2007 we were in dissaray when judas left so played every man and his dog at 1/2 back before head came over.

This year we've played our hooker at scrum half and our 6 at FB. If they thought whiting was the answer he'd have played there

They thought Thorman was the answer at 7. Do you really trust the judgement of our coaching staff?

At stand off, which he did say in his post.



Personally I'd play Whiting at 6 with Berro, if I remember correctly, Whiting came to the club as a stand off.

I would also start Dowes instead of Cordona.

A nothing game? How very dare you! This is the start of our assault on the playoffs I'll have you know.

We've gone off thread - The real issue here is not Whiting or Washy at 13 : Surely if Washy travels, it's Washy - End of.

The issue is, why does Agar want to move Tansey and not play Briscoe in the obvious centres. When we have a problem in one position, the nugget changes the whole side to solve it.

He was brought in because of his ability to perform in several positions, maybe Agar wants to see how he gets on. I believe Briscoe will develop into a great centre, however not yet I still believe he needs further development on the wings.

Interesting, and 'on thread' response BB, I guess you are suggesting you mature a centre on the wing, where they are less exposed................... is there good examples of this ? I thought winger's (real winger's) are always wingers and Centre's the same ? If so, maybe you have a point, and the delema of 'AGAR the Terrible' is 'How do we protect and nurture him on the wing, when I have 2 good winger's and a few average centres

I hear what you are saying, however the modern game has produced a lot of modern concepts in which players tend to be able to play various roles within the squad,for example Berrigan, Motu, Tansey, Whiting the list is endless.
In relation to Briscoe he has the speed, strength and skills to perform both as wing & centre I believe he should develop more on the wing to build up his confidence and knowledge,so in a sense yes it offers more protection on the wing at present since returning back form injury from Wembley to then be injured a few games later.Like I said he has the ability to develop into a first class centre however this does not need to be rushed.

Are you really saying Whiting is stronger than Washy

Would you drop Raynor to achieve this ?

I like whiting, but I've got to believe Washy is more creative and offensive than Whiting, or I'd conclude there's no place for Washy at FC. So for me, no contest at Loose, Washy. Whiting is a jack of all trades, a good squad player, good work ethic etc...... and looks a world-beater in a side playing as we are now. But if we are on form (ahhhh,the dizzy heights of our run to the grand final), Whiting would be deemed, IMHO, too slow for a centre, not creative and offensive for a 1/2 or loose, and hence a potential 2nd rower.................. but we have enough and better 2nd rowers........ hence, he's a utility player at FC, by default.

Based on performances over the last couple of seasons yes I probably would, I believe Brisoce offers more with his speed and strength.
I understand your point about our lack of quality centres it does not matter who we play in the centre as they do not pass to the wingers any way

, however I do not believe Briscoe is the quality centre(yet) that we desperately need.

Yeah, I think agar is the best

You'd seriously drop raynor? If we had anyone with a 1/2 decent kicking game then him and calderwood would be bagging tries left, right and centre (or would that be yeaman>icon_wink.gif. They're the 2 best chasing wingers in SL. I'm sure Briscoe will go on to great things but he isn't as good as raynor right now

Tansey's performances at FB since he has arrived have been one of the few bright points of our season for me, he also came to us to establish himself in that position and get away from being a 'jack of all trades'. If Agar starts moving him about just so he can rush Briscoe back from injury for a meaningless game then he's even more daft than I thought he was (I seem to end half my posts with that phrase at the moment).

I doubt that would be the reason for moving him from full back, he would be moved to stand off cos Horne's injured and Thorman is useless.

I agree with the point of not moving him tho, he need to stay at full back for the forseeable future.

Nail on the head there, we do not utilise our wingers strengths, based on this fact and performances over the last couple of years, I disagree with you Briscoe offers more in our team than Raynor, I also believe he is better than Raynor.

That's a bit strong IMO. Raynor has proven himself a top performer over many years and at international level. Briscoe may go on to be one of the great players of his era but he isn't as good as Raynor right now

Fair comment, however a lot of our players have been top performers with international honours, however they have not been top performers over the last 2 seasons, so selection must be based on present performances and not their capablitiles from the past IMO of course.

then briscoe should not be in the team as he does not have a current performance to justify it - unless he played in the reserves (which he has'nt)

I think he is a great prospect but at this time he cannot/should not displace our current wingers - I can see him replace G Horne

If we had more available options most of our team would be out on current performances.

Briscoe has hardly played in the last 12 months

Nor has most of the team



Raynor has not feautred much more.

We've got to get away from the 'utility player' way of thinking. That's why Rovers ended up with our Fullback. IMO Tansey should stick at FB and no-way should Briscoe be rushed back for a meaningless end of season game. Neither Wingman deserves to be dropped, it'll just -off either for no good reason. Houghton should play in the position he grew up playing in before we turned him into a hooker.i.e. Scrum-half.