The biggest weakness in our back division at the minute is the left wing defending of kicks. Both positionally in terms of kicks going behind Briscoe and high kicks where neither Briscoe nor Yeaman are very tall. It is obviously going to be tested by every opposition coach every week. If I was looking to rearrange the back division to get Whiting involved I would be looking at maybe putting Hall on the left wing and Whiting in at centre. Briscoe was good with ball in hand last night though so that would be harsh. I actually think Whiting on the bench isn't a bad option and last night showed we don't need to have Houghton on the bench. FWIW I hink Turner will be dropped for Long next week with everything else kept the same.

I'm with Kosh on this one....Radders back for Moa aswell maybe

Everyone has the odd bad game! At Wrexham we were poor across the board. Overall he's a fairly strong attacker and one of the best we have in defence.







Like me, for instance.

It could easily be Radders and Long in and Turner and Moa out. I would not argue with that.

I actually think Agar got it right.



Whiting is a fantastic utility player to have as he can cover pretty much every position bar prop and wing. We had already had 3 HB combinations in 4 games and Tansey is our #1 FB.



In terms of next week, I'd keep as we are, Radford for Moa, Long for Turner. Hall has done nothing to merit dropping at all IMO and it looks like Carmont could be out. We need to gameplan to stop Richards getting service rather than move people round to try and beat him in the air, (which is borderline impossible).

Thought it was a good move to put Tansey at dummy half and Whiting at fullback when we had the ball and then swop round when Cas had the ball.

agree on all points.



Agar got it right, Tansey is our first choice no 1, and we needed Whiting on the bench to cover at 2nd row in the absence of Radford.



I also don't think we missed Houghton that much, he is great at doing scoots, which is effective against tiring teams...but doesn't offer a lot else at the moment IMO

Tansey was put back in so he did not miss 2 games in a row and then possibly come back in cold against Wigan.



i would have prefered Whiting to play at 6 though last night

I'd have had less of a problem with that if he'd been given a little more game time. Bearing in mind Moa only did a short stint as well, I don't see why Whiting was left on the bench for so long.



Anyway, I'm obviously in the minority so I'll stop banging on about it now. For a little while, at least.

That would have been the only other alternative that would have been fair to Whiting, I reckon.

To be fair if Agar hadn't played Tansey and we got beat then he would slated for not bringing back in his No 1 full back.

As much as Whiting did well last week i think Agar got it spot on bringing Tansey back in, he is Hulls no 1 choice full back and to be fair to Whiting he is a quality utility player and was of more use off the bench.



Whitings utility tag is his down fall if anything as i'm not sure what his best position is and if he even has one.

I am sure Whiting was happy to be part of the playing squad last night, he came on and did what he had to do , can see him in the centre against Pat Richards next week mind, he is as tall as Richards and with his defence wont be the patsy that Crookes was last night against him thats for sure!!

Whiting for Hall

Radford back in for moa

Long back in for Turner

nuff said if fit