Fell off a lifeboat

exactly, lets see what happens first, I though Radford looked a different player in the rovers game aswell.

I'm sorry but those looking for some sort of tactical reason as to why Dowes, Radford and Cusack are all playing at the expense of Moa are clutching at straws. Its simply down to not having the balls to tell one of the three that they are dropped, simple as that. We now have 3 props who couldn't break an egg let alone a tackle. 3 into 2 just doesn't go so I suggest Mr Agar needs to grow a pair and decide which 2 to go with for the good of the team and if it puts 1 players nose out of joint so be it. The strength of the squad was supposed to allow Agar to pick players on form, on form Cusack doesn't deserve his spot. From what I understand Calderwood is not injured so dropping him to accomadate Hall on the wing is just bizarre! If you Hall needs to play then again, grow a pair, and pick him in his best position. Will these changes be the difference between winning and losing at Saints? Who knows but I'm alot less confident now.

I thought he did, but then, I also thought that Moa did. Cusack looks underdone and ought to have missed out, IMO.

What do you know? If Calderwood isn't injured, I don't see why the club should say he is unless it's a disciplinary issue they're trying to keep in house. If he's just been dropped in favour of playing Hall out of position, then why not say so?

You certainly seem convinced, and I wouldn't dismiss your information out of hand without knowing the source, but I find it hard to believe that Agar would put his job at risk just to keep some players happy. He knows that failure will see him sacked sharpish, so why take that chance?

Agreed. Hall will be scoring tries for fun at rovers next year

About 7.30 on Saturday

Saints

And unless his defence improves big style he will be letting a few in as well.

Hall has defensive frailities and against Saints they will definately be punished and targeted. Some games no matter what a player brings in attack it will not compensate for what it loses in defence.

Most people are expecting a tight game and in a game like one silly defensive mistake can cost you 2 points. As we have seen Hall is a confidence player and the last thing he needs is a mare in the first game.

Moa only got a contract because of the swell of public opinion. If it was up to agar he wouldn't even be at the club. His whole ethos is to play a defence orientated game and hopefully manage to scrape more points than the opposition. It's why he plays a prop at LF where the successful teams play a runner or someone with a bit of creativity.

dowes, cusack and radford as 3 of our props means we'll be on the back foot against graham, fa'asavalu and puletua.

I think moa would have given us something different