What we need most is a wrestling coach. Dummy-halfs running amok because we have no markers / tacklers left on the floor occurs nearly every set. It's killed us game after game. If we controlled the rucks better we'd be in the top 8.
Aside from that we don't need big changes to the squad imo, just fit players & more size / quality in the back-row.

Can't believe this has made 5 pages. He's no better than Dixon or cockayne. Moved on.

Actually I think that is a very good point.

Usually the opposition have better go forward than us and most of the season we have blamed a shortage of props and our featherweight back row. In other words us simply not having the required physicality. That's a factor for sure but perhaps a bigger reason is teams just rolling on up the pitch unopposed due to us not competing effectively in the ruck...or in other words losing the wrestle.

The best example I can think of is Cas away. They never once needed to kick upfield on the last because they'd already gone the length of the field just by rolling on forward.

He I'd never a winger and shouldn't be played there. Stick with him at full back and he'll get better and better

Do you think Chester knows this?
He even said on Friday night he's made more mistakes playing others out of position post match, yet he was very confident of a win before the game.

He played him at full back so would assume so. I was confident of a win before the game, just didn't realise most of the team would roll over and have there bellies tickled

You've just been unlucky with the loss of the mongrel type forwards.

I don't think Dixon will ever be top class FB, good going forward, but makes too many errors (including decision making) and is an appalling defender. Reminds me a lot of Eden. Shaul is a much better player, can tackle, safe under the high ball, quick and can score a try out of nothing. Seems to have a bad attitude and does struggle with link up play compared to Rankin.

Cockayne is just bang average and no were near any of the other 3 FBs mentioned.

Think we'll have to agree to disagree, Dixon is just playing behind a very very poor defensive unit, he doesn't make as many errors as people make out, no more than the likes of Shaul, Tomkins etc make. His worst performances have been on the Wing, not big enough by half. If you put Shaul and Dixon behind the same team Dixon would be the more threatening player and not relied upon in defense.

He's also nothing like Eden, he made the same errors week on week, seemed incapable of learning, Dixon does seem to be learning.

How does playing behind a poor defensive unit make you consistently drop the ball?

Dixon's nowhere near as good as Shaul, it's quite laughable to think he is and just goes further to prove that your opinions are based solely on the colours he wears.

If shaul was that good wouldn't he be in your team

No really he has been a naughty boy, rankin has come in and done really well, hasn't Dixon been dropped a few times also for Cockayne?

How often have you watched him? he doesn't drop the ball anymore than any other full back. He had a mare against Salford, aside from that he's no more liable than any other player. Is Shaul in the top ten try scorers? How many Sky MoM's has he had? I'd throw back at you that your opinions are based soley on the colours he wears (when picked)

Looking at the derbies Talanoa is more a defensive liability than Dixon.

imo Dixon frightens me when he has the ball as he always looks likely to break free and score,but defensively he is poor whichever way you dress it up, he may well improve that aspect

dixon seems fragile. He'll go from brilliance to stupidity in seconds. Shaul is more a traditional full back. Bags of pace (not as much as dixon), safe under the high ball and his marshalling of the defence was improving a lot before he was dropped (for reasons unknown).

From a consistency point of view, shaul is the superior full back but dixon will probably win you more games than shaul. He'll also lose more than shaul too. Depends what you want from a full back I guess. I don't think dixon has much in his bag other than scintillating acceleration and good pace over a longer distance. If/when he loses that he'll be way behind shaul

Well, Dixon has another 2 years left on his contract, and as we have a dire need for forwards with a bit of mongrel, I'd suggest going with Dixon & Guzdek next year. Use Cockayne's cap space to get a righty nasty bellend of a prop who will no doubt spend more time banned than playing.

Talking of bellends isn't watts resigning for us

ha ha ha ha you wish

More chance of us signing Charlie Watts.

Fair point, forwards have to be the key.

Has Larroyer signed, I wouldn't sign him or Burke permantley.

You need 2 props and at least one attacking backrower.

I would take a risk and try and get Hock, he fits your description perfectly.

No chance,past his best and a penalty machine.Could have been a great player if his head wasn't empty,wasted his talent.

I actually agree on the 1st part of your post,but I think dixon has had a couple of poor games but can only improve hopefully.

He certainly has the bellend bit well and truely covered. Wouldn't go near the bloke, ultimate unprofessional.

I've heard we've signed Den and Angie Watts for next year, Roly the dog is still in talks

Probably drinks less

Dixon still seems to be the same player who broke through at london for me. He may improve but he may not