I know its only friendlies but Shaw missed a fair few the last couple of weeks and could prove costly over the season.
Do we put Hall or Drinkwater in there or stick with Shaw?

Shaw Hall Drinkwater Mcguire Dagger Crooks Atkin Addy. All would do a job. I'd go for Hall initially. Held his nerve away at Leeds and a few long range ones have influenced results since his return. Nice problem to have for Sheens.

Everyone is welcome to disagree but I think the 35 second shot clock is a major factor here.

Hull FC's Sneyd admits he took over twice as long as is now allowed. It's got to make a difference to the routine.

Shaw was 100% Rovers best kicker in 2018 now he has to rush his routine and hasn't got it right yet.

Good point regards the shot clock, and as you said Sneyd admitted taking 30 seconds extra per kick.
Will be interesting to see how quick kickers adapt.
Hall to me though seems more relaxed wide out but time will tell I suppose.

It’s a good point.

I understand the reasoning behind the shot clock, and am in favour of it, BUT, if if is to the detrement of goal kickers, than i think maybe another 20 seconds needs adding, i was a fairly good goal kicker at a very good level in Union and League, and when you have a routine, it is VERY hard to change. I was fairly quick and didnt have any daft run ups etc.

Players like Sneyd are going to suffer, and so will F.C if Sneyd cannot change his routine.

Im not singling F.C and Sneyd out, its just his timing to take a kick is alarmingly long (30 seconds extra is hell of a lot of time).

I think if we see the goal kicking averages fall dramatically as a result of the shot clock, it should be scrapped or altered to suit.

Quote robinrovers10="robinrovers10"I understand the reasoning behind the shot clock, and am in favour of it, BUT, if if is to the detrement of goal kickers, than i think maybe another 20 seconds needs adding, i was a fairly good goal kicker at a very good level in Union and League, and when you have a routine, it is VERY hard to change. I was fairly quick and didnt have any daft run ups etc. Players like Sneyd are going to suffer, and so will F.C if Sneyd cannot change his routine. Im not singling F.C and Sneyd out, its just his timing to take a kick is alarmingly long (30 seconds extra is hell of a lot of time). I think if we see the goal kicking averages fall dramatically as a result of the shot clock, it should be scrapped or altered to suit.'" Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently?

Quote robinrovers10="robinrovers10"I understand the reasoning behind the shot clock, and am in favour of it, BUT, if if is to the detrement of goal kickers, than i think maybe another 20 seconds needs adding, i was a fairly good goal kicker at a very good level in Union and League, and when you have a routine, it is VERY hard to change. I was fairly quick and didnt have any daft run ups etc. Players like Sneyd are going to suffer, and so will F.C if Sneyd cannot change his routine. Im not singling F.C and Sneyd out, its just his timing to take a kick is alarmingly long (30 seconds extra is hell of a lot of time). I think if we see the goal kicking averages fall dramatically as a result of the shot clock, it should be scrapped or altered to suit.'" Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently?

Quote Faithful One="Faithful One"Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently?'" To be honest, I'm in favor of the stop clock on scrums and drop outs but think goal kicking should be exempt as all kickers have different styles from years of practice.

Quote Faithful One="Faithful One"Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently?'" To be honest, I'm in favor of the stop clock on scrums and drop outs but think goal kicking should be exempt as all kickers have different styles from years of practice.

I'm not, some kickers take an age, Tickle used to wind me up with the amount of time he used to take over a reasonably simple kick.

Though not really bothered about the clock. Am I the only one who can’t understand why everyone seems to be getting obsessed with speeding up the game? Is it that big a problem? I watched Rovers against Saints 1992 or 3 on that well known video sight, an entertaining game with lots of action. They had just started to clamp down on laying on & head high tackles the game flowed well & the only difference from today was the game was not stopped for injuries and video ref as much as it is today. Union & NFL don’t seem to worry about nothing happening for long periods of the game yet they get good support & TV coverage. The only thing I have really noticed is our players now being full time are fitter & stronger so the skill full small players never get much chance to run at tired forwards, so the reduction in subs will help that & maybe even go down to six changes if we find eight to much? What’s any one else think?

The NFL has been concerned about and taken steps to improve the pace of its games. It's arguably a slightly different point, but Union was concerned with the time lost to repeatedly resetting scrums and the last game I saw it seemed like it was a more controlled process with fewer collapsing.

Also, maybe the world is changing - and our chairman has alluded to attracting the next generation of fans, and they possibly spend their time differently. Tbf, I suspect we all do versus 25 years ago. I think the feeling is that longer games with slower play are cutting against that grain. Life generally is faster now.

Being radical, could we just bin-off conversions altogether and have 5-point tries?

The big change I'd like to see is dramatically restricting the wrestle. There's a quote I've seen, I think from the early days of SL, something like: 'I have seen the future of rugby league and it is basketball' - it seems to have gone to the other extreme nowadays. And the growth in milking penalties at the ruck that has come with it is not entertaining or edifying.

It is probably an age thing but being in my late 60’s I do find it odd that the game seems to think that it needs to be constantly moving at breakneck speed, to win spectators certainly union is not all action nor is darts or snooker but it doesn’t make it any less tense or exciting for its followers. Not that it matters as us older ones are leaving the game anyway either through natural wastage or not wanting to be out late. The game is certainly not family friendly as no decent parents would bring young kids out at eight at night especially on Thursdays with school next day. Our game has sold its soul to SKY so they can pad out their schedules when there is no football, & I suspect all this call for shot clocks is so they can fit our game into their own slots in the programming. Sad for me but I have given up on my season ticket after 20 plus years as I won’t travel into Hull on a night for a game. Sunday afternoon (or Saturday in my youth) was the best time to play, fixed in everyone’s mind, ie that’s we all did that time every week. Now you can’t plan anymore as it changes with no warning, the sooner the game wakes up to the fact that people want a regular time slot that becomes a habit the sooner we might revive the game. I am sorry to say I think it is to late & the game is in its death throws! & I sure hope I am wrong.