Its always an interesting exercise to imagine the opposition with equivalent players out when you hit an injury crisis (including suspensions). Tends to put your own team into perspective.

I know we have a lot of players out, but the crucial players that are missing is why we have been so poor. Lomax and Roby are our best players and have such an influence when we are attacking.

We also missed Wilkin on Saturday. Ashe was terrible in comparison so it was no wonder why our attack was pathetic.

If we had them 3 back then we would have won the game on Saturday quite convincingly.

Poor Ashe has had all of half a game in two years so I don't know what anyone was expecting from him. Had Brown actually given him some game time with Wilkin, instead of opting for Wello in the halves, Ashe may have been able to offer more to the team on Saturday.

It does. Like how London were down to just 17 available players and had five fewer internationals on the field than we did, yet they beat us. Or how Hull KR have such an injury and form crisis that they have conceded 178 points in their last three games against other sides, yet we managed just 14 and 18 against them and they too beat us convincingly (twice).

Seriously, the injury 'crisis' isn't a good enough excuse. There are more than enough senior players on the field to be winning games against the likes of London and Hull KR. It wasn't any injury crisis that left the team with no halfbacks and incredibly poor prop forwards, it was the board of Directors.

Lets see if he's in for next week then. I understand he hasn't had much game time, but he didn't look anything special.

Ashe reminds me of Wello in the little I've seen of him. Clearly a very competent player, but lacking in the pace to be a fullback at Super League level.

I don't think the post was an attack on Ashe. But just simply stating that Ashe in comparison was not as good. It's not to say he did not try or do his best.

I think from what I heard, he tried everything he could.

It's nothing to do with age.

Same as with Wellens when he plays halfback. He is not as good, I'm sure he busts a gut and tries everything he knows, but effort will only get you so far and ability is what we are missing.

Nobody said it was.


Nobody said it was. However, had he had more [iexperience[/i then he may have been better prepared. And that lack of experience, this season at least, is down to the coach and his foolish decision to play Wello in the halves with Wilkin instead of one of our younger halves.

It wasn't an attack, you're right, but from what I saw on Saturday he didn't look like a first receiver - that was my point. I thought a lot of his ball choices were poor and that meant that we rarely threatened the fringes when we were on their line.

I think we had 3 consecutive sets of 6 on their line in the second half and didn't threaten once. Purely for the reason above re: ball choices. Arguable that these decisions come with time and experience, but hitting the short ball every play meant that if we didn't barge over (or score from distance, Jones blitzed their right centre time after time and made countless breaks) we wouldn't score.

It was a very frustrating match to watch.

When Swift went off injured and Charnock came on, did we reshuffle at all or just pop Dougie on the wing?

Makinson went to the wing and Charnock went to FB

Right. How did he look.
I missed some sections of the radio commentry as I was on baby duty.

Did ok, but because Ashe and Hohaia were consistently playing through the middle, we rarely used the FB in attack. We rarely put 3 passes together to get the third pivot in the game.

I would love to see how many carries Charnock made in their 20. I suspect it would be very low.

Charnock took up the full back role in attack for the Salford game and, as you can imagine on that night, rarely got the ball.

Really frustrating and I think it's why Wilkin's suspension is such a blow. People may knock him but he does a job.

This is where Brown drives me nuts. Makinson has been at fullback for weeks. So why does he end up on the wing and Charnock, who hasn't played at fullback in the first team ever, end up at fullback? Bloody ridiculous.

I think that wing spot was marking Dixon, London's potent attacking threat. Perhaps he thought that Makinson, who got extensive experience onthe wing, would do a better job of marking him? From what I understand, Charnock's played a lot of rugby at full back, so would be a reasonably safe bet there, compared to an un familiar wing spot against one of the league's top try scorers. I'm sure he could of handled dixon though.

The original plan was Makinson at FB. Swift was injured so the plan changed. It's not like it was a tactical decision, it was forced.

So why not put Charnock on the wing? That was my point. Why play TWO players out of position rather than just the one (ie Charnock)?

Makinson is a winger? So never played out of position?

Mr Brown doesn't work like that, he likes to make things more difficult. Does he never think he's got a guy who's played all his career at fullback and scored a lot of tries, who could have switched position with Makinson.

He isn't a winger though. He only started playing on the wing in the first team. Until then he'd played at centre and fullback. And more to the point, he'd been developing at fullback and the team had been getting used to him at fullback. Charnock had only featured in the team for half a match against Salford and I believe is a halfback. So Brown sticks him in the vital position of fullback, when the team had no idea how he played or what to do with him, and sticks Makinson back on the wing where he hasn't played in weeks.

Sorry, but that was a dumb call by Brown, and not the first, and it probably put more pressure on the team than there needed to be.

There is another sensible option completely not taken, although I'd counter that one I suppose with the lack of experience we would have then had in the halves, with both Ashe and Charnock given no time at all to speak of in their respective positions (again, thanks to Brown's dumb choice of putting Wello with Wilkin instead of blooding Ashe or Charnock there when the chance arose).

Wellens to FB???

Yes. When Lomax got injured he should have been given the spot again and Makinson back on the wing. Why make things difficult by playing players all over the place when there is no need.