Maybe it's Jimmy Lowes - not a bad hooker in his time IIRC - who sees flaws in McShane's game. Re Hood, IMV they selected him at the expense of McShane for the Cas game to give him exposure at SL level against opposition the coaches viewed as appropriate for him Unfortunately, Cas didn't play ball, so they couldn't risk putting him on till it was clear the game was won. McDermott's comments after the game would seem to me to verify that view. I agree with the view that McShane will be back this week vs the Wolves.
Ahem ! ...is there where I say I told you so .
McShane's face doesn't fit (say no more). It does seem a cruel twist to give the lad the no.9 shirt and a four year contract.....only to then keep him firmly on the sidelines.
I got that part wrong, not in isolation I'd say, plus I only stated it as a view NOT a fact. I am surprised though since if McD didn't have faith in Hood against Cas, it's hard to imagine that this week's game will offer greater opportunities to blood Hood. We'll know by about 21.50 on Friday.
McShane's face doesn't fit (say no more). It does seem a cruel twist to give the lad the no.9 shirt and a four year contract.....only to then keep him firmly on the sidelines.
McShane's face does fit, James Lowes told me last year that they rate him very highly, including McDermott in that.
It's just obviously the case that they want to fit Burrow in somehow, and they want to take a look at Liam Hood (whom in my own opinion is better than McShane). You can't have McShane, Hood, and Burrow in the same squad, that simply would not work.
I got that part wrong, not in isolation I'd say, plus I only stated it as a view NOT a fact. I am surprised though since if McD didn't have faith in Hood against Cas, it's hard to imagine that this week's game will offer greater opportunities to blood Hood. We'll know by about 21.50 on Friday.
All banter and joking aside I am as confused as you. Logically McShane should have been selected considering his performance against Manly and in the u-20's last week.
Maybe McDermott was convinced enough by Hood's brief cameo appearance to give him more game time this week. Otherwise it is incontrovertibly illogical.
McShane's face does fit, James Lowes told me last year that they rate him very highly, including McDermott in that.
It's just obviously the case that they want to fit Burrow in somehow, and they want to take a look at Liam Hood (whom in my own opinion is better than McShane). You can't have McShane, Hood, and Burrow in the same squad, that simply would not work.
Why would it not work ?
Is Burrow, McShane and Hood a worse option than Burrow, Diskin and Buderus if not Long, Cunningham and Roby ?
Get all 3 on I say........and Sinfield to LF will allow that of course.
McShane's face does fit, James Lowes told me last year that they rate him very highly, including McDermott in that.
It's just obviously the case that they want to fit Burrow in somehow, and they want to take a look at Liam Hood (whom in my own opinion is better than McShane). You can't have McShane, Hood, and Burrow in the same squad, that simply would not work.
If McGuire or Sinfield were injured we'd probably have them all in the same squad, with Burrow at half and McShane/Hood 9/14. Seems McShane's role is first reserve to McGuire/Sinfield/Burrow.
I just hope, if he is rated highly, that he doesn't turn into another Jimmy Lowes, fed up and pushed out at Headingley and coming back to destroy us.
Is Burrow, McShane and Hood a worse option than Burrow, Diskin and Buderus if not Long, Cunningham and Roby ?
Get all 3 on I say........and Sinfield to LF will allow that of course.
Like you say I don't think that would work with sinfield at 6 which is clearly where he is seen playing at the moment. I think mcshane was unlucky at not keeping his place, he strikes me as a good player and hopefully he and hood have a good future at the club. I just hope if hood is selected then he is given more of a run out than 6 minutes
McShane's face does fit, James Lowes told me last year that they rate him very highly, including McDermott in that.
It's just obviously the case that they want to fit Burrow in somehow, and they want to take a look at Liam Hood (whom in my own opinion is better than McShane). You can't have McShane, Hood, and Burrow in the same squad, that simply would not work.
Why would it not work ?
Is Burrow, McShane and Hood a worse option than Burrow, Diskin and Buderus if not Long, Cunningham and Roby ?
Get all 3 on I say........and Sinfield to LF will allow that of course.
Buderus & Diskin were both excellent defenders in the middle of the park. Sinfield was defending in the middle also, and was also excellent. That is not the case now. Hood is comepletely untried at this level. McShane's defence has been questionable, and Burrow can only really defend out wide. Having all three in the match squad with Sinny & Danny at half back makes us too lightweight IMO
Buderus & Diskin were both excellent defenders in the middle of the park. Sinfield was defending in the middle also, and was also excellent. That is not the case now. Hood is comepletely untried at this level. McShane's defence has been questionable, and Burrow can only really defend out wide. Having all three in the match squad with Sinny & Danny at half back makes us too lightweight IMO
You could be right. Concern over defence might well be more logical to understand
Buderus & Diskin were both excellent defenders in the middle of the park. Sinfield was defending in the middle also, and was also excellent. That is not the case now. Hood is comepletely untried at this level. McShane's defence has been questionable, and Burrow can only really defend out wide. Having all three in the match squad with Sinny & Danny at half back makes us too lightweight IMO
You could be right. Concern over defence might well be more logical to understand
However there may also be an angle of too many cooks spoiling the broth. I remember when Diskin came back from injury in 2005, we would play periods of the game with Burrow, Sinfield, McGuire, Duneman and Diskin all on the pitch at the same time. This is not really that different. I remember at the time thoughts being that there were too many chiefs, not enough indians