LMS : Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:19 pm  

I've noticed our favourite cockney has been attracting quite a lot of stick on a variety of threads. I'm not sure this is wholly fair, as I think people are criticising him for not doing stuff he's never really been able to do !

Basically, LMS is pretty lightweight for a prop. He's not actually that big, when you put him up against the likes of Walmsley, Amor, Masoe and now Savelio. So when he's being played in the middle of the park, as he is at present, there's not much point complaining that he isn't making many breaks, because he never did. He hasn't the grunt to get through the opposition middle.

So what does LMS offer ? Strictly speaking, he offers what used to be a second-row package : he's surprisingly fast, he's got good footwork, and defensively he's pretty sound. He can also do longer minutes than the out-and-out props. The way he's been used mostly at Saints is as a sub. This means he can exploit tiring defences with his speed, by making his yards when the opposition line isn't moving up as fast, but also his greater mobility can shore up our own tiring defence in the middle. He does that job pretty reliably.

Where it goes wrong is when he's used as a starting prop (nearly always as a result of injury), because he doesn't have the size to do what Masoe, Walmsley and Amor do in terms of making the hard yards against an energetic defence. Basically, if you need to try and carry the ball out of your own twenty, LMS is not the man you want to be handing the one-out pass to.

Our problem is that we've got used to simply classing him as a prop, and so comparing him negatively to our real big front-rowers. But he doesn't offer what they do, and we'd be better comparing him to the second-rowers - fewer yards and breaks, but more tackles and the occasional backing up of someone else's break.

Personally, I think he is a second-row. He's go the same sort of size, footwork and speed as Chris Joynt had, and I've always thought he could be really effective when used further wide hitting balls from first or second receiver and running at the opposition backs with a bit more space. We've actually now got some genuine big front-rowers in Walmsley, Masoe, Amor and Savelio. We also have some younger kids like Thompson and Walker to fill in for injuries. With Manu out for ages, I'd like to see LMS playing second-row alongside Soliola, and leaving the brick-wall running to the real props. It might firm up our defence out wide, and give us a little more threat there.

Either way, I don't see much point getting on his back for not making big yards in games where our pack is being beaten, and he's being called upon to do a job he's never really been able to do.

Just some thoughts.

Re: LMS : Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:30 pm  

I've perhaps been as harsh as anyone when judging him recently.

I have no problem with him as a lock/ second row (I don't think he has the lateral footwork to be able to play wide, so he's limited to lock) and would judge him as such, if that's where he played. Since he's being picked as a prop, I have to judge his performances as a prop, and they just don't cut it at the moment. He can perform well at the back of the scrum, and would give him game time there to try and up his form, but as a prop, he shouldn't get anywhere near the first team!

Just as a point, he started vs Wigan and was on the bench vs widnes, yet posted almost identical stats so I don't think the "he works better against a tiring defence" line works for me ...

Re: LMS : Tue Apr 22, 2014 11:57 pm  

He actually went to right second row against Widnes, and played most of game there. This occurred after Soliola was moved into the centres and Wheeler the wing to cover for Dawsons injury.

It was noticeable that Widnes made fewer breaks down that side with LMS defending in that channel than with Soliola.

He did quite a bit of tackling in this position as evidenced by him being second top tackler for us. Something many fans failed to notice and take account of.

Most fans will just notice however the fact he wasn't driving it up the middle much. This is understandable as he wasn't being asked to play up the middle, and with Wello and Wilkin in the halves the ball didn't get moved much, to give him opportunities to run out wide.

I have been personally mulling over if Saints may play him in the backrow in the future, with a view to getting more punch out wide. This is an area we are severely lacking now due to the injury to Manu.
The likes of Wilkin, Soliola and Flanagan cant put in 100 metre plus games from the backrow, they tend to only do 50-60 meters with a lot of tackling thrown in.

When looking at the likes of Wigan, all their backrowers regularly get over 100 meters a game, Leeds also have Ablett and Delaney who can chew yards up out wide. Warrington have Westwood, and Huddersfield have Ferres.

We desperately need someone to emerge and give us more wide running options this will help free up our threequarters. I think half of our problem is that teams know we have a big front row that can go forward, however once the ball gets to the second rowers they are easy to handle. So teams just triple team the front row to limit its forward momentum. This forces Saints to shift to Wilkin and Soliola. They just then get smashed when they have the ball, and are run over when defending.

