That's unfair, there are a lot of other personnel changes that happen around the same time that could be equally relevant. Taking yesterday's game for example, I'd argue Hansen's being subbed for Hock was a much more significant substitution.

At least some people on here can see his value, given he's currently 9th in our "player of the season" race, ahead of a lot of players who seem immune from criticism.

Amen brother.

If McIlorum is a "major problem" then there are lots of teams in worse shape (Higham and Clarke for starters)

He has big strengths and big weaknesses but if we had the chance to replace him with a creative hooker we should take it without question.

I don't disagree but it is like comparing British centres. I know you like him Brian but he is a very limited player. He has it all but the smarts and in my opinion it will never come.

Certainly a SL player but not good enough for a top club. I also doubt Logan is, I think that we may see one of our halves moved there and given a shot.

ill concede the point about Hansens substitution, and im glad more than me niticed how poor we were when Hock came on.

but think back to early season when finch was out......we had MM playing 80 , and IT WASNT WORKING.
if Madge hadnt got Tommy in at 9 as soon as, no way would we be top of the league now.

MMs good for spelling Tommy why he has a breather, but i would also revert to a tactic we used earlier......think it was huddersfield game.......keep MM on when Tommy comes back, switch him to 13, and let a back rower have a rest

Correct. I can't think of very many 2nd choice hookers that I'd swap MM for. Scott Moore, possibly, though I'm not convinced.

I like him , he does a job under the salary cap we have .And like ive said before did he not out class every hooker on the pitch in the grand final erm yes , no team in superleague can afford 2 world beating hookers .

Read that and the first thought that sprung into my head was "the blind leading the blind".

A quote to offend not contribute. Well done.

Not intended to offend at all so apologies if it did. If I was as sensitive as that I'd have packed up long ago.

It was genuinely what I thought because I can't fathom the downer you have on Mcillorum and we have had this debate before so didn't think I needed to expand further. Given you are agreeing with a Wire fan who if you read the threads on here is pretty keen to pick fault wherever he can I reckon I might not be alone in thinking you are way off beam here.

strange thread, move him to second row? what the f*ck?

Hooker is arguably the most important player on the pitch as they have their hands on the ball more than any other player. It is no coincidence that we really struggle when he comes on the field.

I am a little surprised to see people who could appreciate Piggy and all he brought championing McIllorum. He is as one dimensional as Higham, his dimension is simply that he works hard he cannot lead his team round the field which is the number 1 job of a hooker.

What's wrong with Logan? I've only seen him a few times for Widnes, but he's been one of the best players on the park (along with his fellow dual registered players).

I think his delivery is erratic at best and he seems to lack the vision of a natural hooker.

Hope I am proven wrong though as England needs another Terry Newton badly.

I'd say the complete opposite, I think his vision is excellent and perhaps his best attribute. When I've seen him play for the under 20's and for Widnes he's always looking up and looking at the defence and picking the right way to go and the right man to pass to. I agree that his delivery can be erratic though, but it's not constantly bad. I've heard a lot of Widnes fans complimenting his distribution.

I'm in the minority with MM. I really like him and he reminds me of a young Terry Newton. As everybody says, his defence is awesome and I think there is nothing wrong with his distribution from acting half. He is aggressive and a really good support player when we make a break.
He's still young and still learning his trade yet has pushed onto international recognition.
I'd rather have him with us in support of Tommy than against us!

+1

He is a great defender and big hitter but that is all he ever will be.

His distribution is totally awful. He cannot change the speed of play, he is not dangerous in attack, he never gets us on the front foot.

For now I am happy with him being our hooker on the bench to come on when we are on the back foot, but on saturday he came on and we started to get on the back foot, we were making less meters. Tommy gets us rolling and is just as good as MM when he is playing like that. Tommy must start at hooker from now on.

release him and bring the 3rd Tomkins brother in on the bench for a few games next season, i'm sure Lulu can manage the odd 80 monute game here and there

I thinks hes come on leaps and bounds. Hes started to link up well as the first pivot. His defence is quality.

Going off other people s verdicts on next hooker it wouldn't be Logan , heard many of times. There s people in the academy better than Logan such as Liam carberry , but I don't know just going off what I ve read . And I still think Micky mc is a decent player after all it was madge who give him the 9 shirt so he must see some thing that most of you who think he s no good docent .

You're still comparing him to Piggy and other first choice hookers, though. Tommy is, rightly IMO, our first choice hooker - name some 2nd choice hookers that are better than MM. Plus, he's still only 23, and has a lot of improvement still to come.

See I wouldn't release McIlorum, but I would like to see Logan given a spell on the bench for the rest of the season.

That's what I was thinking , it's like no 1 has 2 James roby s in the same team . Tommy defo 1st choice and Micky defo my number 2 . Every 1 banging on about Logan when most people who go watching U20 s say there's better

Personally I would take off the top of my head

L'Estrange or Diskin from Bradford
Burrow
Scott Moore
Adam Milner
Robinson or Lundt
Sam Obst

all over McIllorum.