Re: Meli : Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:29 pm  

Our retention in the first half was 60% and in the second 43%. We blew five try scoring opportunities, three of them with the line begging. Our forwards were absolute tosh and no-one defended, except Wilkin. That's not why we lost - we could have played brilliantly and still lost. But we were s h i t e nontheless.

Re: Meli : Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:32 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Our retention in the first half was 60% and in the second 43%. We blew five try scoring opportunities, three of them with the line begging. Our forwards were absolute tosh and no-one defended, except Wilkin. That's not why we lost - we could have played brilliantly and still lost. But we were s h i t e nontheless.

I agree with you on this ( and over the past few weeks thats been rare )

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:47 am  

He was pretty poor at times, but he's the only one in the backs that is anywhere near threatening. Any half breaks or breaks in the backline invariably come through him or on his side of the field.

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 9:52 am  

The biggest problem with Meli, and I am sure this is no surprise to anyone here, is he can't defend for toffee. Especially now he has moved positions.

You have Meli in the team because, like Karl Pryce (I was going to say Richards and Monaghan; but I don't rate him as good as them) he can force his way over the line. His defensive weaknesses are expected to be hidden by his ability to score tries. However, when he sin't doing that he is a liability and a hole in the defensive line.

But you already knew that.

I am shocked he was given another contract when there are many more devastating players in his mould that sts could easily get.

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 12:46 pm  

jdrocket wrote:

I am shocked he was given another contract when there are many more devastating players in his mould that sts could easily get.[/color]

Such as?

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:16 pm  

Saint94 wrote:

Such as?

sorry I meant what I assume they could get.

The most overstocked position is Winger and that is what he was when he resigned.

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:19 pm  

jdrocket wrote:

sorry I meant what I assume they could get.

The most overstocked position is Winger and that is what he was when he resigned.

You were getting my hopes up then

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:25 pm  

Saint94 wrote:

You were getting my hopes up then

I apologise. But if you think about Sts have bought some class acts in the past and have even got players at the top of their game from across the hemisphere (Lyon).

I honestly can't see why sts stuck with Meli. He doesn't proivide a blistering attack, is worse than a sack of potatoes under a high ball and can't defend for toffee.

Practically anybody would have been better.

Alos, Sts have a string of wingers ready to take his spot. Most notably Jamie Foster.

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:30 pm  

jdrocket wrote:

Alos, Sts have a string of wingers ready to take his spot. Most notably Jamie Foster.

But last night Jamie went off injured. 17 stitches required. So Meli shifted to wing and Eastmond came into the centre, where he was excellent for us in 2009. Eastmond on the wing was neve going to work. But Meli has been looking a ton better in the centres and just this week reported inthe press as enjoying playing there. He has also looked defensively much better at centre than on the wing.

However, prior to his successful move to centre, I hadn't a clue why we had kept him on either. He certainly didn't deserve a new contract based upon his performances of the last couple of seasons. But we signed him up until the end of 2012 and so while he's here we may as well make the best use of him, and that is in the centre with Foster on his wing.

Re: Meli : Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:43 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

But last night Jamie went off injured. 17 stitches required. So Meli shifted to wing and Eastmond came into the centre, where he was excellent for us in 2009. Eastmond on the wing was neve going to work. But Meli has been looking a ton better in the centres and just this week reported inthe press as enjoying playing there. He has also looked defensively much better at centre than on the wing.

However, prior to his successful move to centre, I hadn't a clue why we had kept him on either. He certainly didn't deserve a new contract based upon his performances of the last couple of seasons. But we signed him up until the end of 2012 and so while he's here we may as well make the best use of him, and that is in the centre with Foster on his wing.

I thought you had missed my point but you pick it up in the second paragraph. Moving him to wing last night was the most obvious move. However, as you say, I cannot see why he was given another contract. Especially when he is still getting targeted for his poor defense. He has never really been the best with positioning in defense and he is obviously struggling more now after a change of position. He often puts a lot of pressure on his winger.