: Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:15 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

I'd agree other than i would have Burnett in the back row and Manu on the bench in place of Hall. Burnett deserves his chance IMO. He may also start with Cusack and Dowes.

My only reasoning with King starting was to have at least one impact prop on the pitch at a time. Therefore keep King and Thackray on the pitch at certain times, depends on how Agar wants to go really.

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:27 pm  

Superbowl Scott wrote:

Tony
Calderwood
G.Horne
Yeaman
Briscoe
Horne
Thorman
Dowes
Berrigan
King
Radford
Tickle
Washbrook

Cusack
Thackray
Houghton
Manu

my team aswell but if washy is still injured maybe start manu

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:33 pm  

Byrne
Calderwood
G.Horne
Yeaman
Briscoe
Horne
Thorman
Dowes
Berrigan
King
Radford
Tickle
Washbrook

Cusack
Thackray
Houghton
Manu

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:39 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Yup, could have played v Dewsbury but we held him back.

He will not play...

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:43 pm  

Beardo wrote:

He will not play...

Guess we'll see.

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:44 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

My only reasoning with King starting was to have at least one impact prop on the pitch at a time. Therefore keep King and Thackray on the pitch at certain times, depends on how Agar wants to go really.

Understand that totally. Agar seemed to favour using Dowes and Cusack last season and bringing on 2 impact props.

I also favour Manu from the bench for his impact. Keep the first 20 tight and blow them away for the 2nd 20.

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:49 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Understand that totally. Agar seemed to favour using Dowes and Cusack last season and bringing on 2 impact props.

I also favour Manu from the bench for his impact. Keep the first 20 tight and blow them away for the 2nd 20.

You cant have neither of Thackray, King and Manu on the pitch at any one time...I can understand 2 of the 3 however these are our only real metre making forwards, yes Dowes and Cusack are good forwards however are more of the plodder type Prop forward!...We'll get steam rolled in the forwards especially against a 'Noble' type side!

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:55 pm  

Beardo wrote:

You cant have neither of Thackray, King and Manu on the pitch at any one time...I can understand 2 of the 3 however these are our only real metre making forwards, yes Dowes and Cusack are good forwards however are more of the plodder type Prop forward!...We'll get steam rolled in the forwards especially against a 'Noble' type side!

Its a fair point, i just have a feeling Agar sees it differently. With Dowes, Cusack, Radford, Tickle and Burnett (if thats the back row) we have plenty of hard yards and solid defence there. We then bring on Thacks, King and Manu to punch the holes and score plenty of points in the last 20 mins of the half. I can see the benefits to both approaches TBH.

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:32 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Its a fair point, i just have a feeling Agar sees it differently. With Dowes, Cusack, Radford, Tickle and Burnett (if thats the back row) we have plenty of hard yards and solid defence there. We then bring on Thacks, King and Manu to punch the holes and score plenty of points in the last 20 mins of the half. I can see the benefits to both approaches TBH.

I can see the advantage of both systems too, like I said earlier I guess its down to how Agar wnats to work it and also maybe down to the opposition too. He might want to fight impact with impact and combine Feka's arrival onto the pitch with say King and Thacks?

: Tue Feb 03, 2009 2:45 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

I can see the advantage of both systems too, like I said earlier I guess its down to how Agar wnats to work it and also maybe down to the opposition too. He might want to fight impact with impact and combine Feka's arrival onto the pitch with say King and Thacks?

As long as Feka isnt left one on one with Radders!!