This.

Madness to play him without another game. Downright unfair and possibly insulting to let him dig us out of a hole for the league but then drop him for the final even if he impresses. I'm not campaigning for him to play right now, but we should be open to it. Having no intentions of letting him play regardless of how he does in the mean time is just blatantly wrong IMO.

Couple of questions:

If we'd somehow made last year's final, would you have played Lineham?
Briscoe had played 14 games before playing in the 2008 final, where's the cut-off for number of games before being ready?

Don't disagree about taking risks, but I do disagree with deciding that Shaul is more of a risk before giving him some more games to impress. The 'only played 1 game' point works both ways, as much as he is an unknown and might freeze, he might also cause problems for Wigan because he's unknown to them and play with no fear because of the enthusiasm of youth helping him feel no pressure.

He has to be given as much consideration as anyone else who can play there IMO.

Why does he have to be amazing with zero errors to displace Whiting though, when he made several on Sunday and isn't a fullback?

I'd be more inclined to agree with you if Horne was fit.

Whiting also made a couple of breaks, scored a try and saved a try. He has big match experience and dropped into FB at a moment's notice and helped us to win the game.

I like Shaul but to me it's a potential disaster waiting to happen. Lets see how he plays, if he plays but I don't think PG will take a risk for Wembley unless both Whiting and Horne are out.

Which is why I'd hate to lose the advantage he offers on the bench for the final, he can do that with just about any position. Tie him to fullback (which is not his position anyway) and if anything happens in another position we're screwed.



That's all I'm saying: See how he does, and if he plays well give him a chance. Not considering him simply because of his age/experience regardless of how he plays is just plain wrong IMO.

Horne, if fit, is the full back at Wembley. Simple as that for me

I mentioned this earlier in the thread, for me Whiting has to be on the bench at Wembley for his utility value. Gentle will make the call on Shaul only if Horne doesn't make it, but he will need to play very well starting Friday night.

Which is exactly how I think it should be. I was just disagreeing with the suggestion that Shaul should not be considered even if he plays well between now and then to play Whiting there instead.



If Horne plays 80 minutes between now and the final he'd probably be my favourite for the spot, too.

In 2008 Horne played despite being out for many weeks after he was diagnosed with diabetes, and was almost skeletal, still had a good game despite being slammed on his back by James Graham in the 1st minute.

If we can get him on the pitch Horne will get the nod over Shaul, and you would want his experience for this occasion. Think Shaul could be a star of the future but this has come too early for him (as in lack of SL experience), but if are options are limited he still may get the chance to play.

I think if Horne had played full back instead of Whiting on Sunday we may have got a couple more tries

This for me, if Horne can prove he is fit and can play against either rovers or Salford he starts at FB.

If not its a tough choice between whiting and Shaul, obviously a lot will depends on how Shaul gets on over the next couple of games.

I would much rather Whiting was on the bench because he is so versatile.

If Horne is not fit then I would probably go with Shaul at FB if he can show he is up to it between now and then.