Technically Briscoe was dropped. But I tend to agree with your last statement. Players that play in pivotal positions in particular are likely to get their place back regardless of how well somebody covers them, unless dropped for reasons of form etc.

Your just arguing for the sake of it now

Point your missing is that Byrne and Motu are both full backs and both pretty good, the one with the jersey currently has performed well enough to keep it.

Washy v Horne, Washy is never a SL 6 and looked very poor in that role. There is no doubt Horne should come back.

If Berrigan was injured and Lee started at 9 with Houghton on the bench and both had absolute blinders i would also argue that Berrigan shouldnt walk back in immediately

To be fair to Washbrook, We had no other option at the time .

Pretty sure Byrne's position of choice in the NRL was Winger before he became more of a utility player.

How do you recommend a player returning from injury earns his place back?

Agreed, wasnt meant to come across as knocking him but thats the way i saw it.

Byrne played centre a fair bit too and covered FB.

A player returning from injury should play 21s to prove their fitness and also wait to capitalise on a slip up by the person playing that role in the first team if they are a natural too.

As per my previous example, Washy playing 6 meant that when R Horne was fit he came back in because Washy wasnt playing well and wasnt a 6.

Byrne playing 1 is playing well and is a 1, therefore Motu must get fit in 21s and wait for Byrne to lose the jersey.

I disagree. Byrne is a utility back. We base some our game play on getting a good kick return, something which Byrne does not offer, so Motu is a pivotal player in the team. Therefore unless he is playing poorly he should go straight back into the team.

Spot on, either way I can't see Motu being fit for Celtic anyway.

The fitness thing is OK I guess, although nowadays getting fit in U21's is kinda pointless because of the huge fitness gap.

The 'wait for a slip up' idea is just plain silly unless you are comparing two identical individuals with identical strengths and weaknesses and identical levels of ability. Byrne and Tony are two different styles of player, so the choice has to be about what the coach wants the FB to do rather than who is making the fewest mistakes.

And Byrne is NOT a 1. He's a utility back who covers the backs and happens to play 1 well.

Me neither but it passed the morning

Either once he is fit Motu will get the FB spot back and if he plays well he will keep it, if he does not perform then Byrne will be straight back in.

Motu not perform, how dare you!

Not Whiting at the moment but I would have Washy and Hall straight in there on Saturday, along with Tony if he is fit.
We were terrible in attack on Friday, very, very boring to watch as a team also. I think this shows when you look at who our top performers were generally, which were forwards (Radford, Cusack and Dowes were the best 3 players on the park imo) who are good at going right up the middle all game long. We need more players with attacking skill on the pitch.
With regards to Byrne. Very good defensive performance but nothing in attack really. If Motu is fit I would put him back in. If we were struggling in defence, I wouldn't drop Byrne from the fullback spot. But as things are, we are very good in defence and need to substitute a few players to get our attacking side up to scratch

if what ive heard today is true, then this debate can be put on ice till April!!!!!

I had a sneaking suspicion that all was not well, hence my comments about available choices.

Yep Press Conference at 21:19

Exactly. If that had been Tony playing instead of Byrne, the same criticisms would have been forthcoming from me, i.e. a lack of any sort of impact with the ball, a poor work-rate in bringing the ball out during exit sets and a complete lack of penetration on kick returns. I'd also be wondering why his technique on the ground had gone to , taking an age to get up and play the ball.

Conversely, there would have been much more made of the incredibly simple kick that Byrne fudged which put us under enormous pressure at a key time.



And some people's memories are complete fabrications. There was one game last year - for a spell of 20 minutes - in which Tony dropped a couple of kicks. Despite that, he was still one of our best players in that game against Harlequins. The only other dodgy spell he's had was the previous season against Wakey, again for a spell of around 20 minutes. Again, he was still one of our better players that day.



Washbrook was one of our better players last year and has as much claim to being a 6 as Byrne does to being a fullback.

Now you are talking rubbish. Ive understood your arguement for most of the previous things youve posted but that statement is wholly out of order to Todd Byrne and to Washy. Washy was one of our better players, when he wore 13. At 6 he was garbage.

I don't think you're remembering last season very well. Behind Berrigan and possibly Cusack, he was our best player.

He did well but wasnt creative enough at 6.

in fact to quote someone that said something about another player recently

He didn't do anything [iwrong[/i though.

And in some people's eyes that should have guaranteed him the shirt for the foreseeable future.

I dont think he will to be honest.I saw him at the weekend and he was limping badly.

Washy was second only to Berrigan last season imo.

I don't disagree with that. I still think he was up there last year though, without being very creative, which probably shows why we didn't have a great season.