Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:07 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

I know, the english used is appauling.

Really is....and who the hell is Rushes?!

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Thu Nov 08, 2012 2:53 pm  

Carlos Alberto wrote:

Another contentious recruitment decision from us.

I think it's a good call. As far as I see it, when he's on form he's a solid enough player who can finish and has the bonus of being an outstanding goalkicker. When he's low on confidence it's pretty much just the goalkicking. As he matures he'll probably be more consistently at the 'solid' end of the spectrum, but I don't see any raw materials that will allow him to develop beyond that tbh.

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Thu Nov 08, 2012 3:08 pm  

I'd rather give Foster a go than another 2/3 years of Gardner and/or Meli. Yeah, he had some bad games, but he did well enough in his first season to show that there is some potential there.

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Thu Nov 08, 2012 5:44 pm  

Dux wrote:

I think it's a good call. As far as I see it, when he's on form he's a solid enough player who can finish and has the bonus of being an outstanding goalkicker. When he's low on confidence it's pretty much just the goalkicking. As he matures he'll probably be more consistently at the 'solid' end of the spectrum, but I don't see any raw materials that will allow him to develop beyond that tbh.

Totally agree

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:58 pm  

Carlos Alberto wrote:

I'd rather give Foster a go than another 2/3 years of Gardner and/or Meli. Yeah, he had some bad games, but he did well enough in his first season to show that there is some potential there.

I must've missed that potential. He's a modern day Danny Arnold. Too many deficiencies in his game to make it here long term and we have a better player in Makinson in his position. Gardner and Meli are also better than him (which says alot for Foster's ability).

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:13 pm  

St pete wrote:

I've been very impressed with Dixon when I've seen him.

The problem with Dixon is that he is only 19/20 so if we signed him in say 12 months time he would command a fee.

Saints as we all know wont pay transfer fees. So thats him out of the equation.

Look were that got us with Chris Hill who is now, 12 months after we baulked at coughing up a few grand to give to Leigh, an international forward.

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:43 pm  

Blobbynator wrote:

I must've missed that potential. He's a modern day Danny Arnold. Too many deficiencies in his game to make it here long term and we have a better player in Makinson in his position. Gardner and Meli are also better than him (which says alot for Foster's ability).

Yes Meli is better than Foster now, and when fit Gardner has the experience to warrant a place ahead of Foster.

However i have so far only got one response as to who we may be able to get to play on the wing for Saints in 2014.

Do you and others seriously want a 31 year old Gardner to be one of our main strike weapons?

I agree that Foster isnt a world beater, he is a young kid that makes mistakes but has shown promise that he could become a good professional winger given patience.
In an ideal world we would be able to pick up a new Offiah or Robinson. However look around in SL, and all the top quality backs are at Wigan, Warrington, Leeds and Hull, they are out of our reach.
That leaves us with the option of picking up journeymen from other clubs, or just sticking a kid on the wing who will then get slated by the Saints fans, because he isnt scoring 90 yard trys every week.

I always like to use the example of Anthony Sullivan.
People forget that for the first few years he was at Saints he was ordinary to put it mildly. Saints fans derided him as a waste of money and another dud. Now many years later after he has retired he is talked of as a legendary winger. This is down in part to his exploits in the SL era when he had the good fortune to be partnered with Paul Newlove.

Just check out these stats.
1991-92 season 13 trys in 28 games
1992-93 season 8 trys in 28 games
He was 24 years old in 1993 so hardly a kid.

Just for comparison, in the same period the 22 year old Alan hunte scored 28 trys in 1993 and 24 trys the year before when just 21.

Can you image if there was the internet in 1993 what people would have been saying about Sully as a winger. It would not have been pretty.

Its why i think fans are often too quick to write off kids before they have had the chance to mature.

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:44 am  

One year deal confirmed this morning.

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:06 am  

Blobbynator wrote:

I must've missed that potential. He's a modern day Danny Arnold. Too many deficiencies in his game to make it here long term and we have a better player in Makinson in his position. Gardner and Meli are also better than him (which says alot for Foster's ability).

Danny Arnold at least was a winger, if a poor one. Foster is only a goal kicker. He's a modern day Sean Day.

Re: Time to recall jamie foster? : Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:06 am  

SomersetSaint wrote:

Danny Arnold at least was a winger, if a poor one. Foster is only a goal kicker. He's a modern day Sean Day.

Could have sworn he scored a fair few tries as well.