With the current front row options (sangare included) we're not getting in the top 4.

Absolutely right Seth. Its not just numbers at prop, its quality. Of our rotation we have one solid prop in Oledzki, three we have hopes for (Sangare, Holroyd, Walters) and two that look to be struggling with age (Prior) or generally poor (Tetevano). Tetevano, Prior and Oledzki have continually shown that as a group they cannot compete at all with Sts, and none of those three make big yards going forward.

In the back row we have fewer but the quality is higher - our first three of Martin, Bentley and Gannon are a higher quality than our best three props. They would also be expected to play close to 80 minutes if needed, whereas we absolutely have to rotate the props during a game.

Centres isn't a problem if Hardaker stays, and even less so if Sutcliffe stays as well. We've got Edwards and Simpson coming through and hopefully one or both will make it. We're well covered for fullback and the threequarters if Tindall stays. If anything we have lack of quality depth at halfback, although hopefully Sinfield will keep developing.

To me we need an absolute beast prop and possibly two. We need them even if some players we don't want hang around. Thompson hopefully will leave. It would make picking a 17 easier if Prior and/or Tetevano leaves, but regardless they are not top 4 material. There's no point signing another centre if we just get battered down the middle.

Agree with those above, prop is still the priority even with the sangare signing, probably followed by halfback depth. Centre will be fine if Hardaker and Sutcliffe stays and there is an expectation that Simpson/Edwards continue to develop. But we are far too quickly relying on an 18 year old or shuffling Leeming or Johnson (who hopefully will have a crack at 9 now Dwyer is going) if one of Austin or Sezer is out, and let’s be fair, Sezers injury record has proven a need for that cover.

The only reason id look at a second row would be if they offer something completely different. All our players seem to fit the high effort, workhorse type. It’d be nice to have an Ali type thrown into the mix, though granted they don’t grow on trees. Probably same in the props itd be nice to have an absolute wrecking ball like paasi even if they aren’t always the best defensively.

I agree we won’t match Saints at prop in 2023, but I just don’t think we can allocate even more of our salary cap to prop. We already know Tetevano takes up £150k of the cap (and that’s very poor value for us) with a bit of guess work Prior maybe £100k Oledzki £80k Sangare £50k Holroyd £35k Walters £25k, I’m going to estimate we’re already using £440k of the cap on our props for 2023.

We’d need to spend around £60-100k to bring in a prop who’s half decent, I’d estimate that would take us up to 1/4 of the salary cap on props, which is just too much to have a balanced squad imo, we’ve already seen this season when we’re without Newman we don’t have a decent centre and are lacking in attack.

We could look to bring your in a young inexperienced player like Walters, but with Holroyd as our 5th and Walters our 6th prop I think this would be unnecessary. When Tetevano and Prior leave they need to be replaced with top quality prop forwards, but we can’t justify it while they’re still with us.

I see Hardaker as first choice full back for 2023 (presuming he stays, he could leave and a new player be brought in) and Myler as back up for both full back and half back. If Hardaker is 1st choice full back we don’t want him to be filling in at centre all the time, Full back is his position not centre.

Sutcliffe at centre is our weakest player in the starting 17 and where we need to upgrade, Sutcliffe can stay as 3rd choice centre and a bit of 2nd row cover or move on.

Full back
Hardaker, Myler, Walker (possibly)

Centre
Newman, Sutcliffe, Simpson

Half back
Austin, Sezer, Myler, Sinfield

Hooker
Leeming, Johnson, O’Connor

I cannot see Sutcliffe as a bigger weakness than our starting props. I'm not saying he's the best centre around, but he can defend and do a reasonable job when he's not asked to make any decisions. Our best two props are absolutely miles behind the best at other clubs. Oledzki is solid but doesn't make much yardage and hasn't really shown he can front up someone like Walmsley. And he's better than the rest .....

I can see the logic, but we could have prime Senior or Lyon in the centre, we wouldn’t get anywhere near winning if Sezer is out for an extended period, or our props continue to get mulched by the likes of saints or Catalan. Didn’t we win two grand finals with either Ellis or Ablett filling in, it’s just not a priority for me, but I understand you have a different opinion.

As an aside, all this is subject to Zack staying, if he goes, we probably would need another utility type, or a starter to allow Sutty to be the utility. Anyone heard if it’s a case of if or when?

I agree with all of this. Very realistic appraisal of resources. I honestly think we are weak at 9 still too. Just don’t rate Leeming as highly as others do……

Sangare looks a right handful.
Think you might have one.

doesn't he just?

... For 12 minutes

he does 15 each half it's a start

French have only scored when he's been on the pitch mind.

Less than 15 first half, 8 when the games gone at the end of the 2nd. Don't get me wrong I loved the impact of those carries but that's not enough

We've needed an impact prop for a while. Mik, Tet can do long spells

He was impressive and eye catching going forward.
And showed some decent aggression.
But desperately needs more fitness.
12 mins in first half and 8 mins in second half is nowhere near enough.

Fair points. Think Hunswick and Smith will definitely be after more game time. But in fairness, I can't say Oledzki made a telling contribution to the game in comparison.

Depends what youre looking at sangares 3 telling carries or Oledzkis higher workload on and off the ball, I think Mik carried well to be honest and his numbers will be far ahead of sangares. Given the choice of the 2, I'd be taking Oledzkis contribution

Yep, I probably take Oledzki's level of consistency for granted. Just think that Sangare, if properly developed, has a bit of x factor about him.

Putting them in the same side seems a winner then?

If sangare can up his workload and manage at least 15 minutes a half. He made a big impact with a couple of carries, France went within 6 then he came off, he should have been a major part in France building on that going to half time and for the opening of the second half. There's either not enough trust due to defensive vulnerabilities or he just physically cant manage more minutes.

where are you getting that from? came on 17 minutes, went off 32 = 15 minutes
for an impact prop off our bench i dont think 15 minutes would be a bad stint

My mistake then if I've done him out of 3 minutes. Anyone know how many carries and tackles he made in for his 23 minutes on the field?

think i read he made about 90 metres and didnt miss a tackle, no idea on the other ones
not sure why youre so bothered about him not coming on earlier in the second half, its not like he can sub himself on

I'm bothered that the coaching team for whatever reason used him for very limited minutes, from what I've seen I'm not convinced on his overall game.