the most entertaining player in world rugby. Whether it be in attack with some great backing up or his comedy defence he is a player who will make games interesting

Would you like him back?

Jekyll & Hyde . I hope he shakes his bad elements off because he could be a good player .

Sandercock should get on the phone to Des Hasler and ask him what he did with Ben Barba.

Lad's got natural talent. He does make some howlers though. He is not a natural defensive fullback and I'm not sure where else you would play him.

The thing is you can work with some one on defence problems but most attacking flair is just god given and cant be taught.

at the minute NO.

He may go on to improve his defence and if he does will be a great player in the future but at the minute he is a defensive liability

It might be that's what he always is - a genius in attack and an utter liability in defence

Then again so have many other top full backs, maybe in a "better" team his flaws may be shielded a little (Like Webb when he was at Leeds)

In a way though, that seems to be how a lot of modern fullbacks are these days. Even Sam Tomkins is not the greatest in defence, especially under the high balls, but coaches seem prepared to accept that a fullback is more important in attack than defence. From an entertainment viewpoint, I tend to agree...I'd rather see a dangerous attacking fullback with less than perfect defence to one who's solid in defence but offers litle danger in attack.

The younger, attacking, fullbacks like Escare, Tomkins, Hardacre, Ratchford and Eden are undeniably exciting to watch, even if they're not as solid in defence as other options a coach may have.

I'd move him to stand off. He is a liability at the back but extremely gifted with ball in hand. Develop his passing game and let him play a Benji Marshall type role.

Hall at FB, Burns at hooker and Eden at stand off. Dobson can control the game so Eden can just be flashy and back up looking for gaps.

Call me old fashioned, but for me the number 1 priority for a fullback is defence. Interesting idea moving Eden to 6 though, but can't really displace Burns, and Hodgson is an excellent hooker.

TBF to Eden I thought he had a solid game at the back except for the last decision to let it bounce and that was more due to covering the other side of the field. He caught a couple of tricky balls well under pressure. If Manu Vatevi can learn to catch I am sure Eden can!

One problem we have a hooker who is way better than Burns, I think with Eden it is a concetration/mental thing & I think it will come right one day & I can wait any way it will be interesting & he is the least of our problems at the moment.

I can easily see Eden making a very good go at it at 6.

Spot on.

I've said this for years. Fullback is about the extra man in attack. I can forgive defensive errors if they provide that extra something in attack. As a Salford fan, I was constantly defending Luke Patten last year as he was fantastic going forward. As soon as he missed a tackle or had a brain fart he was enemy number one.

If Greg Eden sorts his defence out he will be right up there with the best FB in Superleague. At the moment though he is a long way off.

Grix seems just as bad defensively as Eden on the few occasions I've seen him.

a poor mans Richard owen

Scott Grix is usually very very reliable under the high ball, and what he does superbly is organise the giants defence it his attack that's often lacking at the moment

Correct he did have a good game.

If you haven't got the defensive aspect in your game sorted as a FB by the time you've been in the game a few years & are already plying your trade at the top level then you never will (not properly IMO)
Time & time again we see FBs allowing the ball to bounce (or not able to read the play and give themselves a chance to be in position to catch it)
I can't think I ever saw Garry Kemble drop a ball never mind not reach it in the all the years he was at FC, bit like Arthur keegan further back. You'd put your house on them catching it and both were adept at the one on one tackle. Kemble wasn't a playmaker but was a decent attacking full back.

One on one tackling seems to be ok with modern day FBs but not amazing, however I think that's down to attackers running straight at the FB more often than not, aside from Tomkins there's few who can actually put on a proper side-step, it's a case of try to gas the FB off which rarely works these days.

Totally agree, if he can stop making the silly errors, then he will be. I though he was excellent for 76 minutes on Saturday, certainly there most dangerous player, scored one try and set another up, also very safe up until that play.

I disagree - I think defensive ability - particularly positioning - will improve for most young fullbacks over time. I also don't think that good attack should be at the expense of defensive ability.

What is better IMO is that SL sides seem to be looking for attacking fullbacks. Its been a big weakness for GB/England in the past.

If the guys in front of Greg could defend then he'd not have so much work to do in defence in the first place!!! Let's face it, that last play at the Magic weekend should have been shut down and no kick gotten away. It wasn't the last tackle so Greg was organising the defence for the next ptb and was making sure Hull couldn't chip over for a winger, that is why he was out of position for where Houghton kicked the ball.

Greg still almost got to it but it was a towering kick, yes as a fb he should have taken it but I do feel that will come with confidence. The fact is he was given an almighty task by the guys in front of him and it is there that we need to sort out much more than just Greg getting things in order.

If we're talking about full backs with bad defence, some of Jamie Foster's attempts to tackle yesterday were laughable.