On that last point, though; exactly how much difference is there between another teenager from our academy, and a 20 year old from someone else's academy who also doesn't have a single SL appearance either?

I don't really see how you can suggest that an equally inexperienced loanee is any safer an option just because he's out of his teens. We could just as easily given Ashley Thackeray (who's actually older than Broughton) a few more games on the wing and played Briscoe at centre, seeing as that's where he's been playing for the academy. We brought 2 different outside backs in from Leeds that season rather than give Thackeray a go. Alright, he's moved on now and it looks like other SL clubs weren't interested, but I just don't understand why we have kids on our books we don't even look at properly and then go shopping down Headingley way. Our decisions to cast aside players without giving them a chance are sometimes strange to me, I still don't understand why Tuffour was never even given a crack yet Lyne got a 3 year deal, there never looked that much between them IMO.

Fair point, but in the case of Broughton, I guess we got offered him through the Hetherington relationship, and at a time when we already had a lot of teenagers playing and were typically without 8 first teamers, Broughton represented a better option than what we had available and we could fit him under the cap. Tuffour is an interesting one - quite liked him and he looked OK last time I saw him in the championship. Something to do with not wanting 4 wingers in our 25 top earners, maybe?

But again, he was 20. Is that so much better than a teenager? What exactly made him a better option than what we had available when none had seen first team action? IIRC, Broughton wasn't even full time with Leeds at the time, and they hadn't even given him a squad number. And also, Thackeray was 21 at the time. In hindsight, Broughton has gone on to more success, but I just don't understand why we seem to prefer to try Leeds youngsters than our own at times. Williams was another we had that season, and he wasn't up to much at all yet we preferred him to our own.



What really baffles me is the huge disparity in the treatment of the 2 players. One sent on his way without even being given a first team opportunity, the other a 3 year deal? Tuffour was also the bigger and stronger lad, which I would have thought could have put him slightly ahead of Lyne in his readiness for first team rugby. I would have thought you should at least have a look at both before making the decision. We had 4 games of the season left and only 1 fit winger, why didn't Lyne and Tuffour get 2 games each?

Can't see it mattering about the 25 man thing, we've picked from only 22 different players this year, with 2 of those being brought in after the season started (3 if you count Phelps, but then he's a direct replacement for Tansey).

The point for me is that we have seen in the last two years lots of young players been given their at various clubs largely due to the franchise system. Despite the fact we have some excellent prospects in the reserves who have we blooded and given regular game time too?

Probably only Lyn consistently so how nearer are we to knowing about the likes of Green, Kent, Cunningham and Aldous. Why don't we bring in youngsters when a senior player is injured?

I understand Agar being under pressure and needing results and having the likes of Whiting and Turner does not help in some ways as we have utility players to use which perhaps prevents the youngsters getting a shot.

I think it's a difficult one. Let's take Lynne as an example, Agar has played him a couple of times this year but there is already fans who want him replacing with a so called senior player without giving him any real time to prove himself in the 1st team. I think it's hard to win because it's such a results based business, especially at Hull and especially when your obviously under the pressure that Agar is under regarding his job.

I think realistically we can only probably expect to see a couple out of the current 20s play regular first team in the future, I hope I'm wrong but I've not seen any real stand outs. When you look back over previous years when you saw a Schofield playing in the A team or an Horne you instantly knew that these kids would make it, Briscoe was probably the last one who I had that feeling about.

It's a bit chicken and egg. If you don't have players of the quality needed then you can't play them and if you don't play them they won't get any better.

However you look at it, player development at the club has been shambolic. It's either an issue with not getting the right quality of player into the system or not developing those players correctly.

I don't believe that Hull have had only 2 players of sufficient quality to play in our 1st team regularly in the system in the last 10 years.

Maybe it's down to the personnel involved, maybe it's a lack of investment. Who knows? Whatever it is, it's a problem

it's a combination of both, I don't think we have a single quality coach at the club anymore.

