Looks like mind games to me..I rekon if the numbers were to be chosen six weeks down the line,they'd be different again.

I would have kept loyal to the lads who where here last year and given them the priority 1 - 17 shirts:

1. McNally
2. Higson
3. Brown
4. Tonga
5. Dawson
6. Ridyard
7. Drinkwater
8. Tickle
9. Higham
10. Weston
11. Patterson
12. Hock
13. Hansen

14. Hood
15. Hopkins
16. Action
17. Reynolds

The rest I wouldn't care which number I gave:

Smith (here last year but I prefer the others to him)
Foster (Here last year but didn't play much so shouldn't be in the starting 17)
Stewart
Crooks
Vea
Hampshire
Maria
Pellisier
Green
Thompson

This is what Leeds and other big teams do, they keep consistent squad numbers.

Mooky, who is Action at 16?

Probably what we will do next season as we get established, all being well of course. Will be great to get to 3/4 in 3/4 out from the entire squad every season

Don't suppose you're planning to sod off to the Salford board any time soon do you? As for your points...

1) Hood will not be happy if he cannot get a game. Suspect he does't really give a toss what number is on his back. Was number 32 last year.
2) Hock's played at prop for the majority of his time at Leigh
3) As commented elsewhere, Tickle became one of our standout props in the 8s
4) Nobody has a divine right to a place in the team or particular shirt number.
5) What does the fact that Hull let a player go 3 years ago have anything to do with anything? By that logic McNally can have no complaints because Hudds didn't want him years ago
6) Players come and go. What's your point.

In short, your post is just sh*t stirring bile.

Didn't really work for Leeds did it?

One movement I find a bit unusual is Paterson going from 13 to 11 and Harrison Hansen going the other way.

For me Paterson is far more of a 13, a ball handling forward who can (and has) played in
the halves when needed. Hansen is more a traditional second rower who will tackle all day and run all night.

That said, squad numbers are not too important and the squad we have in place looks pretty handy to me. If Jukesy can get the team firing I wouldn't back against us missing the dreaded 8's altogether.

If they were not so important,why would say..



Mind games......I'll set you back to Patersen playing scrum half at Odsal.Did anyone complain?

I reckon most teams play their 'loose forward' as an extra prop these days, Nozzy.

Paterson played the second half of last season and the 8s at second row, linking with Ridyard on the right hand side. Hansen played down the middle.

Perhaps we should have tried alphabetical. I think that would solve all the problems.

I heard a whisper that they were going to do that, but it became a nightmare when they got to 'H'! (Hansen; Hampshire; Higham; Higson; Hock; Hood; and Hopkins.) A former coach, whose surname was right up there at the start of the alphabet, apparently wasn't available/wasn't willing to come to their rescue!

Storm in a teacup, Paul Scholes played in the 18 shirt all his career.

Indeed they do , a complete waste of talent if you ask me , with usually 4 forwards on the bench sacrificing talent for brute strength seems daft , I doubt that tactic will help us

IMO we need an expansive style to win games in SL , let's see a touch of early 2015

Agreed, SL at times is too regimented 5 drives and kick shouldn’t be in our plans unless closing the game out, we’ve shown what we are capable of and how SL teams struggled to cope with us keeping it alive, let’s play to our strengths and give them something to think about.

No, its not like they're the most successful team in Super League ever.

Correct and young Roy Keane played in a 16 shirt all his career. The skipper !

27 into 13 will simply not go. Players will not be bothered what number is on their back as long as they are selected. Actually, if I was some of the players in that squad I will be thanking my blessings I even have a number. I mean Jamie Acton not having a Super League number 8 or 10? Disgraceful...




Rubbish thread.

IMO whilst we have a team to win SL games, we do not have the personell to exploit teams with an expansive style. I feel it is therefore unlikely we will adopt one. Especially with the rule changes to the scrum where defensive teams need to retract a full 10 metres.

Conversely, I feel teams could hurt us more from that change than what we will gain from it.

So you think we will be able to ' grind teams down and snatch victories ' ?

If we go out with the mindset to avoid heavy defeats we will lose , I couldn't care less what the score is , every game is winnable , just go out to win

But our forwards will give us more chance of winning than our backs.

We have some great RL ability in the forwards, Weston can pass, Stewart is as good as a halve, as is Patterson

Our players ( all of them ) will give us more chance of winning , but to do that they need to have the mindset of going out to win , from the 1 st second , they can all play the game , if they are allowed to do so

Paul Anderson was a battering ram at the Bulls , nothing more , when he signed for Saints he suddenly started playing RL , actually passing and offloading , they can all do it

That philosophy delivered by Paul Rowley was lapped up to great success in the 2015 middle 8's

We aren't playing in the middle 8s ( yet ) , and you have identified the problem in your post

That's 10 metres from the mark,I believe that realistically only adds another 1or2 metres on the old 5 metre rule not a full 10.Should be fun for the video ref come disallowed try time from a scrum.