Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:13 am  

Gaskell has more physical attributes and talent than Matty, but Matty's undoubtedly the better player right now. I always said that, at the time, letting Smith go was the right decision. We had Pryce, Eastmond, Wheeler and Smith (plus Lomax bubbling under) and could afford to keep 3 of them - anybody at the time would have let Smith go from those 4. With the use of a time machine we'dve gladly let Warrington have Eastmond instead but at the time it was the right decision and **** happens. Smith is hardly a world-beater or match-winner, but he'd improve our team if we still had him and it's hard to see too many better options available at the moment...

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:22 pm  

And that's what it all comes back to. A huge player drain in the halfback position's. Whilst other clubs have been scrapping around for halfbacks we've been offloading them like there is no tomorrow and it has left us with a second row and a fullback in the half's.

I'll admit the Eastmond equation was difficult, but I still hold that it could have been hedged against. Lets not forget, we let Long and Smith both go, before Eastmond signed that 2 year deal. (not sure about Ellis) Even at that stage he was touted as holding out for the Union £.

Then come renewal time, we also had Pryce's contract due up.

If we ever get 2 halves back at the club, we need to be sure that we are not renewing both contracts in the same year. Losing one is unfortunate but the amount we have gone through is almost criminal in terms of talent drain.

Imagine this

Lomax FB
Smith 7
Leon 6
Gaskell centre or 13 or 6
Wheeler centre or 6

no need to buy Lance and some

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:36 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

And that's what it all comes back to. A huge player drain in the halfback position's. Whilst other clubs have been scrapping around for halfbacks we've been offloading them like there is no tomorrow and it has left us with a second row and a fullback in the half's.

I'll admit the Eastmond equation was difficult, but I still hold that it could have been hedged against. Lets not forget, we let Long and Smith both go, before Eastmond signed that 2 year deal. (not sure about Ellis) Even at that stage he was touted as holding out for the Union £.

Then come renewal time, we also had Pryce's contract due up.

If we ever get 2 halves back at the club, we need to be sure that we are not renewing both contracts in the same year. Losing one is unfortunate but the amount we have gone through is almost criminal in terms of talent drain.

Imagine this

Lomax FB
Smith 7
Leon 6
Gaskell centre or 13 or 6
Wheeler centre or 6

no need to buy Lance and some

tbh if I had a time machine Wheeler would be plying his trade elsewhere by now given his shocking injury record. Letting Smith and Longy both go with the 2 other halfbacks in the last year of there contracts was a poor move by the chairman as was signing an expensive fullback on a long term deal because he fancied playing 6.

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:25 pm  

The 2 big mistakes we made were letting Eastmond sign a short-term contract extension and offloading Pryce for Hohaia - the first one is maybe understandable in the circumstances and he'dve likely just sodded off to Warrington on a long deal if we'd pressed the issue which would have been the worst case scenario. In the current marketplace a player with Eastmond's ability is king sadly. But basically swapping Pryce for Hohaia gets loonier and loonier with each passing day. Maybe we simply couldn't compete with the raw £s on offer from Cats, but by the looks of things we never made an attempt to even try to...

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:03 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Takes one to know one!

You just don't know how to take a compliment do you. I was agreeing with you, you know.

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:04 pm  

Apparently he's not in the squad for Salford.
I know we all have varying degrees of support for him, but this will leave most of us scratching our heads, i reckon.

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:19 pm  

I think that's the debate on Gaskell done!

Barring Brown repositioning Gaskell for some other position which will take time.

As a halfback that's pretty much an indication that he will not play half for Saints again.

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:20 pm  

He could've played him full back this week, even if not standoff.

As you say, that looks like that, but its more than a little baffling to me.

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:27 pm  

Kinda looks like Gaskell #6 nail in the coffin time then... If he has no place even in the 19 with the players we have out then we won't be seeing him in the halves again barring an outbreak of plague at the training ground I don't think. I think we'll be seeing Hohaia ostensibly staying at #6 but doing a lot more work from dummy half.

Re: Gaskell : Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:02 pm  

I think that's it for Gaskell, I'm sorry to say.