Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:26 pm  

Does Jamie deserve his starting place this season on the wing instead of Gardner or Meli?

Plus side he kicks better than Kyle (and Kyle probably won't be fit for the start of the season)?

Negatives: he was found lacking in the Grand Final although Meli left him high and dry with his defending?

I'd start the season with Jamie and drop Meli

Thoughts

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:40 pm  

He certainly needs to be kept involved. Despite his slight frame, he looks a lot more robust than when he started, and certainly has some excellent skills.
IMO though, if he wants to play for Saints long term, he needs to force his way into the centre to show off his skills. As a winger, I think he'll just be an also ran who'll get moved on sooner or later.

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:45 pm  

He's the wing version of Paul Wellens. Solid as a rock but no use at all in attack and a major weakness in our lineup. Our backs, bar Shenton, Pryce and Eastmond are amongst the worst in Super League.

Flannery and Meli should not have been handed new deals IMO. The money should have gone on a couple of backs.

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:47 pm  

What do you think of the chances of Meli being starting centre next season? Keeping Sia & Flannery in the pack?

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:56 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

He's the wing version of Paul Wellens. Solid as a rock but no use at all in attack and a major weakness in our lineup. Our backs, bar Shenton, Pryce and Eastmond are amongst the worst in Super League.

Flannery and Meli should not have been handed new deals IMO. The money should have gone on a couple of backs.

Ever the doom mongerer (How many tries did "no use in attack" wellens score last year?). I agree he has neither the blitering pace nor size to really succeed in the reletively 1 dimensional (attacking wise) position of winger. However, he may have the abilities to make him a good centre - skill, timing, brains etc. Time will tell.

I certainly agreed on Flannery and, to a degree, Meli.

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:05 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

He's the wing version of Paul Wellens. Solid as a rock but no use at all in attack and a major weakness in our lineup.

Unbelievably harsh. Looks a talented player to me - good finisher and very good hands.

By the way, being the wing version of Paul Wellens wouldn't be a bad thing, unless you reckon 4 Grand Final wins, 2 WCC, 5 Challenge Cups, 4 League Leaders shields, Man of Steel, Players’ Player of the Year, Rugby League Writers’ Player of the Year. 2 Lance Todds, and 1 Harry Sunderland is a shoddy return.

I sometimes wonder whether you watch the game with your eyes closed.

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:15 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

He's the wing version of Paul Wellens. Solid as a rock but no use at all in attack and a major weakness in our lineup. Our backs, bar Shenton, Pryce and Eastmond are amongst the worst in Super League.

Flannery and Meli should not have been handed new deals IMO. The money should have gone on a couple of backs.

Nah,thats a poor evaluation. He has good feet,prety quick over the first 30m's and clears his line well.
Lacks that killer speed from 30m's but imo he could make a very good centre. But there again my glass Is half full

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:19 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

Unbelievably harsh. Looks a talented player to me - good finisher and very good hands.

By the way, being the wing version of Paul Wellens wouldn't be a bad thing, unless you reckon 4 Grand Final wins, 2 WCC, 5 Challenge Cups, 4 League Leaders shields, Man of Steel, Players’ Player of the Year, Rugby League Writers’ Player of the Year. 2 Lance Todds, and 1 Harry Sunderland is a shoddy return.

I sometimes wonder whether you watch the game with your eyes closed.

No, I'm a visionary. People will still talk about me on the rugby league scene 40 years after I've died. In the days of Newlove, Albert, Sullivan, Lyon, Hunte, Gleeson the likes of Wellens and Foster are fine. They'd score 40 tries and it would work well. But when you've only got 1 centre in the entire squad and only Pryce and Eastmond who could be regarded strike players (One of whom plays once every lunar eclipse), there isn't enough threat to see us winning trophies in the future.

We are carrying too many 'solid but not brilliant' players in the backrow and on the bench to fill the outside backs and fullbacks with them as well.

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:20 pm  

Don Brennan wrote:

Nah,thats a poor evaluation. He has good feet,prety quick over the first 30m's and clears his line well.
Lacks that killer speed from 30m's but imo he could make a very good centre. But there again my glass Is half full

He's too small for centre. The second rowers heavy breathing as they chased over would blow him into touch.

Re: Jamie Foster : Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:35 pm  

Rommel wrote:

Does Jamie deserve his starting place this season on the wing instead of Gardner or Meli?

Plus side he kicks better than Kyle (and Kyle probably won't be fit for the start of the season)?

Negatives: he was found lacking in the Grand Final although Meli left him high and dry with his defending?

I'd start the season with Jamie and drop Meli

Thoughts

Didnt think he woas found lacking in the grand final, and he didnt play alongside Meli, that was Lomax. So I think your getting your players mixed up.

At full strength I would have Gardner and Meli on the wing with Wheeler and Shenton in the centres..

However with us lacking Kyle at the start of the season, and possibly all of it, if Saints sell him to a RU team. Then we will probably need to start with Lomax or Foster on one wing, so we have a recongised kicker.