Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:28 pm  

Blobbynator wrote:

Which was?

My point was to replace a player who will be with us next season with one who won't is not the way to go. I didn't say that our leaving players should be dropped, which is what some people are suggesting I said.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:29 pm  

St pete wrote:

The point your making is that your biased and bitter.

Huh? You really do say some daft things.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:35 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

My point was to replace a player who will be with us next season with one who won't is not the way to go. I didn't say that our leaving players should be dropped, which is what some people are suggesting I said.

So why should Kyle be dropped because he's not here next year and can cover injuries off the bench?

If Kyle is playing well he should stay in.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sat Jul 16, 2011 3:17 pm  

St pete wrote:

So why should Kyle be dropped because he's not here next year and can cover injuries off the bench?

He is not our fullback, he is our no.7. Therefore, he isn't being dropped. He doesn't have the fullback spot to be dropped from. He WAS dropped from the no.7 spot though but he brought that about himself.

It's you and others who are wanting to drop a player. Only one of our most experienced players who when fit has saved countless tries for us, this season included, not to mention scored a few from being a fantastic support player.

People are having fits about our defence yet would advocate putting a player who is defensively vulnerable right in the middle of other defensively vulnerable players and right on our tryline. Madness.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:24 am  

Look I'm no fan of the way Eastmond went about his business. But even I thought he would come back during the Easter break, more so our halfbacks would not have to double up ( at that point I did not realised that both reserve half backs and their back up in Wheeler were going to hit the injury list).

So I expected Eastmond back at halfback to play against Cas, and then thought we would rehabilitate from that point. Well that is what we have done and now he has taken his chance and rather than given performances like at the start of the season, he has given performances deserving of his talent. This is sport and he's playing for his spot. If he is not a disruption to the team any more and his performances are up to scratch then in the end that is all that matters so he should play.

I know what you are saying about playing those who will be here next year, but for me you do that during the regular rounds, unless there is an injury, that is when you test out your potential youth for next year.

Now Pryce is fit, whether he signs or not I'm sure the coach, the board, the player and even Gaskell himself understand that in a few weeks Leon will be taking the starting spot from Gaskell and rightly so. Gaskell has shown promise, but you don't play promise over what you actually have when it comes time to win things.

I'm a huge Wellens fan and would not like to see him cast aside but it is sport and he has been below par this year either due to age or injury. I'd like us to find another role for him, but IMHO, Eastmond has his spot this year and he will have to fight it out at FB next year with Lance, Lomax and maybe Pryce. It could be that Wellens is the perfect back for Royces back on the bench senario, as he can also do a few minutes stint in the loose forward 2nd row. Which would mean we don't have a back sitting on the bench for the whole match not able to play a role in the pack.

Eastmond is a liabilty in defence in that he will not be able to stop a man on the line up close, but he will be good as a sweeper cleaning up loose kicks, and shutting down breaks in the field of play, before then run 80 meters.

So it's a better attacking quality he brings with some down side on line defence, but better kick returns and shutting down breaks.

If he plays well he deserves his chance regardless of the politics and my or others personal opinions on his attitude at the start of the year.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:25 am  

So in answer to the poll I've not ticked any option. The best player to play FB is the best player not anyone due to any recent form. Each week from now on it should be the best player regardless.

The time for experiementation and giving lessons is over.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:39 pm  

Eastmond or Makinson with Wello third choice for me.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sun Jul 17, 2011 3:52 pm  

McClennan wrote:

Eastmond or Makinson with Wello third choice for me.

I can't see how anyone can put makinson above wello. He's never played a full super league game at fullback, hes only played about 7 full games.

Eastmond or wello for me and on current firm it's got to be eastmond.

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:00 pm  

St pete wrote:

I can't see how anyone can put makinson above wello. He's never played a full super league game at fullback, hes only played about 7 full games.

On the basis that we need to look to the future. We have nothing to lose by playing a youngster (I included Eastmond in that too) because it's all necessary experience. People weren't really up for putting Eastmond at full back (I would include myself in that) but look how that has changed after just two games. If an opinion can change in two games for a tiny scrum half why can't it also be a change for another youngster?

Re: Who should play fullback for rest of the season? : Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:04 pm  

McClennan wrote:

On the basis that we need to look to the future. We have nothing to lose by playing a youngster (I included Eastmond in that too) because it's all necessary experience. People weren't really up for putting Eastmond at full back (I would include myself in that) but look how that has changed after just two games. If an opinion can change in two games for a tiny scrum half why can't it also be a change for another youngster?

I don't agree mate. It would be a massive mistake playing a young untried kid at fullback at the business end of the year when we still have a shout of doing the double

I'm all for switching there when a game is won and out of site but this is the business end of the year and we need our best 17 playing and not trying kids out.