Why do we need an extra pivot playing in the line? Had our most successful year in many playing without 1
Also thinking about pretty much every top team in the world I can't think of any with an additional 13 pivot player

Yeh completely agree, not sure what the obsession is with it on here. We looked really well balanced this year, just missing a bit of spark, which hopefully kelly will give us, and hopefully shaul can play a little smarter after another decent season. Think radford will go carlos and fonua one side and griffin , talonoa the other, which you couldnt argue with , looks pretty devastating, michaels to be waiting in the wings, injury or the carlos fonua combo doesnt work

But then a lot of teams now have a full back that is a converted half and can pass the ball. Tomkins, Gidley, Ratchford, Dorn, Hanbury, Gaz O'Brien.

Shaul, as much as I love his speed and back up play, can break down an attack because he chooses the wrong option, or leaves little space for the winger/centre or his pass isn't good enough

Last year we played most of the year with one halfback, should really help Shaul having two this year, I'd also expect him to be working on this during pre season. Hopefully Sneyd will also be working on developing a killer pass that he lacks, so he doesn't rely too much on his short kicking game.

Think about every top teams full back and what they offer as a pivot.

Our attack stops when the ball gets to Shaul a lot of the time. Most teams play with the full back as an extra pivot unfortunately Shaul doesn't have that in his game so having Carlos as the extra pivot makes sense. Will take a lot of the pressure off from Sneyd leaving Shaul and Kelly do what they do best which is support play and speed.

[[/u


Disagree. Sneyd and kelly both like to get their hands on the ball a lot. A pivot joining from deep like from fullback,as and when is a weapon that's hard to defend. So its up to Shaul to do that. Or he may find himself out for connor or carlos.
3 men stood in the line when weve already got a very productive hooker is too many chief's not enough Indians stuff for me
Given the size and physicality of the team assembled it's not practical use to try and finesse all over the pitch. We're a go forward and be dominant team and we play off the back of that. Unless we're gonna chang 70%of our personal to accommodate such a game I can't see us becoming a team that plays a straight out pivot at 13

Shaul has proved the last few seasons he can't play as a pivot. Ask any Rovers fan Kelly isn't a type of half that'll control a game he's a runner. Imo we need another ball player in the team which Carlos can do. Sneyd and Carlos as the main pivots with Kelly and Shaul supporting. We get great go forward irrelevant who's at 13 anyway.

70% change?

Then Shaul might be in bother then
An attacking fullback is a 1000 times more effctive than a man stood in the line clogging up an attack. Especially with a productive 9 like houghton who takes up a lot of the slack..kicking etc
If you think kelly is just a support player then you're in for a treat imo. With our pack he's gonna have a platform to work from that he's not had at rovers. Go on video site and look at 4 mins in the pre season game v rovers this year
Kelly hits the winger pin point from 4 men in from a left to right. Can't recall a hull player ever hitting that ball like that

A man clogging up the line?
Off course I know he can hit a good pass but he's much much more devastating as a running halfback. Horne is a prime example. Great running game but struggled to control a game. Look at how Leeds used Sinfield as a 13 along with a running 6 in McGuire. If we use Kelly as a half to control his side of the field we won't see the best of him imo.

An extra pivot wouldn't harm us as I think we got a bit too predictable at the latter stages of the season,Kelly will help us but a extra pivot can be useful

A pivot coming into the line at speed from all over yes
Not a 3rd in the middle of the field getting in the way
Aus-no 13 pivot
Nz- same
Every nrl team
Every SL team pretty much (westy at wire) but his role there different to when here
We had it. Was poor. Didn't last year was top for ages. Won a cup and our none pivot 13 was 2nd in the MOS

I'll go with the idea when abdull back as I think he could be a mix of modern 13 with the skills to add old school 13 style play on occasion. But as for an out and out pivot purely for the sake of it then no imo

Won in 2005 with a pivot at 13.....if we wanted a ball playing pivot at 1 then we should have kept Rankin,Shauls speed and support is great but he doesn't link well...imo.As for a ball playing 13,I'm old school and like a ball playing 13

Me too. I'm willing for Abdull to turn into the next Jason Smith but I'd settle for the next Paul Cooke.

Connor
Michaels/Shaul
Fonua
Griffin
Talanoa
Kelly
Sneyd
Taylor
Houghton
Watts
Minichiello
Manu
Ellis

Green
Bowden
Hadley
Washbrook

Slightly against the grain...

In my opinion, Shaul needs to improve his passing, and his linkup play
to create an overlap for the outside backs..

My backs would be
Carlos
Connor
Fonua
Griffin
Talanoa
Kelly
Sneyd

I honestly can't believe that people are thinking of dropping Shaul, was excellent for 75% of the season and form dropped off when the rest of the team did, deserves to start the season at FB, if he doesn't produce then, then it opens the chance for Connor etc

Exactly this.

All about opinions Dave..

For mine...

The modern day fullback, needs to be an extra pivot, this is the area where Shaul is lacking
, IF he improved in this facet of his play, he would be in for international reckoning...

but again - in my opinion....

Agree with you there Dave
Shaul has improved parts of his game every season.No reason for even thinking of replacing him with Connor

People want to drop Shaul , unbelievable !!

I have this vague memory of Shaul scoring the winning try at Wembley. Does anyone else remember that? When Shaul scored the winning try at Wembley? The try that won us the cup? At Wembley?

Passing is nice but tries win games.

Shaul on the wing would be a waste of his support play. Having Kelly in, we will hopefully have an increased number of breaks which Jamie can follow through.

1. Shaul
2. Michaels
3. Fonua
4. Griffin
5. Talanoa

(What a set of backs!)

6. Kelly
7. Sneyd

(Mouth is watering already)

8. Taylor
9. Houghton
10. Watts
11. Manu
12. Mini
13. Ellis

(We've seen what these can do this year)

14. Bowden
15. Green
16. Hadley
17. Connor/Washbrook

We're going to need different players off the bench dependant on who we're playing. Hopefully we'll see the likes of Osborne, Downs, Fash, Turgut, Matongo, Rawsthorne all pushing for first time starts.

I still worry about the strength of depth in the forwards. The starting pack is impressive but one or two long term injuries and we could struggle.The likes of Turgut, Downs, Masi and Fash will have to step into the breach and may not be ready to play a significant number of games. Last season with good management and maybe a little bit of luck we coped but there's no guarantee next season will be the same.

It wouldn't surprise me if we sign another prop.

Agree, losing Frank means someone needs to step up, but I'd prefer someone from the 23s. Dependant on cap space, we could always dip into the loan market (Reckon Feka would come back?

) if we were desperate.

Certainly deserves to start the season at full back but I do think he'll be one worried about his position in the team with Connor waiting in the wings.

It'll be interesting how Radford rotates his backs throughout the year though.