Thought they had till Friday to name squad for Sunday games. I cant remember now !!

Agree totally.

Stick Hall at 6 and have him defending inside Yeaman, Washy at 7 and Turner on the bench as back up to those 2. (We could always stick Washy at hooker if Berro needs a rest)

If Tickle is out, Burnett direct replacement with Fitz doing the kicking.

Shame for Tickle as it sounded like he had a very good game on Friday.

Good for Burnett to get some game time though.

The squad that plays against York today might give us a clearer indication of the team for Sunday.

Hopfully Long is only out for a couple of games, longer and the team will really start to suffer.

I think he said he wanted to play at stand off or loose forward ive never seen him say he could play at 7, I was really impressed with him for Salford playing in the national league at 13 but he was much more a ball runner, back row type player more in the mould of Fitz if anything, in the modern game depending on the team and the system there is not that much difference between 6 and 13 the positions are becoming less specialst and increasingly becoming just a number on a shirt, he could do a job and has played at stand off at various grades and some think it could be his best position but I would be shocked if he has ever played at he just dosnt have the attributes to be a first reciever in my opinion.

First choice would be Wahsy to 13 and Fitz to 12 although Wasy will be needed for the halves if Long doesn't play.

Washy to six, Horne to 7 if Longs out, Burnett for Tickle if he is out and Moa for Radders if he is out with Dowes starting. Brother is it a hamstring injury or a dead leg?

Sports talk last night made me chuckle when someone emailed in about Houghton playing 7.

Quote ="jordanp"I think he said he wanted to play at stand off or loose forward ive never seen him say he could play at 7, I was really impressed with him for Salford playing in the national league at 13 but he was much more a ball runner, back row type player more in the mould of Fitz if anything, in the modern game depending on the team and the system there is not that much difference between 6 and 13 the positions are becoming less specialst and increasingly becoming just a number on a shirt, he could do a job and has played at stand off at various grades and some think it could be his best position but I would be shocked if he has ever played at he just dosnt have the attributes to be a first reciever in my opinion.'" www.sporthull.co.uk/hullfc/news/HULL-FC-Turner-s-shock/article-1636913-detail/article.html I agree there is little difference in the modern game between 6 & 13, in one article is claims Bomber used him for both in this article it says he was brought in as a utility to cover centre, h/backs and backs,so I would suspect he has some experience,I think he will be used to cover the 6, I may be wrong thoughwww.sporthull.co.uk/hullfc ... ticle.html

Quote ="jordanp"I think he said he wanted to play at stand off or loose forward ive never seen him say he could play at 7, I was really impressed with him for Salford playing in the national league at 13 but he was much more a ball runner, back row type player more in the mould of Fitz if anything, in the modern game depending on the team and the system there is not that much difference between 6 and 13 the positions are becoming less specialst and increasingly becoming just a number on a shirt, he could do a job and has played at stand off at various grades and some think it could be his best position but I would be shocked if he has ever played at he just dosnt have the attributes to be a first reciever in my opinion.'" www.sporthull.co.uk/hullfc/news/HULL-FC-Turner-s-shock/article-1636913-detail/article.html I agree there is little difference in the modern game between 6 & 13, in one article is claims Bomber used him for both in this article it says he was brought in as a utility to cover centre, h/backs and backs,so I would suspect he has some experience,I think he will be used to cover the 6, I may be wrong thoughwww.sporthull.co.uk/hullfc ... ticle.html

www.sporthull.co.uk/hullfc/news/ ... ticle.html Think I got the link right that time

www.sporthull.co.uk/hullfc/news/ ... ticle.html Think I got the link right that time

Sounds about right to me Steve.

So we might have radford, tickle, horne and long out? Good job our injury luck has changed

Fortunately for us though although (although no game is easy) we have Crusaders & Quins it could be worse, we may just scrape the results. We do have more depth in the squad now

I bet three out of them four play on Sunday and wouldnt be surprised if all four turn out !

Hope you are right...maybe Justiniho assessed the injuries

Yeah maybe Agar fancies a shot at his own 'tongue in cheek' HDM propaganda machine as a little dig at Justine !

I was told last night by someone at the club that it was early days but all four of the above were looking fair to good for the weekend. There definitely wasnt any long term injury concerns, just knocks.
Now whether Agar wishes to rest these players is up to him but I just think the way the team are playing and have bonded recently, everyone one of them will be chomping at the bit to get out and play. Match day at the end of the day is the reason Rugby Players live !

I can maybe see Agar resting Long as he is quite rightly wrappin him up in cotton wool !

think you are correct but hey if any of them do have a knock this is the one game of a season to give them a break huh

he'll be back on the now hes wages are in.

he'll be back on the pi$$ now hes wages are in

3 great posts so far - don't know how RLfans has survived this long without you.

edited for accuracy

Edited for better accuracy

If he doesn't change his ways we'll be surviving without him again.

i should of said that damm it