That's unfair, there are a lot of other personnel changes that happen around the same time that could be equally relevant. Taking yesterday's game for example, I'd argue Hansen's being subbed for Hock was a much more significant substitution.



At least some people on here can see his value, given he's currently 9th in our "player of the season" race, ahead of a lot of players who seem immune from criticism.

Amen brother.



If McIlorum is a "major problem" then there are lots of teams in worse shape (Higham and Clarke for starters)

He has big strengths and big weaknesses but if we had the chance to replace him with a creative hooker we should take it without question.

I don't disagree but it is like comparing British centres. I know you like him Brian but he is a very limited player. He has it all but the smarts and in my opinion it will never come.



Certainly a SL player but not good enough for a top club. I also doubt Logan is, I think that we may see one of our halves moved there and given a shot.

ill concede the point about Hansens substitution, and im glad more than me niticed how poor we were when Hock came on.



but think back to early season when finch was out......we had MM playing 80 , and IT WASNT WORKING.

if Madge hadnt got Tommy in at 9 as soon as, no way would we be top of the league now.



MMs good for spelling Tommy why he has a breather, but i would also revert to a tactic we used earlier......think it was huddersfield game.......keep MM on when Tommy comes back, switch him to 13, and let a back rower have a rest

Correct. I can't think of very many 2nd choice hookers that I'd swap MM for. Scott Moore, possibly, though I'm not convinced.

I like him , he does a job under the salary cap we have .And like ive said before did he not out class every hooker on the pitch in the grand final erm yes , no team in superleague can afford 2 world beating hookers .

Read that and the first thought that sprung into my head was "the blind leading the blind".

A quote to offend not contribute. Well done.

Not intended to offend at all so apologies if it did. If I was as sensitive as that I'd have packed up long ago.



It was genuinely what I thought because I can't fathom the downer you have on Mcillorum and we have had this debate before so didn't think I needed to expand further. Given you are agreeing with a Wire fan who if you read the threads on here is pretty keen to pick fault wherever he can I reckon I might not be alone in thinking you are way off beam here.

strange thread, move him to second row? what the f*ck?

Hooker is arguably the most important player on the pitch as they have their hands on the ball more than any other player. It is no coincidence that we really struggle when he comes on the field.



I am a little surprised to see people who could appreciate Piggy and all he brought championing McIllorum. He is as one dimensional as Higham, his dimension is simply that he works hard he cannot lead his team round the field which is the number 1 job of a hooker.

What's wrong with Logan? I've only seen him a few times for Widnes, but he's been one of the best players on the park (along with his fellow dual registered players).

I think his delivery is erratic at best and he seems to lack the vision of a natural hooker.



Hope I am proven wrong though as England needs another Terry Newton badly.