His distribution is questionable IMO. It's a bit laboured and gets a bit temperamental when he tries to speed it up. I worry that this could be more of a problem at hooker, where we'd need him to be quick and accurate consistently.

Couldn't agree more with all of that

Guess it depends what the desired effect is. Do argue from a different angle, do you want your star player to be on the pitch for more minutes or do you want them to be on the pitch for less minutes if it makes them a more effective player? If for example we played Fitz at prop for 50 min instead of 13 for 80 mins and it made him more effective in the 50 mins he was on isnt that better?

Guess thats my arguement with Houghton. I'd sooner see him play 40 mins at 95% than 60 mins at 80%. I'd also want to see him operate when it plays to his strengths and i still firmly believe he needs to come off the bench and take the line on when both the square markers and the defensive line are tiring a little bit.

Problem is though, because we have 12 inter-changes, there's a lot of swapping about around the 20-30 min mark. So Houghton won't be as effective in the first half anyway.
My strategy would be to start Houghton to try and get us on the front foot, bring Washy on after 25 and then let Houghton back for the last 25 when defences really are tiring.
This also gives us options in the 2nd row if injuries happen during a game.

I take your point and agree to an extent but we are not talking about two hookers, we have one hooker and one makeshift hooker. For me Houghton has to start the game and be on the pitch longer unless Washy settles into the role really quickly.

Washy at hooker is an interesting one.

Defence is good enough, has good hands, strong go foward.

Not sure his distribution is it quick enough somes times he seems a bit laboured.

Houghton has to start as his all around hooking game is much better than Washbrook, including defence *see stats.

But if we are to play Berrigan at centre, we need someone on the bench who can come on if needed, the good thing about having Washbrook there is that he can cover other position aswell, if the squad stays the same I would give him a couple of warm up games at hooker to see how he goes.

But if the one that is a makeshift hooker does a job for 30-40 mins in the game that allows Houghton to win us a game in his 40 mins then i think it's the move to make.

Lets say for example: (1)
min 0-20 Washy plays 9. He is 60% effective because he's not a hooker
20-40 Houghton plays 9 off the bench. He is 95% effective

40-60 Washy back on. 50% effective
60-80 Houghton back on. 85% effective
Total out of a possible 400% = 290% (avg of 72.5%)

Alternative example 2
Houghton plays 0-80 and is 60% effective due to fatigue
Total out of a possible 400% = 240% (avg of 60%)

Alternative example 3
Houghton plays 0-30 mins at 75% (down from 95% in option 1 due to longer spell)
Washy plays 30-60 mins at 60%
Houghton plays 60-80 mins at 60%
Total possible out of 400% = 262.5% (avg of 65.6%)

Obviously my numbers are slightly bias to win my arguement but again for me this kind of makes sense.

Whiting to Full-back and Tansey to share hooking dutys anyone?

You're a freak!

Do you want me to map out another scenario like the one above with Tansey sharing the hooker duties?

Those are my thought processes!! Freakish they may be, but i think they're right!!

Way too much time on your hands....

2 and a half weeks of my notice period left and i've handed all of my work over!! Happy days!

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Not such happy days for the forum with 2 and a half weeks of random stats galore and a Washy for hooker campaign to put up with!

I'm not even going to start on my 2007 Richard Horne for FB campaign!!



I'm satisfied for next year though that my 2008-2010 'Berro for centre campaign' and my 2008-2010 'ball playing loose forward campaign' both may come to fruition.

Starting back row of Tickle (left) Westerman (right) and Fitz at 13...discuss.

no way. Westerman at 13 everytime for me. i'm not as fussy about who plays front/second row as they're all good players. but IMO Westerman needs to [udevelop [/uinto a quality 13

Boooooooooo!!

I was expecting a more thorough reply then that....disappointed!

Where do you see Tom Briscoe playing in the future, centre or wing, O Wise One?

That's all your statement warranted!!

do you really want fitz at 13?

i thought you'd be keen for a more attractive brand of rugby i.e. ball playing 13

At the start of the year Fitz was more then just a prop playing 13 IMO and some of the important tries he scored from kick throughs highlight that (away at Rovers away, Bulls at home and Catalan etc). If he is an out and out prop then we wouldnt see this part of his game.

The problem last year was that we flogged him by making him play 70 plus mins EVERY week and by the end of the season he was playing more like a prop.

Having Westerman in the back row means Fitz can get the rests needed with Manu coming into the back row as an impact player and Westerman dropping to 13.

Westerman is a big lad with a decent running game and good hands - he could cause some damage alongside Berro and Briscoe on the right hand side and I always felt Tickle was a more dangerous running threat on the left.

Just an option.