Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:42 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

That's not the full story though.

It was against Warrington that our pack finally stepped up and actually started to work hard. Had Gaskell had the advantage of a pack working hard in front of him he may have had more space to work in.

Also, he had to work with Lomax, who has now been put at fullback. Had he had the advantage of an experienced player like Wilkin by his side then maybe that too would have helped him. But he didn't.

It's not up to Gaskell at the end of the day. He could be playing his socks off in every Rochdale match he played in. If the powers that be don't want him in the team, he won't get in the team.

You cant blame the pack when Lee as a bad game. The fact is every time he as been given a oppotunity at first team level over the last year and half he as failed to deliver. Wont take the line on, average kicking game and just does not see the runners running into gaps.

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:44 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

It's not up to Gaskell at the end of the day.

It is - he could have played well in the first team over the last 12 months or so.

Don't get caught up in the powers that be guff - Brown had him as first choice in the first three SL games and he was poor. Added to his at times dismal form last year, he got dropped.

He can only hide behind the poor pack argument for so long - eventually he has to actually show something or his place in the team is rightly at risk.

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:44 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

It's not up to Gaskell at the end of the day.

It is - he could have played well in the first team over the last 12 months or so.

Don't get caught up in the powers that be guff - Brown had him as first choice in the first three SL games and he was poor. Added to his at times dismal form last year, he got dropped.

He can only hide behind the poor pack argument for so long - eventually he has to actually show something or his place in the team is rightly at risk.

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:47 pm  

Gaskell was poor the three games he play this season and its his fault he ain't playing but when Gaskell got dropped last season he was one of the best player in 4 of the 6 games

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:47 pm  

One eyed monster wrote:

You cant blame the pack when Lee as a bad game. The fact is every time he as been given a oppotunity at first team level over the last year and half he as failed to deliver. Wont take the line on, average kicking game and just does not see the runners running into gaps.

You have a seriously selective memory, you really do. One eyed is definitely a good name for yourself!

He has hardly had any game time at all over the last year and a half when compared to Lomax, who not only played in every game last season and this but has had the benefit of working alongside an experienced player in the halves. Gaskell has not had that advantage at ANY time during his first grade experience and as a halfback that is vitally important.

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:48 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

It is - he could have played well in the first team over the last 12 months or so.

And had he been playing in the first team for the last 12 months or so he might well have done. In fact, he did play well. He should never have been dropped originally last season.

However, you have never been a fan of Gaskell and so I expect you to write him off.

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:49 pm  

1984saints wrote:

Gaskell was poor the three games he play this season and its his fault he ain't playing

The whole team played atrociously in the first game and not much better in the next two but I didn't see anyone else getting dropped. How strange. Not.

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:01 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

The whole team played atrociously in the first game and not much better in the next two but I didn't see anyone else getting dropped. How strange. Not.

I went to Wrexham yesterday and Gaskell was excellent so if he not pick this week then I think they is more to it then just form

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:18 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

You have a seriously selective memory, you really do. One eyed is definitely a good name for yourself!

He has hardly had any game time at all over the last year and a half when compared to Lomax, who not only played in every game last season and this but has had the benefit of working alongside an experienced player in the halves. Gaskell has not had that advantage at ANY time during his first grade experience and as a halfback that is vitally important.

Ive watched both Gaskell and Lomax since they was 14 year olds playing for blackbrook and Orrell respectively. Lomax is something special, someone you need to find a role in the team, unfortunately for him scrum half is the spot that opened up first. Gaskell on the other hand as done very well to be kept on after his scholarship contract, somebody that as punched above his weight for a few years. He was very good in 11 (which was a nice surprise) but since he as been non existent.

Lomax also probably played every game because he trains 100 percent, his diet is top notch and very rarely goes out on the lash with the lads and if he does you can often find him drinking wate, he is the model professional.. Gaskell, well i wont go there.

I'd love Gaskell be given another go and be world class but unfortunately it isent going to happen, as he quite simply is not and never will be 'class'.

Re: Gaskell : Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:19 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

The whole team played atrociously in the first game and not much better in the next two but I didn't see anyone else getting dropped. How strange. Not.

Yes you did, Makinson did. Who was then given a oppotunity at the weekend and again, despite scoring. Did naff all.