: Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:50 pm  

fc baldy wrote:

What.......would have Hall over Horne anyday of the week

I'd have agreed with you before pre-season however on form you have to pick G Horne. He was MOM in the Leeds friendly wasnt he?

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:52 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

The reports i got from the Leeds game were that Byrne looked excellent, and from seeing Hall versus Dewsbury he was out of position a hell of a lot.

I went to the Leeds game and although Hall played less minutes he looked a far better option at FB. He made 3/4 clean breaks and took some dangerous high balls.

Byrne was solid too but never looked like beating a man or breaking a tackle.

Byrne might be safer option. kinda says a lot about our side really.

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:52 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

I'd have agreed with you before pre-season however on form you have to pick G Horne. He was MOM in the Leeds friendly wasnt he?

Buggerd if i know...i was at work..........pre-season or no pre-season..Hall is better attacking wise.....would sooner have my centre going full length than 30mtrs and getting caught.

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:52 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

I'd have agreed with you before pre-season however on form you have to pick G Horne. He was MOM in the Leeds friendly wasnt he?

No, Thorman was.

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:54 pm  

You also need to take into account that Horne is a more versatile player than Hall.
Hall also needs to iron out various flaws in his game, from the games i caught on tv last year his defence at times was very poor and he seemed more intent on grabbing the spectacular interceptions than defending the line properly.
However i also see the need to give him game time this season as well.

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:54 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

I went to the Leeds game and although Hall played less minutes he looked a far better option at FB. He made 3/4 clean breaks and took some dangerous high balls.

Byrne was solid too but never looked like beating a man or breaking a tackle.

Byrne might be safer option. kinda says a lot about our side really.

BINGO

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:00 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

I went to the Leeds game and although Hall played less minutes he looked a far better option at FB. He made 3/4 clean breaks and took some dangerous high balls.

Byrne was solid too but never looked like beating a man or breaking a tackle.

Byrne might be safer option. kinda says a lot about our side really.

Byrne brings a lot more to the side than safety, such as his support play. At the end of the day i have no preference between them and each have positives and negatives. Would put my house on Agar going with Byrne though.

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:01 pm  

fc baldy wrote:

Buggerd if i know...i was at work..........pre-season or no pre-season..Hall is better attacking wise.....would sooner have my centre going full length than 30mtrs and getting caught.

As i said, ive been saying most of last season that i'd rather play Hall or Briscoe in the centre than G Horne as i think he isnt good enough in attack to play there, however he has earnt his chance and made it impossible to be dropped, fair play to him.

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:02 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

No, Thorman was.

OK, G Horne came out of the game with huge plaudits though didnt he?

[Kosh]

: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:05 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Why would Hall be in the team currently when G Horne has looked safer than him in the right centre and Byrne has been safer at FB.

Edited for accuracy.