Funny. I thought that too. It'd appear we're both morons and must bow down to the wisdom of LSOW...

"Inbred" I believe is the correct term.

Are you saying Pat is more likely to kick them than Sam?
Are you saying the man known as Superman doesn't do more than just kick? Do you remember where we had issues in the WCC?

Anyway, nice attempt to take me off the OP topic.

If you want to discuss the impact of Pat's absence we can do it in another thread.

I believe it is.

Our forwards? The fact they were better than us?

? What has this got to do with OP?

The answer will not give his direct replacement. The answer will give a player regularly included in the same squad as him. Again, I reiterate my point about the subs bench. If it worked the way it did in football, with a very limited number, no chance to bring a subbed player back on and not being allowed to utilise your full bench, then yes, you would be correct.
However, that's not how Rugby League works, thankfully. If you start the game as one of the four on the bench, you're extremely likely to get just as much game time as the man who starts in your position on the pitch. That does not make you his replacement.

And for my extra point, I addressed that issue in my very first post on this thread:

You asked the question.

Nothing. But it was you who brought this up:

I do see your point, seriously I do. I value Hansen for his contribution namely in defense. But then I look at a few other factors which are the other players we have in the backrow, and the results from the games he was out, and then in all honesty if someone were to say did we miss him? I say, no, not really.

We covered well and won our games. Hats off to squad depth.

I shouldn't have allowed myself to go off topic. I did it as people were pecking my head for comparisons to other notable absences, naturally I mentioned Pat.

Anyway...

And to that extent I agree with you. Based purely on results we've not missed him.

Based on how the squad has performed, that's open to interpretation, and the majority would seem to indicate that we have.

In the future, try to refrain from making massively sweeping statements about a player (who is very popular amongst the fans) and his contribution to the squad, and then not expecting to have your head bitten off.

We're done here.

Cheers for the tip. I usually expected a more intelligent response from people which doesn't always happen.

Thank you for providing decent discussion without any abuse.

All done.

I dont think we've missed him, because we have a good squad.
HOWEVER I do believe that we would have been a stronger team with him in, and that he is a far superior player to Chris Tuson.

Hansen hasn't been missed as we have lost zero games in his absence

Hansen has been picked in the =#FF0000starting XIII in every game except one when he has been available for selection.

Seeing that second row is probably our strongest position squad wise that would suggest that the coaching staff rate HH very highly.

12 pages


Have we missed Fielden and Gleeson?
Would we have won any more games with them? Maybe.
Would we have lost any more games with them? Probably not.
So good riddance to Gleeson? No, I'd have him back like a shot.
So get rid of the high-earner that is Fielden? I think not.
HH deserves his place in the 13, I believe we are weaker without him, although full respect to the other squad players, so, yes, he has been missed.

Pengy i know who you are and hope what i have heared is true but paaaaat is the best player on the team like it or not

what does that mean?hope whats true? and sorry i disagree. sam tomkins is the best player on our team!

that you are really the love-child of mal meninga and alex murphy and ready to join the club to fill in as centre/stand-off ????

Hansen will get back in the team when back with tuson the one dropping out. Our 3 second rowers this year are definately hoffman,hansen and farrell. With farrell being outstanding so far and hoffman showing why he is world class hansen is going to need to come into the team and show some very good form to keep his place. Especially with Hock coming back in less than a month he may find his place under threat!

However, what a dilemma for the coaching staff to have. Tuson who has done nothing wrong since coming into the first team and Jack Hughes who has also shown significant promise fighting to get into the first team squad.

What a line up and inparticular pack we could have in the time for the warrington game!

S.Tomkins, Charnley, J.Tomkins, Carmont, Richards, Finch, Leuluai, Fielden, McIllorum, Mossop, Hoffman, Hansen, O'Loughlin subs Hock, Prescott/Lima/Coley, Farrell, Deacon

I'd hate to be the person given the dilemma of chosing that 4th prop! I suppose it will benefit us in the long run though because of squad rotation. The only definate starter in the front row is Mossop! He has been fantastic this year.

As I have said previously, I think Liam Farrells form has dipped a little, particularly those long attacking runs that he was previously making. This maybe the fact that he is being used in the starting XIII, and is having to do a lot more of the "unsung" defensive work that HH does.

I got told your down at the academy

Another question, if Last Son of Wigan couldn't post on the forums would the forums miss LSoW? Clearly posts would still continue so probably not.

But would the level of debate be better or worse.......