Great to see Mitch has lost a bit of timber.
He now looks like a centre. Sadly he runs as fast as a forward, tackles like a premiership footballer, and seems as fit my grandad! (God rest his soul)

Plenty of others have "money in the bank" so to speak like Watkins and Hall and delivered at big times. Achurch doesn't have that and needs to justify why he's still at the club and why we should even consider keeping him.

Agree with that though in fairness that could be colouring my view of him tonight.

I just thought he never offered anything. He didn't take the ball in with any purpose nor hit with anything other than glancing contact in the tackle. He also didn't appear to have a high workrate that someone like Keinhorst goes for. Though I've not seen the stats so I may be being unfair on Achurch, it's just my impression. It probably doesn't help that being big and with his current haircut he stands out a bit.

I said it on the player by player thread, the stats are very intriguing. Keinhorst with praise, and correctly, and Achurch the scapegoat, incorrectly. Both players stats are exactly alike, except Achurch made more metres per carry, and less minutes.

He really wasn't the problem last night, unlike some others, and is getting unfair critisism.

We know you don't like giving Keinhorst praise but I would say that the majority of Keinhorst's 37 tackles were first in where he decked the attacker while many of Achurch's were 2nd 3rd 4th in where the attacker was not stopped effectively

That is a really pish poor response, and very scraping the bottom of a barrel.

If you see my posts, each time I said the praise of Keinhorst was correct. I thought he was the best player in the second half last night.

But to have identical stats, is not the picture you are painting. That is because you are wrong. Achurch was not great, but he was far from the worst, and nowhere near has bad as some are portraying, last night.