Re: Dan Sarginson : Mon Aug 12, 2013 3:33 pm  

I thought he had a nice step that he used on a couple of occasions but other than that I didn't think he had an impact, and to have him in the top three players in the game is just ludicrous.

Re: Dan Sarginson : Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:25 pm  

BackrowSaint wrote:

Took his try well but otherwise was fairly anonymous. Poor defender.

This for me is his big problem!

Re: Dan Sarginson : Mon Aug 12, 2013 5:09 pm  

pies-r-us wrote:

This for me is his big problem!

I agree but it is probably fixable as he's just turned twenty. He's certainly no worse than Ratchford or Turner were at his age. His running style reminds me very much of Ratchford. Time will tell.

Re: Dan Sarginson : Mon Aug 12, 2013 6:14 pm  

And a dam sight better than the centre that was Joel Tomkins

Re: Dan Sarginson : Mon Aug 12, 2013 7:06 pm  

Loz wrote:

And a dam sight better than the centre that was Joel Tomkins

I'm not sure, but Joel was only a fill in for Gleeson, and he wasn't that poor defensively.

Re: Dan Sarginson : Mon Aug 12, 2013 7:58 pm  

It was noticeable in the second half that Londons left side attack had us stretched on a number of occasions.

This seemed to occur after Wello came on, our defence then appeared to stop sliding properly to the right and hence Turner and Makinson got exposed a number of times, with the likes of Sarginson getting on the outside of Turner.

The result can be seen in Turners stats which show 4 missed tackles.

Turner was later moved over to the left hand side of the field with Josh Jones slotting in to defend the channel Turner had been defending.

FWIW it appeared at this stage as I recall, (which is somewhat unreliable) that Turner had been moved to play in the halves, Wello was hooking and I think Howarth slotted into Jones 2nd row spot.

Re: Dan Sarginson : Mon Aug 12, 2013 10:06 pm  

I thought he looked pretty decent with the ball in hand. If he gets good ball I think he could be ok but his defence is woeful.

I don't think I've seen a team so poor in defence as London the last month or so. They are being knocked off to easy and missing simple one on one tackles.

Re: Dan Sarginson : Tue Aug 13, 2013 8:09 am  

Sadly Dan has been Hyped up far too much by his agent/management and now believes that he is far better than he really is, his tackling and defence are still weak. I thought he was in the bag for Wigan, unless they changed their mind after the semi-final.

[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

Re: Dan Sarginson : Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:48 am  

Offside Monkey wrote:

Mmm, I wouldn't buy into that too much. To suggest London had one of the best 3 players on the pitch that night is ludicrous.

it's not uncommon for their match reporters to give out sympathy points in that competition.

It's been discussed with sadler on the other rl forum a couple on times, with not much response from him

Re: Dan Sarginson : Tue Aug 13, 2013 10:08 am  

Fantastic Mr Catpiss wrote:

it's not uncommon for their match reporters to give out sympathy points in that competition.

It's been discussed with sadler on the other rl forum a couple on times, with not much response from him

We towelled them for 70 out of 80 minutes.
Our left flank of Manu, Meli & Swift were making breaks at will at one point. Any of those would have been worthy MoM (imo in front of LMS and Walmsley).

Its a common problem that we like to pat the loser on the back. Someone mentioned that Terry O'Connor was on SL Fulltime and kept saying how Salford (I think) never gave up, well done to them, even though they got 70 put past them.
I was watching a game the other week were Hull (I think) scored a lovely long range try, but the commentators just wanted to bang on about how Danny Kirmond unsuccessfully chased all the way back.