Well I don't know why you missed them, but I've seen Whiting play for us at stand-off (albeit a while back), and I'd actually say they were the least impressive performances I've seen him give for us. His decision-making wasn't quick/good enough and he dwelt in possession. Whiting is many things, a great player being chief among those accolades/attributes, but he's not the halfback answer for us.

The home derby this year put that myth to bed.

You could well be right. We could have also had the deal with Miller agreed when we went for Chase, missed out on Chase so went for Holdsworth, miller pulled out so we went for Prince.

All pointless now.

In fairness, if he had a few games to bed in and was playing alongside a decent scrum half, things might be different. He has had some good games at 6 (was it Leeds last year when he got MOM at stand off?), and given a run there could do quite well. He's definitely better as a loose forward though.

I would have hoped so, but even if you accept the point that he wasn't used to playing there, as I've just pointed out he did once have a few games there (think it was around 2006/07). Then there's the fact that when Gentle asked all the players where they saw as their best position, Whiting apparently said back row.

He was named at 6, but he played as a back row. Seymour played as the sole halfback that game and was outstanding.

I agree all have opinions and whether we agree or disagree,there is a right way and a wrong way to reply !

I know that's what was said, but he wasn't playing as a typical back-rower. Had his hands on the ball a lot in central positions. Perhaps more like the old ball handling 13, which is where he could be best utilised if we could come up with a game plan to accommodate it.

Don't entirely agree with you, TBH. He was predominantly on our left edge to overload Leeds' right, and didn't really play that much of a ball-handling role. Did a bit more than your typical back rower, but no more than he often does and didn't dictate any play. Seymour took charge of all of that in far and away his best 80 minutes for us.

Either way, he wasn't and isn't a stand-off.

I saw it differently, but don't care enough to argue about it.



Even Thorman had the odd good game.



I think he could do a more than passable job there, but 13 is definitely his best position.

Why didn't FC go for Sammut. Pulling up trees at Bradford.

Dont start that one!

There's a reason he's at Bradford.

There's a reason Holdsworth was at Salford!!

He's a bottom 4 halfback and should be at a bottom 4 club

No he's not and no he shouldn't.

Ah like Matty Smith?

Eye the club that filled Langleys medal cabinet with more than Ellis Yemo and Westy

which was years ago, when they had a decent team

Wtf has Langley and Bradford's success ten years ago got to do with whether we should have signed Sammut?

Nothing it was a stand alone statement

He thinks we should have signed Langley.

My word!!!

The blind mice are out tonight!! It's ridiculous how some won't have a bad word said about Hull FC..

I'm a fan, of course, but some defend the club to an embarrassing level...

Everyone has their own opinion, and is entitled..

Mine is that Holdsworth is a terrible halfback and one of the main reasons we have no attacking prowess whatsoever.. The sooner we are rid, the better!!

So why isn't Sammut good enough then?

Your post should have been "what has smith got to do with sammut"

Because his defence is terrible, he drifts in and out of games and only has 3 or 4 brilliant performances per year. You're just another one fooled by a few star turns in front of the cameras.