Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 1:34 pm  

SaintsFan wrote: One relationship [in attack] that has really impressed me is the one between Walsh and Lomax. In a pre season piece in the local rag, Walsh identifies Lomax as a player he is looking forward to working with, and it shows. The two seem to have developed a real understanding already. I hope they can both remain fit as I think that relationship could be pivotal to our chances. I'd agree with this. Would it be worth cultivating this relationship, with the eye of having 6. Lomax and 7. Walsh? Lomax can play that role (and basically did against Leeds) and bring in a fullback?

SaintsFan wrote: One relationship [in attack] that has really impressed me is the one between Walsh and Lomax. In a pre season piece in the local rag, Walsh identifies Lomax as a player he is looking forward to working with, and it shows. The two seem to have developed a real understanding already. I hope they can both remain fit as I think that relationship could be pivotal to our chances. I'd agree with this. Would it be worth cultivating this relationship, with the eye of having 6. Lomax and 7. Walsh? Lomax can play that role (and basically did against Leeds) and bring in a fullback?

Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 1:45 pm  

Carlos Alberto wrote:

It's a pity we didn't have Walsh when Lomax was struggling in the halves. I think he would have done very well as a running 6 alongside Walsh.

And I still think he would.

Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 1:46 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

I'd agree with this. Would it be worth cultivating this relationship, with the eye of having 6. Lomax and 7. Walsh? Lomax can play that role (and basically did against Leeds) and bring in a fullback?

What like a world cup winning fullback???

Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 2:06 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

I'd agree with this. Would it be worth cultivating this relationship, with the eye of having 6. Lomax and 7. Walsh? Lomax can play that role (and basically did against Leeds) and bring in a fullback?

I don't think so, no. I'm (obviously) no expert but from watching Saints this season so far it would seem at this stage anyway that both Walsh and Lomax are free ranging, popping up all over the place, and that flexibility and fluidity may be lost to Lomax if he moved into a six role as such. I'd still go with Hohaia at six because he can offer another running and kicking option should the opposition aim to close down Walsh, linking in with Lomax as he did so spectacularly against Leeds at LP for example.

We badly need to have our spine retained week on week so that all its parts can get used to playing together. Messing around with Hohaia will do nobody any favours.

Apropos of nothing whatsoever, I liked the way Hohaia and Walsh celebrated Hohaia's try on Thursday night. Maybe those two would also work together very well if just allowed to get on with it by our tinkering coach.

Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 3:40 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

I don't think so, no. I'm (obviously) no expert but from watching Saints this season so far it would seem at this stage anyway that both Walsh and Lomax are free ranging, popping up all over the place, and that flexibility and fluidity may be lost to Lomax if he moved into a six role as such. I'd still go with Hohaia at six because he can offer another running and kicking option should the opposition aim to close down Walsh, linking in with Lomax as he did so spectacularly against Leeds at LP for example.

We badly need to have our spine retained week on week so that all its parts can get used to playing together. Messing around with Hohaia will do nobody any favours.

Apropos of nothing whatsoever, I liked the way Hohaia and Walsh celebrated Hohaia's try on Thursday night. Maybe those two would also work together very well if just allowed to get on with it by our tinkering coach.

I agree fully lance should be left to work with Walsh for the remainder of the season. Rumour was that this is lances last season. With the rules on concussion now in the NRL is value increased exponentially. So looking to the future, it's either bringing someone in or someone moving position (turner, as was the original point of the thread, or lomax) and it was a suggestion for 2015 and beyond.

With Wilkin (or turner) in the middle of the field playing lock, moving the ball from one side to the other, we can afford for our halves to play a little, and not be tied into a structure necessarily. Lomax wouldn't have to change the game he's playing, just the number on his back, and we can bring in a fullback who can specialise in being on the shoulder of the ball carrier every other tackle, and solid defensively. Lomaxs lack of a kicking game is a draw back, but with the pivots we currently have in the team, were stifling our 6 into occasional 1 off plays whoever it is. We've all called for wheeler, hohaia and whoever else has played there to get more involved than just a few good plays a game, moving lomax back frees up our fullback role for something different.

Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 4:39 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

I agree fully lance should be left to work with Walsh for the remainder of the season. Rumour was that this is lances last season. With the rules on concussion now in the NRL is value increased exponentially. So looking to the future, it's either bringing someone in or someone moving position (turner, as was the original point of the thread, or lomax) and it was a suggestion for 2015 and beyond.

Sorry, I didn't realise you were looking to next season. I assumed you were talking about this season. But that's probably because I'm having enough difficulty dealing with this season at the moment to think about the next one!

With Wilkin (or turner) in the middle of the field playing lock, moving the ball from one side to the other, we can afford for our halves to play a little, and not be tied into a structure necessarily. Lomax wouldn't have to change the game he's playing, just the number on his back, and we can bring in a fullback who can specialise in being on the shoulder of the ball carrier every other tackle, and solid defensively. Lomaxs lack of a kicking game is a draw back, but with the pivots we currently have in the team, were stifling our 6 into occasional 1 off plays whoever it is. We've all called for wheeler, hohaia and whoever else has played there to get more involved than just a few good plays a game, moving lomax back frees up our fullback role for something different.

It's a possibility but just now I'd like to see how things develop with the same pivots each week, assuming we ever even get to that stage! At the moment, Lomax and Walsh as they are placed are looking very good and unless something goes wrong with that then I can't see the point in changing it but if as you suggest Hohaia wont be with us next year, even though he is contracted to be, then maybe things will be looked at again at that point. At this stage I'm happy as things are between Lomax and Walsh as they are working very well together but I may feel differently by season's end.

Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 5:21 pm  

Walsh and lomax have been exceptional together and have a really good understanding but I'd leave lomax where he is.

The free role really benefits lomax, he can pop up where and when he wants and it's near impossible for a team to take him out the game.

It's just a shame we can't find a stand off. The spine of lomax, new 6, Walsh, Roby would be very very good.

I was sceptical at first with lomax at fullback but he was struggling in the halves, he become to predictable with his step and dummy, he also didn't let the ball go enough. He's basically playing as a extra pivot now and he's massively important for us.

Re: Is it time . . . : Mon May 05, 2014 6:34 pm  

St pete wrote:

No no no no no no please not Jordy at 6!!! I'm begging Brown not to go down that route!!! I'd rather play wello there!!!

I don't know how much I could stand of him doing that little hop skip and jump and then dropping the ball inside.

He's decent/average centre and a absolutely woeful stand off!

Lance & wheeler are by far better at 6 then Turner.


Turner has no natural ball skills as a stand off. He has no natural brain for a stand off. He has no kicking game. He's got no organisation skills. In fact I don't think he has one thing to suggest he'd be a ok 6.

This for me although I would be tempted to give Roby a break and use Lance at 9 as he's not too terrible there. Turner has looked beyond terrible every time I've seen him play 6.