Options at 13

[sheepsteeth]

Now lockers is out I think we have two options

1. Move someone to 13 who is a ball player
2. Have an extra big man in the pack to give us more grunt.

Option 1 for me would mean either Green or Mickey Mac to 13.
Green to 13 also means Rocky Hampshire would be in the team but we'd lose a fair bit in defence. Mickey Mac to 13 gives us a ball player who can also whack people in defence but then it's who is the interchange hooker.

Option 2 for me would mean putting Flower at 13 and use him the same way wire use harrison and leeds use Bailey. The extra grunt up the middle could make a difference without lockers.

I'm inclined myself to move Mickey Mac but i doubt that would be a popular suggestion.

[East Stand Faithful]

Now lockers is out I think we have two options

1. Move someone to 13 who is a ball player
2. Have an extra big man in the pack to give us more grunt.

Option 1 for me would mean either Green or Mickey Mac to 13.
Green to 13 also means Rocky Hampshire would be in the team but we'd lose a fair bit in defence. Mickey Mac to 13 gives us a ball player who can also whack people in defence but then it's who is the interchange hooker.

Option 2 for me would mean putting Flower at 13 and use him the same way wire use harrison and leeds use Bailey. The extra grunt up the middle could make a difference without lockers.

I'm inclined myself to move Mickey Mac but i doubt that would be a popular suggestion.

Don't like either option.

Why not just put the best LF we have in there and leave MM and Green in their normal positions ?

Having said that I don't know who is the best LF in the squad but over to Waney for that one.

[markill]

I would play Taylor there and take him off after 30mins to put Logan on, Logan to hooker, MM to LF for 10 mins either side of HT and then Taylor back on for Logan. MM can play 80 minutes and it gievs us a bit of variety.

I certainly wouldn't be playing either Tuson or Hughes there, which are the two players Wane has picked to start there in recent matches. To me, they are both line running back rows who don't have the ability to pass at the line I would want from a LF. I think Taylor's size and power mean that he is more of a threat in the middel than those two even without that pass option being as good as Lockers, but I think its still there for him more than Tuson and Hughes.

The other viable option for me is Farrell at LF and Hughes, who by the way was excellent against Hull on Friday, at LSR - Hughes' best position anyway.

[wiggydoran]

Farell to 13! it as a ring to it!

Hughes or Tuson to start 2nd row.

There is also Burke that played well at loose during the season.

Lockers plays 13 like a standoff combined with a forward that will take on the line. I don't think there is any one ealse in the league let only our club that can play it like he does / or at a decent enough level.

[DaveO]

I would play Taylor there and take him off after 30mins to put Logan on, Logan to hooker, MM to LF for 10 mins either side of HT and then Taylor back on for Logan. MM can play 80 minutes and it gievs us a bit of variety.

And if the team have any clue who is doing what after that round of musical chairs I'd be very surprised.

If Burke is over his family bereavement he is the obvious choice for me.

If not then I think Wane will stick with Tuson at 13 which I don't think is good enough.

Tuson isn't a 13 and I'd sooner have Faz there and Tuson in the back row.

The only other player I can think of is Flower who has played 13 for Wales and his former club but I think he has made the conversion to a prop so Wane won't do that either.

I certainly wouldn't be playing either Tuson or Hughes there, which are the two players Wane has picked to start there in recent matches. To me, they are both line running back rows who don't have the ability to pass at the line I would want from a LF. I think Taylor's size and power mean that he is more of a threat in the middel than those two even without that pass option being as good as Lockers, but I think its still there for him more than Tuson and Hughes.

Taylor is never a 13 in a million years though I agree with what you say about Tuson and Hughes.

The other viable option for me is Farrell at LF and Hughes, who by the way was excellent against Hull on Friday, at LSR - Hughes' best position anyway.

This is another viable but one option others have mentioned that isn't is Green at 13 and Hampshire at 6. Green's defense is very suspect at 6 and would be badly exposed at 13 IMO and with Hampshire not yet physically mature the middle of our line would leak tries IMO.

So for me what I'd like is a back row of:

H, Faz, Burke

What I think we will get:

H, Faz, Tuson

[sheepsteeth]

I agree green is weak in defence, I did state that but the way Waney has us playing means we're toothless in attack without a ball playing 13. that's why I suggested mickey mac because he's a ball player with good defence.

the only thing without lockers is it may force wane to play the percentages more and go up the middle and play field position. If he decides to go that way then flower to 13 for me.

[jobo]

I agree green is weak in defence, I did state that but the way Waney has us playing means we're toothless in attack without a ball playing 13. that's why I suggested mickey mac because he's a ball player with good defence.

the only thing without lockers is it may force wane to play the percentages more and go up the middle and play field position. If he decides to go that way then flower to 13 for me.

Micky Mac good defence but he's hardly a ball player. Even his distribution from acting half can be slow.

As someone has already said, Wane must have someone in mind but whoever it is, they've big boots to fill.

[cpwigan]

Mark, I think Taylor has fantastic potential BUT even at prop his lack of agility / endurance holds him back.

IF Wane is true to his word, Burke should be replacing Lockers. I think the past has shown that musical chairs involving several players just to replace 1 player is unsuccessful. Personally, I think replacing the besy player in SL is a thankless task.

[DaveO]

I agree green is weak in defence, I did state that but the way Waney has us playing means we're toothless in attack without a ball playing 13. that's why I suggested mickey mac because he's a ball player with good defence.

the only thing without lockers is it may force wane to play the percentages more and go up the middle and play field position. If he decides to go that way then flower to 13 for me.

We didn't look as toothless in attack v Hull at the DW than we did in the CC final. There must be a guide in those two games for what Wane needs to do in Lockers absence.

I think it may be instead of trying to replicate how we play when Lockers is in the side and expecting whoever plays at 13 to be a Lockers clone, we need to play a different game as we did v Hull at the DW.

If we try and play as we normally do when Lockers is in the side but with a different player at 13 we can forget it.

Doing so would require Green to be a lot more creative as Hampshire was.

Perhaps the solution is if Lockers doesn't play we need to just drop Green, pick someone at 13 who can defend for 80 mins and let Hampshire play 6. if you are good enough you are old enough.

[cpwigan]

If Wane wants to play Wane Ball then Green at 13 makes sense but I think it will crash and burn but it will do that with anybody minus Lockers.