Re: LMS : Wed Apr 23, 2014 5:37 am  

What's his weight and height compared to other props?

He's played prop now for a good 5 years but only last year and now as he been so poor ?

Re: LMS : Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:26 am  

St pete wrote:

What's his weight and height compared to other props?

He's played prop now for a good 5 years but only last year and now as he been so poor ?

about 6'2" and 16 and a half stone, a centimetre shorter but a kilo heavier than Amor, so its not his size, its application

Re: LMS : Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:06 am  

Saint Simon wrote:

about 6'2" and 16 and a half stone, a centimetre shorter but a kilo heavier than Amor, so its not his size, its application

I've been stood with him and Amor vas the didn't look much size difference. Maybe it is application or maybe he's just not strong/good enough.

Re: LMS : Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:23 am  

Fine if he is to play in the second row, BUT!

I'm pretty sure we signed him as a prop. If we take him out of the Prop category then we are down to Amor, Masoe and Walmsley, with a sprinkling of youth around him.

Laffranchi is a second rower playing prop.
Clough has gone


We have a wealth of second rowers, adding another one to the ranks just means we are missing more and more grunt up front.

At this rate everyone is becoming a second rower or an impact prop as we have no one ready to do the hard yards. Which just about sums up good friday.

There are 2 second row spots, we can't have 10 second rowers and 3 props. It's just a massive imbalance and we can't promote Wilkin, Flanaghan, Wellens, etc to the front row to cover the gap.

Re: LMS : Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:24 am  

Saint Simon wrote:

about 6'2" and 16 and a half stone, a centimetre shorter but a kilo heavier than Amor, so its not his size, its application

That's what an ex-player of my acquaintance used to describe as his "playing stats", not his real stats. In real life, he certainly isn't 6'2" (I was standing next to him in a café on Saturday morning, and I was taller, and I'm only 6'0). I can't comment on his weight. On the other hand, Walmsley (who was also in the same café) really is a big lad !

Separate note, but I'm always slightly surprised when I come across RL players in the flesh at just how small some of them are. Jonny Lomax barely came up to my chin. How the hell does he take the battering that he does every week ?

Re: LMS : Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:50 am  

bewareshadows wrote:

At this rate everyone is becoming a second rower or an impact prop as we have no one ready to do the hard yards. Which just about sums up good friday.

So we need another prop, as well as a standoff (and scrum half, potentially).

Huby would be a very good addition, but we'll do well to pull that one off.

What to people think of Phil Joseph? I can imagine he wouldn't cost us the earth, and always seems a decent battering ram when I've seen him.

Signing another prop, say Huby for conjecture's sake, would allow us to field the following pack

Front row of Amor, Roby, Walmsley - with Masoe and Huby from the bench, covered by Richards and Walker
Back row of LMS, Soliola, Manu with Savelio from the bench, covered by Greenwood and Thompson

That's a big pack.

Re: LMS : Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:31 am  

Offside Monkey wrote:

So we need another prop, as well as a standoff (and scrum half, potentially).

Huby would be a very good addition, but we'll do well to pull that one off.

What to people think of Phil Joseph? I can imagine he wouldn't cost us the earth, and always seems a decent battering ram when I've seen him.

Signing another prop, say Huby for conjecture's sake, would allow us to field the following pack

Front row of Amor, Roby, Walmsley - with Masoe and Huby from the bench, covered by Richards and Walker
Back row of LMS, Soliola, Manu with Savelio from the bench, covered by Greenwood and Thompson

That's a big pack.

I like Huby - a classic case of a prop maturing late into effectiveness. I remember when I first started watching, people used to say that props don't enter their prime till they're past 30; how times change. I'm less keen on Joseph, who seems championship standard to me. I'd hope Saints have scouts looking at championship clubs to see if there are any big, nasty props - even in the latter stages of their careers, who could come and smash into brick walls at Saints for a bit. I do think prop is a position which can benefit from a bit of the older man's confidence and maturity. It's a rare 20-year-old who has the self-confidence to do what good props do well. That's why James Graham was such a standout.

I think we've already got 4 big powerful props : Walmsley, Amor, Masoe and Savelio. Then we have youthful cover in Beaumont, Forster, Greenwood and Walker. I don't see any reason to play LMS at prop with those options. Give the lad space, and stop asking him to do what he's never really been able to do.