What's everyone's opinions then on keeping Smith?

I personally think he had a solid game and he could be good cover if needed, but keeping him shouldn't mean dropping the youngsters.

Waste of salary cap IMO. If we have some left keep it in case houghton gets injured

Smith did step into the hooking role yesterday on a few occasions

I agree with Jake

He's not a specialist hooker though

Neither is washrook

Although his passing accuracy wasn't too shabby from dh

Yes we need two specialist hookers in the first team squad like every other Super League club.

Think we'll see this less with the reduced interchanges. Just need someone who can spell for a bit IMO

It's not the 10 minute spells that are the problem, it's if houghton gets injured. If he does we'll be screwed trying to use washbrook or smith for full games

Yer fair enough. Litten didn't do much wrong on Sunday, though.

He's a kid and not up to the rigours of playing hooker for 80 minutes at SL level

So was Kruise Leeming and I imagine he'll be trying to push to get into Huddersfield's 17 this year. They have Hinchcliffe given the 9 shirt and then players such as Wood, Ellis, Robinson who can cover during the game and also Leeming in the squad. Don't think that's too dissimilar from Hull this year?

I thought he did alright. Set up Claverings (I think) try and also having him at fullback gives another kicking option. I thought he was similar to Rankin in that he's a ball player, something which Shaul maybe needs to work on. He was supporting the runner on a number of occasions too and I really don't think that having him in the swaud would be a bad thing, should they get him for a good price.

Its good to have options, and depending on who the opposition is, it will enable Radford to select a team to utilise specific skills. It can also leave other teams guessing at the squad he'll pick, rather than having the same predictable team each week.

Not this season. Only NRL and internationals have reduced them.

Leaming is 3 years older though.

Made his SL debut at 17, played 21 times in 2 1/2 years. Granted most of those appearances will have been last year, but I think Litten could do a job for us if needed. The noises coming out of the club towards him have all been positive. Be interesting to see if he gets any sort of run out against HKR.

Apologies, misread an article as it coming in this year! Cheers

Of course we should sign Smith. We know what were getting the kid can play. He brings great experience and a calm head, multi Grand Final Winner and multi GF try scorer and Harry Sunderland too.
2 season ticket holder mates at Belle Vue reckon we've got their best 2 players from last year.
He also brings good backs cover in all positions, an area which I feel we are a tad light. You may know he has also covered at Hooker and in the halves too ! he's sharp at acting half with a good organising skills.
Ah yes and he can kick goals too.
I know his GF exploits were a few seasons ago but he's no spent force and last year, like Washy, did really well in a side that was struggling.
He may not start as first name on the team sheet here.....but its not how you start its how you finish, and by the way, now that Westys gone, who is our second kicker ? Rich was no 3 behind Westy and yet Westy wasn't that good a kicker was he. I think we need Lee Smith more than some realise.

good post

A talented, motivated, goal kicking, former international utility player going cheap? He looks like a good signing if the finances can be arranged.

It is a small worry that he would limit game time for some of the kids but I think that could be outweighed by our need for experienced players that have won things.

As has been said, leeming is 3 years older than litten and he's been a bot part player until now and will presumably understudy their new hooker. robinson has been playing mainly hooker at hudds for years and as a former half back is better suited to it than a back rower or outside back. Like I said, lose houghton and we're in trouble

Hopefully we won't lose Houghton!

Its a difficult one as having two out and out first grade hookers would cost, when they may only play half the season each. Having a couple of versatile players who can 'do a job' in a number of positions seems far more cost effective, but maybe this is where we've been going wrong!

Not having proper cover is always cost effective until you need the cover

But they do have cover? I'm sure if Houghton gets a long term injury then they can reassess the situation and potentially get someone on loan (see McShane). Until then, the players mentioned could do a job there. We have players in the squad who are capable of good distribution from dummy half. That would does us for the short term if/when Houghton doesn't play.

We'll see who's right if houghton gets injured then won;t we