Why all this talk of Cust at no.9?
No disrespect - I like him as a half, great attitude. And even though it doesn't always pay off, he has a crack and tries stuff - but the modern-day hooker is often a fit-as-fk tackling machine. Matty Ballin set the standard on that front imo. Cust is an able dummy-half, and gets involved in attack plenty.
That isn't his issue, and if we have Schuster & DCE along with Walker in centres and Jrbo/Trbo's playmaking all happening, Cust's main strength is diluted in a wealth of playmaking options.
Defence team-wide was a problem this year - can't deny it.
And Cust is/was targeted as a defensive liability by opposing packs. It just doesn't make sense. If the hooker is not making those tackles, the forwards are - that means they plod back on kick-returns, and poor guys like Garrick are trying to take those early-set hit-ups, and we are 3-4 tackles into a set on our 30 when we finally get a run that has post-contact metres and any offload chance that isn't a wild speculator (going to miss our offloads with AFB gone, will be left to Marty, who everyone knows has an offload or 6 in him).
As a 14 coming on with lethargic forwards, I guess it might work, but the opponent bench rotation would just run fresh boppers at him til he tires - I know I would.
Cust is young, maybe he will fill out and fit that role in time. I just wouldn't want to set him up to fail in that capacity so young.