remember Horne was McRae's chosen one

Thought Seymour had played a fair bit at 6? Could he just shift there if Ellis played? Either way, Horne is likely to be far better playing alongside a recognised halfback, so I reckon it's too early to write him off just yet.

What actual evidence do you have that Horne was done any favours and/or played against the wishes of the various coaches?

Just because something doesn't coincide with your wishes or opinion doesn't [inecessarily[/i make it wrong or some sort of fit-up.

what evidence do you have that he wasn't?

just because you're a moderator doesn't [inecessarily[/i make your opinion more valid.

IIRC you're right about Seymour, and that would indeed be an option if Horne doesn't hack it. I was just questioning the suggested straight swap of Ellis for Horne.

I think you're right also about Horne playing alongside a (hopefully) settled and experienced halfback partner. And if for any reason he doesn't step up to the mark we have a number of options. It just amuses me that so many people are ready to bin him without even waiting to see how he - or indeed any of his rivals for the spot - shapes up next season.

You want me to prove a negative?

Since I have been back watching the team Horne's been the only recognized #6 we had so how you can say he has been done favours is beyond me. We have had no alternative but to play him there, even if he wasn't 100% fit.

I was more referring to how we never seemed to be looking for another 6 regardless of how Horne played, and how sentimentality/cheapness seemed to override form

exactly my point

In first grade NRL, Seymour has started 81 games at scrum half, and 31 games at stand off- suggesting he can probably do well in either position. He played the majority of his 2nd grade football at stand off too.

Surprisingly (to me anyway), Horne has started 125 games at scrum half, 115 at stand off, 31 at Fullback and 15 at centre.

Whatever your opinion of either of them, neither are lacking experience in either of the halfback positions!

Personally I think that had more to do with the fact that since Cooke left we've been struggling to find a regular 7 without trying to look for a 6 at the same time. The only decision you could reasonably label as sentimental for me would be the length of contract he was offered when returning from that neck injury.

I'd much rather see Turner continue his development & decent form at the back end of last season than having Martin given the 3 shirt.

Decent form against lesser teams but went missing versus the bigger teams.....wouldnt offer a new contract when his is up.

in a team that went missing for the big games all season (bar 1 or 2) that doesn't say anything really does it?
The kid has potential, he's had nothing but changes on his wing (when he was picked), he's still only 22 and frankly I'd rather we kept Turner over a fair few others.