefully we can take it.

Two trains of thought for Radford here,

1. Pick players on form i.e. Michaels
2. Pick players suitable for the opposition i.e. Talanoa

On the latter we have a large squad so we should utilise it and rest players when necessary. It's a tough decision to make and if it doesn't work out for us then I'm sure people will in hindsight state the obvious. The Hudds game is huge potential banana skin. Lose and once again we're knocked off balance. Win and it will build on momentum and belief. Just my opinion of course

If you are choosing Talanoa based on the opposition what specifically is that that we need against Hudds that Michaels or indeed Naughton, Lancaster don't offer?
It certainly isnt defusing Brough's high bombs as he has been very iffy under the high ball more often than not.
I don't see us losing due to any one player, Talanoa if picked , which i wouldn't be particularly unhappy with will do fine, it's whether making the change is justifiable and doesn't induce negatives either on or off field

Why change a winning combination? I can't see Radders changing the team to much anyways. They will be opportunities later on in the season for the likes of Talanoa to come back in the side. But for now in my opinion I think we should keep the same team.

so to the opposition. hudds lost a close game to cas today, but looking at the relevant forums it seems that cas were missing 9 players, 7 of which would have been in that team had they been fit. hudds were missing 3 or 4 including a couple with illness. the concensus on their game was that is was very poor with lots of errors and both defences awol - pretty obvious from the score.

we will be going into this game on the back of games against two of the top teams in the league which we won, confidence and standards will be high and as long as we don't get dragged down a level, i can't see us losing. of course FC being FC, this could well happen as it has done so many times before. i really can't see anderson raising the efforts of the hudds team, if he could he surely would have done it by now, so whether we win or lose will be purely down to us. this might sound arrogant but we've done well in recent weeks and have earned the right to be arrogant. all successful teams need to have an air of arrogance and confidence - just not too much!

For me I would keep both Michaels and Yeaman in the 17.

Neither have let the team down and have been a big part in the teams turn around. Both have been defensively sound with Michaels really impressing me with his returns and in taking the kicks/bombs put up. Yeaman has also impressed with his passing something I never thought I would equate to him however he has to now or face losing his place again.

For me Talanoa has not been as soild or as complete as Michaels and no doubt with kicks probably coming from Broughy I would rather have Michaels under them than Talanoa.

Thats the whole point of a squad having competition, while you are playing well you should keep your place until your form drops. Would be complete madness to drop either of them for Talanoa unless they are not fit to play.

I wouldn't worry so much guys we are on short turnaround have a team of headless chickens and will manufacture a way to put you in scoring positions like we did with Castleford yesterday.

Complacency will be your worst enemy I believe start off fast and score early and it will be game over before half time Frank Pritchard will have a field day with our current defensive capabilities.

I wouldn't bet on Hull unless we were +40 in the betting if that puts things in to perspective

Still two tough games and would be happy with one win from two, keep the same side for this week, but rest anyone tired or with a knock.

Looking forward to the game and hopefully a decent crowd.

Yesterdays man (as you put it) or not Yeaman is playing well and shouldn't be dropped for Talanoa who when played at Centre is bloody awful.

Yeaman has copped a lot of stick over the past couple of seasons and righly so sometimes but FFS the guy deserves some credit for the perfomances he has put in whether he's nearing the end or at the start of his Hull FC career.

Talanoa should not get back in unless there is an injury at the moment in my opinion but need Carlos utility value
Shaul
Michaels
Fonau
Yeaman
Naughton
Pryce
Sneyd
Taylor
Houghton
Watts
Ellis
Manu
Washbrook
Subs
Tuimavave
Bowden
Pritchard
Green/Thompson

I was simply saying it depends what Radford sees as "the future", Yeaman deserves credit for his improvement I agree.

Whilst I've not been Yeaman's biggest fan, the left centre spot must be his on form. The continued pressure for places should keep everyone on their toes and this is the perfect example. Tuimavave on the bench acknowledges his value to the side. It puts pressure on Yeaman to keep his place and on Tuimavave when he gets his chance.

Should be a comfortable win if we turn up in the right frame of mind and hudds continue with the form they've shown so far this season but you just know that one (or both) of those won't happen. It never does when we're involved