Amen to that. mcrae had his faults but he was much better than what we've had since.

About time agar's assistant was sacked again

we pay lip service to our youth teams and development, you only need look at how quickly the proposed investment at the Boulevard disappeared off the radar once it got a bit more complicated.

Take Lynn, I have said I don't believe he is good enough and won't make it even though he has only had a handful of chances so I am falling into the trap of not giving him a chance in some ways. The thing is, as you mentioned, it's not about just playing young players it's about quality and potential. Reece has pace but I see little else, no real step or power (still developing I know) or game awareness at times.

Maybe I should reserve my judgement until he has played 10 games in a row but reactions like mine are maybe be the reason Agar does not take risks?

I don't know about that as I can't comment on someone like Lasty.

I said when Sharp was sacked that we needed a new head coach to come in with a backroom team at all levels and still believe that to be the way forward.

Cas away at Catalans next weekend,

Good chance we will be one point behind them this time next week

lets just concentrate on beating wakey they have already beaten us at our place this season so nothing is for granted but we should be beating these but i know what saying

Last season's game at wakey still haunts me. Don't think I've ever left a game so early in my life.

back to Thread , 8th or not ?
Cas think because we go to wakey we will still be 3 points behind LOL

Is 8th good enuff ? CC final is the only thing I want

7th should be obtainable.

Good enough? Probably not but I don't think we've got a given right to be in the top 4 considering ally of clubs spend the same.

Would a CC semi final brighten the mood a bit? We're playing pretty poorly at the moment and are very, very beatable. Our coach is also almost as clueless as yours. One side or another will reach the semis and then anything can happen.

An interesting question is, would either Leeds or Hull reaching Wembley serve only to paper over the cracks? I certainly think, good day out as it was, our final last year made our season look a bit glossier than it really was, saving the real wake-up call for this year.

A day out at Wembley would be great for the club and fans...but it would definitely paper over the cracks, the clubs PR team would get at least 5 years mileage out of Agar being the man who 'led us to 2 cup finals'

We haven't beaten an SL side in a knock out game for 3 years though, so i'm not holding my breath.

Table with 9 to go...

5th - Leeds 21pts
6th - Catalans 21pts
7th - Castleford 20pts
8th - Hull FC 17pts

Games left...

Leeds Rhinos:
Bradford (H), Wigan (A), Catalans (A), Hull (H), Salford (A), Castleford (H), Quins (A), Wakefield (H), Huddersfield (A).

Catalan Dragons:
Castleford (H), Bradford (A), Leeds (H), Saints (A), Quins (H), Hull FC (A), Warrington (H), Hull KR (H), Salford (A).

Castleford Tigers:
Catalans (A), Warrington (H), Wigan (A), Bradford (H), Crusaders (A), Saints (H), Leeds (A), Wakefield (A), Hull FC (H), Hull KR (A).

Hull FC:
Wakefield (A), Saints (A), Salford (H), Leeds (A), Wigan (H), Catalans (H), Crusaders (A), Castleford (A), Warrington (H).

Reckon there's about 6-7 wins for Catalans, 5-6 wins for Leeds and 4-5 for Hull and Castleford.

But only takes a couple of freak results to change everything. If Hull beat Wakey (should be favourites) and Saints (shock) and Leeds lose to Bradford (shock) and Wigan (who are favourites) then we'd most likely go above Leeds on points difference. And if Cas lose to Catalans, Warrington and Wigan (who would all be favourites against them) then we'd actually be 6th after 20 games and it'd be in our hands for a home play-off spot.

Aye there's a few twists and turns before the seasons out yet. Would be nice for crusaders to beat salford, leeds to beat Bradford and we beat wakey this round to give us a bit of a cushion.

Cas have a game in hand don't they?

End of season, at best our only claim will be 'we was only 4 mins away from 7th spot'

They do, at Wigan.

i reckon we will finish 7th hopefully anyway

Not good enough though

i know