'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:23 pm  

I know this is pretty left field but what do people think of Clarkson as a shout for hooker?

He is contracted to us and has turned Widnes down. Given he obviously doesn't want to go down the league, and I don't see another top 6 team likely to offer him a deal it looks like he will be coming back to us.

His defence has always been very good but has struggled to emulate the attacking play of a jjb or ablett at 2nd row. McD seems to favour the strong hooker who can double as an extra forward when Burrow comes on rather than the skilful ball playing hooker (see you later McShane).

He knows the club and the ethos, can't be on big money and wouldn't stifle Robbie Wards progression in the longer term.

Not sure if I'm talking myself into something silly though.

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:26 pm  

apparently he has agreed a deal with hull kr for next season

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:29 pm  

Terrible idea, and thankfully not one we're going to use.

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:52 pm  

Open secret he's off to Hull kr.

I'd stick with what we have and at least give ward a go, unless we have a real quality signing up our sleeve, and I don't include Lunt & bought on in that.

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:05 pm  

Jonesy's a Legend wrote:

apparently he has agreed a deal with hull kr for next season

There you have it then.

Are we getting a transfer fee? Assume not

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:24 pm  

I think Aiton has shown the value of a proper hooker.we have a great pack and clearly want to offload.
We need a proper hooker . Not a SH forced there through injury or a SR that's not been good enough imo

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:44 pm  

Emagdnim13 wrote:

I think Aiton has shown the value of a proper hooker.we have a great pack and clearly want to offload.
We need a proper hooker . Not a SH forced there through injury or a SR that's not been good enough imo

Many regard Houghton as a "proper hooker" because he has a high tackle count but his distribution on Friday was poor and played a part in their defeat. Hull fans regularly criticism him for bad options and passes. The distribution and dummy runs are more important than the tackling.

The modern 9 is expected to be up with every PTB on attack and make more tackles than the other forwards when on defense with the result that a bench place has to be tied up with a reserve 9. I do not see why the 9 cannot play the full 80 and make much fewer tackles but have the 4th bench spot filled with a high tackling forward. We expect too much from our 9s who are really halfbacks and not built for heavy tackling work.

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:54 pm  

Indeed. I still think if we had a proper hooker with Burrow to cover and R Ward as back up /games vs lower teams is much better than going with Burrow or Clarkson .

If that means Houghton I'd be ok with it though hopefully we could sign better.

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:05 pm  

Emagdnim13 wrote:

Indeed. I still think if we had a proper hooker with Burrow to cover and R Ward as back up /games vs lower teams is much better than going with Burrow or Clarkson .

If that means Houghton I'd be ok with it though hopefully we could sign better.

IMO Clarkson is a non starter and Burrow is much better than R Ward from what I have seen. Not that many candidates about.

Re: 'New' Hooker : Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:11 pm  

Clarkson played a few games as hooker last season/season before when we had injuries. I don't think he did too badly from memory and with a bit of work something possibly could have been made of him. But you can't take that kind of risk (make him the lead hooker and hope it works) with such a critical position.