When Tomkins is out we must not play Pat there again. He offers no threat in attack and gives the defence easy options as he fails to join the line providing no second phase.

I understand he is solid in defence, but fullback is an attacking position and without that threat from fullback a teams attack is always going to struggle.

Pat at fullback was not our problem tonight, not by a long shot, in fact I thought he was one of our best players

If Sam is out, I'd stick him at fullback every time

I thought he had a good game personally. Defensively he was good and safe under the high ball. Infact I've already said on twitter that from a defensive view point I'm more confident In Pat at FB than I am Sam.

I don't even think he was bad as far as attacking is concerned... But you are comparing him to Tomkins..... So he's never gonna match up in that department.

I don't think there were any major problems, it was a good game and the best team won on the night. It was a good team performance. An older head in the pack I think we could have nicked it.

Richards is a quality player top class, and a very solid defensive fullback. He offers our attack nothing though in that position, the second phase out the back play was non existent tonight as he does not have the pace or hands to join the line or create space for those around him.

Great wingman, not a fullback in the modern game.

It's the safe option and ultimately thats probably the correct call in an away match at Leeds. He's solid but does limit you in attack.

In terms of other options who have we got? Charnley was the same against Huddersfield, Powell had a crack but is too slow and Murphy is out on loan. After that Tierney is possibly too young and a player I'd consider as a real left field selection would be Ryan Hampshire but like Tierney its probably too soon especially considering we'd be moving him from his usual position.

Murphy or Hampshire for me.

Well seeing as he wasn't taking goalkicks suggests he had a tweak, with that in mind he had a solid game.

We all know how good he is under Sinfield's bombs!

But a great attacking threat. Sam is hardly solid under the high pressurised kicks either but we allow that for the positives he brings. Sam has made some howlers at full back. Give the kid a break.

So he drops a bomb and should never get a shot again? Apart from that drop he had a very good game that night. Whilst I appreciate the drop was crucial the kid is a much more natural modern fullback than Richards.

As I said I thought Richards was solid tonight, but his lack if pace and vision really shuts down our attacking options.

Our entire attacking game is based around the second phase play. Richards at fullback takes that out of our game and against a good defence it costs us games.

I think firstly we should be looking at the fact we made poor metres in the forwards battle for 70 minutes tonight, we really did struggle to break out of our forty due to Leeds line speed and stopping us dead. Neither Murphy / Hampshire would have altered that.

I can understand Wane's thoughts on Richards at FB tonight as the alternative would have been peppered all night with bombs. Instead Sinfield know's Richards will field those all day long and arched them to Ryan Hall instead.

Let's face it, tonight was a good effort but could have really been on the back of a hammering due to the amount of possession against us (Ryan Hall should have had a hat-trick in the first half but for sloppy last passes).