Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sun Feb 24, 2013 5:43 pm
wertyuio wrote:
And all this clamour for Lomax to be Full Back: fine if you are one of those who sees a full back that likes to be more of an attacking than defensvie player....the current vogue. I still maintain that your full back is ostensibly a defensive player......just ask the Australian team in November 2013 when they've peppered Tomkins with high (and subsequently dropped) balls or run over him from eight yards out or grounded the ball about four yards to his left (or right) just in time for him to slide in with his knees....still, he'll come into the line two or three times and score a try.
While they themselves will have the best attacking fullback (And prone to a costly error or two) in the world playing for them you mean? The fullback is the most important attacking player there is in the modern game as he's the hardest to line up against as they can float along behind the play and join in anywhere. Saints get stung by that so, so many times against teams like Warrington and Leeds who have quality fullbacks.
While we're at it, Wellens is terrible defensively as well as in attack. He's relatively safe under a high ball that is played right to him, but his lack of mobility means he simply doesn't get to balls anymore and puts us under pressure as our wingers have to cover half the width of the pitch whenever there is a kick. He is long overdue retirement and his performances this season so far have been farcical. Having the slowest player on the field playing fullback is just stupidity.