Would let Moa stake his claim against Crusaders. We were 26-0 against Saints, that was due to the impact and defensive efforts of the pack. For another tough game the starting 13 should remain unchanged. The only change I would look for would be on the bench with either Washy or Turner for Houghton. But, even then I don't really think it is necessary.

you just dont get what im saying do you im not saying cusack is crap im just saying that we need to get the right balance in the pack and for me that means 1 of dowes, radders and cusack would be dropped for moa to give us impact and some pure aggresion.

Which we had plenty of against Saints to be leading 26-0 without Moa!

I really don't get people wanting anything to change, the 17 that played at Saints showed more pride, passion, comittment and ability than we saw last season, barring injuries, keep it the same.

i hope agar picks moa lets see how he goes if he dosent perform then drop him but im more then confident heel perform.

Nuff said

well i know some people wanted calderwood to come in the team if he was fit to replace hall. what would you do because no matter what the same 17 should play shoundt they

Would leave Hall on the wing, he did nothing wrong. but calderwood won't be available.......will he

i know he aint available but was saying if he was would you drop hall for calderwood becasue i know i would. it would be harsh on hall becasue he dint do nowt wrong but calderwood would offer alot more to the team.

As has been said by others...."if it aint broke, don't fix it"



Soon be time to see the squad

That's the thing. Whilst there's logic in playing Moa instead of a "workhorse" type prop, Cusack's name would be well behind Dowes and Radford if that change was to be made.

id be very suprised if it aint the 17 that played saints because i think agar hasnt got the bottle to drop 1 of the older senior blokes.