1 Brisco

28 Cockayne

We have a good team but we can improve?

I think Cockayne should be played at full back over Brisco. Reason!

1. Much quicker
2. Stronger
3. Same as Brisco under the high ball
4. Does not get as many injuries
5. As good if not better tackler
6. enthusiasum


The only thing is his positional play and organisation, which could be worked on. Brisco does not offer enough in attack for me but still a very good player.

Think also Fisher and Hodgson are good but it is one area if I had a wish list we could improve on. If we sort these 2 out we could be the real Deal. A good hooker with Fisher or Hodgson to interchange.

Just looked at Hull's team for next year and after I stopped laughing I thought top 8 for them is a real long shot. Would be very peed off if I was supporting that lot next year.

Valid point because Cockayne is a better athlete than Briscoe.

It's all about choice really, do you go for more flair and stronger kick returns from Cockayne or solid defensive work from Briscoe?

Squad wise, JM probably thinks playing Briscoe is the better option for 2 reasons:-

1) There's enough flair player in the team already.

2) Cockayne is more versatile so can slot in anywhere to cover injuries.

Good debate though though cos Cockayne's kick returns are quality and they're a starting point in every set to get a roll on.

IMO Briscoe is safer under the high ball, has better positional play, and also is stronger in the tackle, how many try saving tackles on and over our own line has he done.
his only down falls are his lack of pace and his attacking play too lets him down.

do you want the more exicting but prone to the odd error or too Cockayne at f/b or good old reliable Briscoe?

Both on their best form, Briscoe is a better fullback for me. At his best he is top quality. If his form dips BC is an excellent alternative. Injuries mean it is a squad sport and BC will be in the 17 more often than not, I reckon - lots of competition for spots next year though, which has got to be a good thing.

if he does sign, we may even see a bit of Hall at f/b i reckon.

Both very good full backs with different qualities but for me Cockayne needs to be on the bench every week due to his enormous versatility and effectiveness in covering a lot of positions.

Briscoe is reliable under the high ball Cockayne isn't. Also when Cockayne puts in strong kick returns how many times does he actually lose the ball.

1. Much quicker - Yes Charlie is
2. Stronger - Yes Charlie is IMO
3. Same as Brisco under the high ball - Not for me, Briscoe far more solid and safe
4. Does not get as many injuries - Please explain further on this one - Briscoe gets knocked all over but always gets up and carries on.
5. As good if not better tackler - Not a chance, Briscoe is one of the best for last ditch tackles.
6. enthusiasum - Yes Charlie really loves it; but you cant knock Briscoes commitment at all.

If and its a big IF we are saying Briscoe is no longer a good enough FB for us then we need to sign another FB, Charlie is a great asset to us as a club for versatility but no way is he a starting FB at SL level.

Briscoe had a rough season, looked like he was carrying a knock at times and was covering a very second string back line for huge chunks of the season and this isolated him a bit and made him have to work too hard. Its no surprise to me that when Colbon came back into the side Briscoe looked a better player again, think LC adds a lot of stability and organisation to our back line.

Agree totally, which is why im shocked that so many people are putting Hall in the starting line-up.