Remember Gaz Ellis debut ? I wonder how many games we have Reynolds Sneyd and Connor all fit ?
75 % would be amazing

Great debut, gives our attack a whole new dimension. The link from him to Sneyd to Conner to set up Griffins try was brilliant and judging by the state of him at the end of the game he doesn't go shirking anything. Good times ahead

This is what a lot of us have been saying for a year or two now, you can't have Shaul and Sneyd as two of your pivots as neither are creative enough or have that good a passing game.

Having Reynolds with Connor as FB, makes our passing much faster and accurate, there is no way Shaul would have put Griffin through that gap.

We do lose some pace, so would love to see Hodgson working wit Shaul to improve his passing and decision making in the opposition's 20, this would gives us even more competition for places.

Can you see any potential for Shaul to get better, he has played the same way forever, maybe Hodgson can coach him as he isnt his mate, he's his boss, hope so.

Probably not, however some players can adapt, Danny Mcguires game use to be all about pace and support play, but in his latter days he changed his style and improved his creative side, Hodgson was an amazing FB who was very creative, very much a modern day FB, if he can't improve him, I don't think anyone day.

Jamie Shaul is amazing - in broken play, not structured plays. He is the type of player that can score from nothing, which is useful but as a pivot, his input is so limited that we cannot afford to play him as a fullback. It is a great shame that his passing is so limited, if he could improve that side, I think he would have done so already, for me that talent is not coached in to a player it is a natural trait that some are born with, but not Jamie.. If he had the skills that Connor has, his potential would be virtually limitless in the British game. I'd often thought he'd be a great hooker but again, he lacks the distribution skills required. Nice problem to have though, excellent for squad rotation and to keep Jake on his game.

Tbf I think we got all that stuff from Kelly too. I think Reynolds is perhaps a smarter player than Kelly though. Albert had a tendancy to overplay and often made errors doing it. I think Josh is a better decision maker.

Have said many times Hull should use Shaul as a nine now the rules have changed.His running with the ball from acting half would be sensational.
You dont need distribution skills to be able to pick up a ball and pass to a first receiver.
In any case he cant be worse at passing a ball than Danny Houghton as was shown yesterday.

I've often thought that Shaul is our best winger who has had to play FB because we didn't have anyone better. Now he is no.2 FB he can challenge for a wing spot. Assuming he makes a full recovery he is fast, can get on the end of a break, can beat multiple defenders and is safe in defence. Further, he can come inside early in the set and run from dummy half. Too early to say for sure but I reckon he is more likely to oust a winger than Connor.

For me the difference between Kelly and Reynolds is down to team play. Kelly was an excellent player for us but the big problem was a lot of what he did was off the cuff and none of the team knew what he was doing or thinking as he didn't seem to play to any structure (even at Rovers) he seemed to just have a free role.
Reynolds seems to have the same if not more technical and natural ability but also seems a much more disciplined player in terms of the roles and structures in play.

That may well be down to the lack of structures and what Kelly was told to do by Radford etc but I think Josh Reynolds is certainly the better fit for us with Sneyd etc.

In his after match interview though he did say he was more of an off the cuff player and had to remember to play to the game plan.
Think both players are similar but Hodgson is the difference to be honest and the way he sets the team up.
Reynolds was given licence to play on either side of the pitch were as Kelly was predominantly played down the right and Sneyd on the left in the Radford era.

I agree a lot is down to Hodgson and suggested that might have been how Radford wanted Kelly to play or maybe just didn’t have the players disciplined enough or define the roles enough. That’s is probably why AP went for BH to take us forward. Was good to see AP smiling and enjoying the game rather than being totally frustrated.

I pointed that out on the game thread, there is no way our passing would have been fast enough to get Connor in the 3 on 2 situation for the Griffin try if it wasn't Sneyd passing to Reynolds.

That try was clearly a off the training pitch structure play. The PTB was to the side of the post to open up a 60/40 split with Sneyd and Reynolds doubling up, Manu really sold his dummy run to get Connor even more space on the outside.

It makes a nice change to actually have an attacking structure to discuss