[Kosh]

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:00 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

But who says Hall is the better option, thats not clear at the moment so Horne has to stay.

Yes it is.

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:11 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

But who says Hall is the better option, thats not clear at the moment so Horne has to stay.

Hence the word 'potentially'. If Hall plays like he can and improves his defence, he has the ability to completely eclipse Horne. The only way to realise this is by playing, so giving him that opportunity when you can could be for the good of the team both short term and long term.

Big Dave T wrote:

The Crocker comparison is very clear. If Hall was an Oz international that too would be clear! Tony has also proven himself to be a class full back so thats pretty clear. Potential to be the better option also means he has the potential to be the worse option so why risk it when we dont need to?

And in a single sentence I think you've nailed our biggest problem: fear is overriding our desire to improve. Do you think Leeds and Saints and the like would be scared of putting in a talented youngster against the might that is Celtic Crusaders?

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:19 am  

Kosh wrote:

Yes it is.

Based on what? Youre subjective opinion i guess?

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:22 am  

carl_spackler wrote:

Hence the word 'potentially'. If Hall plays like he can and improves his defence, he has the ability to completely eclipse Horne. The only way to realise this is by playing, so giving him that opportunity when you can could be for the good of the team both short term and long term.

I agree he is a future star should he develop correctly. Im not anti-Hall by any means, just think short term he isnt the right answer. Ive said before, i'd have sent him out on loan for 3 months.

carl_spackler wrote:

And in a single sentence I think you've nailed our biggest problem: fear is overriding our desire to improve. Do you think Leeds and Saints and the like would be scared of putting in a talented youngster against the might that is Celtic Crusaders?

Not sure its fear, in business it would be called risk management!

You go with the option that will get results rather than one that may make you better results or may make you worse results until they can develop into a player than doesnt make worse results.

[Kosh]

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:28 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

Based on what? Youre subjective opinion i guess?

Hall offers much more in attack than Horne ever will. Crusaders have a weak defence. We should try and exploit it.

I'm pretty sure we'll go with the 'safe' option though. We always do.

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:29 am  

Kosh wrote:

Hall offers much more in attack than Horne ever will. Crusaders have a weak defence. We should try and exploit it.

I'm pretty sure we'll go with the 'safe' option though. We always do.

Why is playing the person who is first choice in their position "safe", Horne did nothing wrong against Wigan did he?

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:30 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

I agree he is a future star should he develop correctly. Im not anti-Hall by any means, just think short term he isnt the right answer. Ive said before, i'd have sent him out on loan for 3 months.

I actually agree that loaning him out could be a good idea.

Big Dave T wrote:

Not sure its fear, in business it would be called risk management!

You go with the option that will get results rather than one that may make you better results or may make you worse results until they can develop into a player than doesnt make worse results.

I would have thought risk management would be choosing to utilise/develop him when the risk is minimal (ie against teams who hold less of a threat). Not using him at all is just risk avoidance and a waste of his talents.

If his inclusion would mean the difference between winning and losing against the likes of Celtic/Salford/Castleford, I'd say we have big problems.

[Kosh]

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:38 am  

Standee wrote:

Why is playing the person who is first choice in their position "safe", Horne did nothing wrong against Wigan did he?

My question would be why Horne is first choice when he isn't as good a centre. But that's been done to death on here.

Oh - and I don't want a team full of players who've 'done nothing wrong'. I want a team full of players who've done things right.

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:43 am  

Standee wrote:

Why is playing the person who is first choice in their position "safe", Horne did nothing wrong against Wigan did he?

nO HE DIDNT DO NOTHING WRONG...WAS THROUGH A COUPLE OF TIMES BUT Wigans line spped was good and they got him...Hall may have got in....Celtics speed wont be anywhere near Wigans so should play Hall to exploit this weakness and have Houghton on bench

: Mon Feb 16, 2009 11:49 am  

Kosh wrote:

Oh - and I don't want a team full of players who've 'done nothing wrong'. I want a team full of players who've done things right.

I like that Kosh, nice one.