Agree with you that this is what McNamara will do. Just baffles me that McNamara has stuck to his beliefs (rightly or wrongly) and put all his eggs in one basket and gone with Chase and Sinfield. He disillusioned our best half back, went against the popular choice of the fans and media and now it looks like he is going to put Sinfield at hooker anyway.

Personally I'd prefer someone who plays at hooker consistently (not as if we're short of players who are playing well in that position) but I feel we need Sinfield at half back to kick and control. While sinfield at hooker worked against the exiles, I don't think it will against NZ and OZ as we need a decent kicking game.

Lunt and Roby. If he puts Sinfield at 9, he wants sacking.

It will be Sinfield with Roby as interchange.

Nope, not good enough.

No chance, Sinfield will play 6.

I'd go with this.

Think it will be Roby with Burrow on the bench, Lunt in the squad.

He will have 6 on his back but will spend a chunk of time at dummy half just as he did for the exiles game, until he went off injured and the team lost any shape structure and leadership

I don't think this is AS bad as people are suggesting.

I'm of the opinion that Roby is definitely an 80min hooker but I think he could be lethal playing from the bench vs Aus/NZL.

It keeps Sinfield away from the halves too, which is a positive.

Burrow is tosh at hooker, IMO.

Burrow has been playing hooker pretty much full time for Leeds for nigh on 3 years now, in that time he has been a big reason why Leeds have won two grand finals and got to two CC finals. He isn’t a great classical hooker you are right, his distribution isn’t great, his defense whilst absolutely textbook understandably isn’t a strong point, but he is a very very dangerous player who not only creates space for himself but the danger he creates also creates space for his team mates. In tight games he is invaluable, not only because of the amount of penalties he wins against lazy tackling in tired defences but because he is a player who offers something very different which you have to set up to defend against. Like Tomkins, Burrow gets other teams playing a different game to what they want to play.

Any other hooker we had bar maybe higham would just offer more of the same to Roby, if that were the case I’d rather just keep Roby on, but with Burrow he not only offers something different from hooker but also cover at Halfback.

I see what you're saying. That's pretty fair.

If Roby is 100% match fit he should be first choice. Would like to see Houghton get a chance.

What, even if they win?

open play kicking is so important at that level, Id love for Houghton get a go, but it'll be Roby + probably Sinfield.

Not a fan of Mcilorum, doesn't seem to offer much apart from distribution and aggro.

Roby still head and shoulders above the rest and would go with Lunt as well...Mcllorum will get wound up and Houghtons passing and decision making isnt international class.

I'd start McIlorum against the Aussies just to wind them up a bit, see who he can take down with him.

Lunt, Roby and Burrow

Past Roby, my favourite is Houghton. Very good all round hooker imo.

I know burrow can present a big threat, but a big part of being a hooker is defending and, whilst he's brave enough, he cannot contribute to a physical defence in or around the ruck like the other hookers do.

We do have a huge pack though, especially if Burgess plays 13. Sinfield is also a very good defender, probably doesn’t have it in him to defend for 80mins at 13 or 9 anymore, but he can certainly spell there.

The thing with Houghton is he's a very similar player to Roby. You couldn't have them both IMO as you wouldn't be offering anything different.

Both very good, very fit, good scooters, immense defenders and can put in the odd good kick. But if have Roby (if he proves his fitness in the play offs) above Houghton because of his better distribution skills.

We need another hooker that can offer something different to change the game if needed. I don't think Sinfield is far different from Roby in what he can achieve.

Yes, but there's no point in then diluting it with a weedy hooker. If we have a strength, keep it strong, and we can build on it.

If Sinfield is to be our general, then I think he should stay at 6 for 80 minutes.

Has anyone mentioned Daryl Clarke?

I know Robes is famed for his scooting, but these days he's a very well rounded hooker. Don't let your preconceptions convince you otherwise.

I think Sinfield would stay at 6 anyway, i just also think he could defend at 9 for a spell or two in the game when Roby is off allowing Burrow to defend on the outwide.

Burrow offers something no-one else does, and as I said before changes the way a team needs to defend against him. If we have a big strong pack, then Burrow is ideal at taking advantage of that, he creates gaps against forwards, and can pull in backs creating gaps for our backs.

Roby is our 9, he is far and away our best 9, bar Burrow, our other 9’s are inferior versions of Roby. The only logical choice I can see is interchanging Roby with Burrow to offer something different, or keeping Roby on for the 80 and going with a bench of 4 forwards.

Roby
Lunt
Clark

In that order. Houghton carries Hull but that's because pretty much everything goes through him. He's consistent but I see nothing in his game that isn't already out there in other people. McIlorum is OK but I think he'd be behind Houghton in the pecking order for me.



Sinfield could be moved there, though.

How is Houghton getting a mention? I mean he works his nuts off and is a good hooker but has average distribution. Josh Hodgeson is a good hooker but should be no where near either.

Now if both of them sort out their deficiencies then the city of Hull would be home to a couple of great hookers and both have time to do it but neither are ready yet.