surely by your "logic" wigan have 8 missing as fielden, o'carroll and prescott are all props and you only need 2 in a team so can't count 1 and phelps, carmont and gleeson are all centres so the same "rule" applies.

double standards from a black and white fan, who'd of thought it

So according to your logic the subs bench must not consist of either a prop or a centre

Don't confuse him with the new-fangled 4 interchange bench.

To be fair I'm always baffled when a coach (inc Justin) has 4 forwards on the bench - if a back gets injured you're screwed surely?!

Hey so how did I break the AUP earlier, I'm curious now...

Difficult though, because if the opposition go for 4 fwds you might get overpowered and if a back doesn't get injured you've wasted a bench spot. A second-row who can at least cover centre is always a good option, if you can find one - Gilmour for example, if you can afford to have someone that good on the bench.

A lot depends on the opposition and the conditions....if it is an expansive team you will need a back...if it is rough conditions or a forward battle you need the forwards.

Personally I like 3 forwards and one utility back if possible, though most teams generally have injuries to take into account, on Friday Manu & Hame both ended up playing centre I know Newton has covered centre for you guys.

Yeah agree with you both, and you're right MR it is tricky. I would go with the BB idea of 3 forwards and one utility player. That's why I personally rate Charlie so highly - he could almost play in any position on the field!

True as well about a 2nd rower filling in at centre - used to feel Psycho did that to excellent effect, as Newton also has lately.

You're not supposed to reveal people's identity unless they're OK with it. Poor Yorkie. I mean, poor me. I think.

Hmm, didn't know that... Which AUP anyway, RLFans or the Unofficial Forum? If you mean RLFans I don't see how it can be - the two forums are unrelated. If you mean the Unofficial one I hardly use it anyway - much more fun on here.