1 Tansey
2 Sharp
3 Turner
4 Yeaman
5 T. Briscoe
6 Horne
7 Long

8 New prop (Fielden)
9 Houghton
10 O'Meley
11 Tickle
12 Manu
13 Fitzgibbon

14 Whiting
15 Lauaki
16 New prop (Hargreaves)
17 Moa

18 Berrigan
19 Prop (Dowes or Radford)
20 Washbrook
21 Back up scrum half (Thackeray)
22 Burnett
23 Lyne
24 J. Briscoe
25 Nicklas
26 Cunningham
27 Green
28 Crooks

Most of Tansey's best games for Leeds came when playing as an impact hooker. He was poor in the centres/fullback role. He had some success in the halves but tends to try to hard and was either really or really bad. He used to kick well from dummy half and ran well.

That said he has matured over the last couple of years and may be able to play the halfback role better, still think that fullback is the position he was born to play, suits his style really well.

Apart from not being able to catch or tackle, that is. He's an exciting attacking player, but comes up with too many howlers to be considered a top full back. Rocks or diamonds, I think someone once said: rocks in defence, diamonds in attack.

Bit harsh IMO, his positional play is [iiffy[/i some times, but to say he can't catch the ball is very wide of the mark. He's only dropped about 5-6 all season, his catch away at Cas this year when he'd ran 30 yards across field, arms fully extended to take one knee height is just one example of his catching ability.
The kid is quality, just what the team needs.

Still to be convinced myself. F/B require an all round skill set and Tansey lacks alot of defensive necessaries. I don't think he's a bad full back but we make allowances for his defensive frailties because of his support play and flair. He's not an all rounder and that's what I'd expect from a FB.

I agree with the catching point. I'm sure if he had good enough judgment to get near the ball in the first place, he may be able to catch it. You've not mentioned his one on one defence, which at times has been equally as poor as Lauaki's. I think his frailties would be less exposed in a different position, but I also hope he can become adept at traditional fullback play - I just can't see it.

Tansey
Sharp
Turner
Yeaman
Briscoe

Horne
Long

O'Meley
Berrigan
Fitz
Tickle
Manu
Whiting

Houghton
Moa
Fielden
Lauaki

He'll pull out a super catch like the one you've described, and then drop a relatively easy one straight after. What I ought to have said was he can't catch [iconsistently[/i well enough to be a top full back. And I reckon it's more than any 5-6 he's dropped. Particularly if you include the ones he ought to have fielded on the full, but instead allowed to bounce. And the ones he doesn't get in the right position to even attempt.

I agree that he's a quality player and I wouldn't even consider suggesting that he shouldn't be in the team. I just have my doubts about him as a (defensive) full back.

I take your point, but isn't it that you'd rather have a "Briscoe" type FB over a "Tony" type?
Some people prefer a defensive minded FB but it's not how the game's played anymore. With most teams (here and in Oz) preferring a "prop" type 13. FB is a pivot role now.
Regarding Tansey, he's only 23 and is in his first full season as a regular, in a position he's only played for 18 months or so. Plenty of time to [isure[/i up his defence.

Not really. I think Tony was a better tackler than Tansey, for a start. If I was being really choosy, I'd say I'd like a full back that can defend as well as attack. Billy Slater would be nice.

He would indeed. Tansey is a lesser version of Jarryd Hayne, plenty of attacking flair but is positionally naive and gets caught out. Perseverance and coaching should turn Tansey into Englands FB IMO.

Fitz at Prop!!! You've got to be having a laugh?

I worry for Briscoe - I think his fearless approach is knocking it out of him, and he's fast becoming a bit ordinary. Whilst I wanted him to stay, now I would far rather have Tansey than him. One thing about Briscoe is that he knew how to score by following Richard Horne around the field - that's something that perhaps Tansey can pick up on if we get any extended appearances from Horne.

100% Agreed.

Why? He is a prop!

I know. Whatever next? Houghton at hooker?

I'm not convinced. He looks more of a stand off to me.

I got called fifteen sorts of ballbag in an old thread for having the cheek to say I preferred a safe fullback in preference to a liabilit..., sorry, maverick like Tansey. So much for respecting other people's opinions.

I fully understand the pro Tansey viewpoints however. The trade off for having a mercurial player like him at fullback will be the inevitable head spins and seemingly silly errors (easy for us to cast aspertions with not having to do the biz on the pitch). When the balance slips towards the negative aspects of his play, then we'll have a problem. His orthodox FB play will improve the longer he plays there and whatever coaching he's getting. His other stuff is pure instinct.

I think he'd be a bloody handful for the opposition at stand off !

Why? He plays as a prop anyway, if we want to challenge the top sides next year, we need a more expansive loose man, and still need a place in the side for Fitz, and the second rowers are pretty settled.

No you don't.

The way we play isn't going to break us into the top 2 IMO. We haven't scored more than 50 all season, with an extra ball handler in the side adding creativity should allow us to do this.

Having a settled half back partnership would be a better idea.

Not having 4 ball handlers on the pitch.

It would, but with Horne and Long's injury records that is unlikely. With the size of our likely pack, another pair of hands will allow us to get better service to the wings, and allow us to change the focus of the attack.

I fully agree.

Mainly as i wouldnt class Horne as a ball handler anyway at 6. He's very much a running attacking option with a decent short kicking game.