Hope he does. If him and Dowes play to that standard every week we do have some serious choices to make.

There was a rumour that Moa had taken a knock in training so not sure whether he was 100% anyway.

Guess if there was one area of concern it would be at 6. I know it was his testimonial so dont want to get on his back too much but Horney didnt look the part. Did he pick up a knock early?

I dont think the balance of the pack was quite right at times but with us trying to give lots of players gametime it was to be expected, will be interesting to see who are the 4 main props at Saints and how they are used, same goes for the back row.

Discussed on a different thread, yep I agree he needs to improve very quickly, personally see Turner putting some pressure on for the shirt.

Moa caused damage and his speed of play the ball is the best we have in our forwards.

From a balance point of view im not sure if Radford, Dowes and Cusack can all be in the 4. Those 3 and then either Moa or O'Meley doesnt feel balanced to me. I'd expect one of the 3 to drop out to accomodate Moa and O'Meley unless Lauaki plays prop?

Back row for me has to be one of Manu/Lauaki starting alongside Burnett or Tickle. The one that doesnt start from Manu/Lauaki should then come off the bench for a spell. Saying that, i'd still look at playing Fitz in the 2nd row with Washy at 13 but i know Agar wont do that so is irrelevant.

Lauaki and O'Meeley have to be two of the props which only leaves two spots to shar between Moa, Radford, Dowes and Cusack. It will be interesting to see who get the nod.

In the back row I would have Manu and Fitz with Washy at 13 and Tickle from the bench but it seems Washy won't get a starting spot which is disappointing. So I would imagine Manu, Tickle and Fitz for the backrow. Lauaki could play off the bench as a backrower allowing Radford, Cusack and Moa to compete for the last two prop spots but I think Agar sees him more as prop.

Nice to have so many options, I just hope Agar has the balls to make the right choices.

For Saints I would go:-

Cusack
Berrigan
Radford/Dowes
Manu
Fitz
Washy

O'Meeley
Moa
Lauaki
Houghton

But that won't happen cos Agar won't play Washy at 13.

The other option would be to start with O'Meeley, he will be arguable our best prop and you should always start with your best players.

I thought Lauaki played mostly out wide as a second rower yesterday.

Could also say Fitz played more like a prop too, just ran up the ball.

When you have players like Radford, Fitz, Lauaki they can play a dual role. What Agar needs to do is find some structure tohow is best to use them to get the best out of them. Lauaki will do the same thing whereever he is named as will Fitz and Radford.

I understand completely all of those players can play prop (Radford is a prop).

Dont entirely agree about Lauaki playing the same role wherever he is played though. Last year in the few games he played he looked to link up out wide with balls to the centre and winger at times. Yesterday one area for improvement I thought was that we need to get him in motion better in the attacking line as quite often he was standing still on receiving the ball.

And Fitz didn't appear to ber playing a prop role when taking a short ball off Longy just inside the centre channel.

personally didnt see much hard running from radford or cusack where as dowes took over from radford at one point and ran like he had a point to prove.
Moa and O'meley our most potent threat, ran like a couple of wrecking balls.

Laukia showed with his wide running he is a natural second row and should be left in the back row position either as impact or long stint. yes he is big but he is also very mobile and that advantage could be lost with him playing front row.

Saints I would go for Dowes Berro O,meley, Burnett tickle fitz

with Moa, Laukia manu turner interchange

Have to say Radford I thought was very good and looked like a fairly pacey prop

. Agree with you re Lauaki in SR but he can be exposed out wide in defence when the opposition is running the ball inside our 20. Think Radford has earnt a start at Saints.

So where did most of Fitz work happen? It seemed to be more down the middle with the odd exception. Nothing new in that, he has played that way for a number of years now. My point is he will offer very little creativity from 13, definately more the Aussie style of 13 which is basically an extra battering ram.

Personally I would play Lauaki as a backrower, he could swap during a game with Manu, therefore keeping that destructive type of player on right through the game.

That still leaves enough props to battle it out for the four positions.

Have also watched Fitz for years yes he does play inside the second rowers mostly. I think he can play a bit more football than you suggest - for example wasn't it him who popped the ball when Longy got held up ? (Thought Hall was a bit slow in support on the occasion when he broke the line incidentally).

Agree about Lauaki in SR we have enough props. Just need to make sure he isn't exposed in goal line defence.

is cusack nailed on to play as he was the worst prop on show yesterday

I think it showed that Cusack is some way of match-fitness - I can't see him being nailed on but I expect he'll start at Sheffield.

I think O'Meeley needs to play at Sheffield. He played well but you could see he was away off full fitness.

I thought Radders had a heck of a game today. He had a couple of cracking touches, particularly in the 2nd half attacking their line, he was ghosting around waving the ball about like half back and threw the loooooong ball out to Briscoe or Turner on the fringes.

Think Dowes is the one who ought to be concerned about the amount of game time he'll get this season.

A good all round performance by the pack I thought. Dowes and Radford in particular both played better than I thought they would. Fitz's work rate is superb. Moa, O'Meley and Lauaki brought aggression. Houghton, Yak and Washy all played OK without ripping up any trees.

Lauaki would be wasted as a prop and hasn't any experience playing there anyway. He needs to take the ball deeper and on the move like Moa does and play wide between the halves and centres. We have enough props. I can't wait to see Berrigan playing with that pack. They'll give him the freedom he didn't have last year.

For me that was Radfords best display for a couple of years. He ran hard and straight, made good yards and sucked in plenty of defenders which is all you can ask of a prop. If he continues like that I believe Dowes or Cusack will lose their place to him. I don't see him in the back row at all. It didn't work last year and he looked ordinary. I'm not particularly a fan of his but that sort of performance will keep him in the side.

A lot of folk with egg on their faces. Radford is a class player who was basically forced into captaining a side with no leaders. Now the shackles are off we can hopefully see a return to top form.

Radford played really well yesterday, he ran hard & direct. O'Meley did well but was blowing alot he needs to get match fit. I know it was only a friendly but was quite happy with way the forwards dominated.

Lauaki has to play in the back row, he has some great ball handling skills, we have more than enough cover in the front row. I also thought fitz went very well yesterday, he seems to have hit it off with Long already. He broke the line on a number of occassions from short passes from Long, and the offload from the floor was fantastic. I wouldn't have a problem with Fitz at 13.

For Saints i'd go with:

O' Meley
Berrigan
Radford/Cusack/Dowes
Lauaki
Manu
Fitz

Radford/Cusack/Dowes
Tickle
Moa
Houghton

Very hard to pick from the last 3 props, Moa has a different game so I would always pick him for impact, I have to say I thought Radford was most impressive yesterday, and I haven't been a fan of his. I think he might just have earnt a spot for Saints

I agree with what you say about Radders.

Personally, I would include Washy in the 17. I thought we improved yesterday when he came on, and he covers a number of positions.

Really? Why? He was poor for large parts of the last two seasons.

I was just thinking the same.

I was also thinking that basing a judgement on a single pre-season friendly is unwise. See Chris Thorman for details.