Nothing new in the Soward story. Same as two weeks ago.

Looks like Martin Richards has been asked for some column inches minutes before going to press and he dug up a previous article.



We do need a rough house prop but there aren't many around.

A couple of years ago on here we were suggesting Carl Webb. Webb retired and perhaps due to the sanitisation of the game players like him are now gone, bar Morley.

Last Saturday Smith had a fully fit squad and a choice of forwards, Wane didn't. SW has had forwards on the sick list with Fielden out all season, Dudson out, Prescott only playing 8 or 9 games. You can't have players, especially props out and not miss them. If Wire had Morley, Carvell and Hill missing he wouldn't have much left in the props dept.

Wane took a risk with experienced players who weren't fit instead of younger men who are. Crosby and Spencer would have been worked over big time by the Wire props and maybe got injured. He played the best team he had and they were well beaten.

As for Sam at 6. Yeah great! He then has to make 26 tackles a game instead of 3. Wire forwards would have targeted him all 80 mins and Sam doesn't have the hit tackle that Tommy does. Played at 6 last Saturday and Sam could have got injured.

Not into the blame game on this one, Wane played the best he had given the circumstances.

Perhaps the players are responsible for the performance, not the coach?

Your right a couple of Chris Hill’s in our front row would have been nice!

I'm not calling for Tomkins to move from fullback but this reasoning baffles me - 'We can't play Tomkins at 6 because he might get hurt'.



Finch is the most important player in the team and the most influential player in the team so by that reasoning surely we shouldn't be playing him at 6 either because he might get hurt?



Tomkins played 6 for a while and I don't remember him picking up many injuries if any. In fact he seemed to pick up more knocks playing fullback!



It's rugby league for heavens sake! You play, you get hit, you get hurt, you get up. If Sam isn't capable of taking a few hits or making a few tackles like he would playing 6 then no way should he be man of steel or considered one of the best players in the game.



I happen to think he's a lot tougher than others seem to, although given that he refuses to return any kicks and always gives the ball to Charnley killing any opportunity to counter attack right from the kick I could be wrong.

Who's we ?

And breath !



All that paragraph is just the one sentence.

Sam at 6 used to make 20-30 tackles a game he now makes 2-8.

Keep him at 1 as that gives him the attacking options rather than him spending his time and energy making tackles.

I said he "Might" get hurt not that he would and that was the reason for keeping him at 1.

Full Back keeps him fresh and able to run at tired men, at 6 doesn't.

Tomkins best game v Wire was at 6.

Yes but the OP has a point. Given that TL, Finch and Powell were hurt I believe our next best option was for Sam to go 6. IMO Sam should be our emergency 6 from now on.

It's certainly a fair point. Wane said we had no other option but to play an unfit Finch, we clearly did. We had a player who was considered the best stand off in the league before he was moved to fullback.



I can understand why people wouldn't want Sam moved from fullback and long term there's no reason to do that. He's the best attacking threat in the league at fullback when the team is playing well. However when the team needs cover in the halves I can't see why he wouldn't be one of the best options available.



Jack Murphy showed signs that he would be competent at the very least when given a chance at fullback, so we have cover in that position.



I just don't get this idea that Wane had no other option.

From your avatar pic , id say keep your eye pealed

.Its hard being a Cowboy in ROCHDALE



.

cherry.pie was right. The idea he should not play 6 because he might have to tackle more is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read.







He might get hurt playing 1 as well. Or is he supposed to run away form making any tacke these days? It's Rugby League!



He started out as a 6 and having to tackle is no reason not to play him there if needs must. Given Lockers is just plain wrong at 6 its about time Wane stopped playing him there. If that means Sam to 6 until people are fit then that is what he needs to do.



The pack getting beat v Wire is irrelevant anyway (as a reason not to play him at 6 as opposed to how it affected the Wire result) in that this happens occasionally and the half backs have to put up with it and deal with it as best they can.

Sammy Powell isn't injured he was the 18th man but didn't make the team when finch passed a very late fitness test. Wane wrongly told the press he was out with a back injury!