Likely shaul would have been there if played

But he didn't so he wasn't. By the way I'm not bashing Jamie who I think is a terrific player.

Don't particularly think Rankin should lose the full back spot though.
Scored one and made an excellent last ditch try saving tackle in the first half.

I just don't feel as confident with Rankin as Shaul, a few times they kicked and he let it bounce, Shaul would have taken it on the full and gained us extra metres

We lacked pace in the backs on Saturday, a few times we tried the early kick, but didn't have the pace to challenge for it, more pace could gave turned those 2nd half breaks into try's.

I'd look at getting Shaul, Lineham and Naughton in the team for this weekend.

I know you'll find holes in Rankin Dave.
Just think it'd be harsh to drop him.

Our centres should be Talanoa and Sa
Sa should partner Lineham and Talanoa Naughton or Michaels.
But that means dropping Yeaman but Radford wont.
Feel sorry for any winger having Yeaman as a centre.No wonder Briscoe left

They way was breaking through with mini & talanoa I think shaul would have backed up more, but fair play to rankin he supported westy well, his game is more pivotal but shaul always seems to be in the right place when we break. I'm hoping shaul is in this week for when we break those whinos down the middle & he's on the end of about 4 tries.

Whilst the differential between Yeaman and X player at centre isn't that great it still has a detrimental effect on overall performance and in tight games it's enough of a difference to lose a game where you might have won.

I'm not really sure what Radford sees that benefits us that way because yet again Yeaman showed he can't pass, and yet again Houghton looked knackered, why isn't he being spelled?

When Westerman plays we look better with Shaul. Westy plays as a pivot which pushes Sneyd and Pryce wider at times, so Rankin has little space to work in. 5 pivots (including DH) is too many.

If fans can see it then why doesn't the coach?