Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 11:56 am  

Mugwump wrote:

Wellens is a problem - not the problem. There were an awful lot of missed tackles in that second half and the overwhelming majority were not down to Wello.

True, but if you watch his game last night, it was like we were playing with 12 men. The wingers panic whenever there is a kick as they know they have to do his job for him and it puts extra pressure onto them. Trying to come with attacking plays that can catch a defense out is also very hard to do when your fullback joins the line in the same position every time and does it so slowly they could send messages to each other down the defensive line by second class post.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:32 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Wellens is a problem - not the problem. There were an awful lot of missed tackles in that second half and the overwhelming majority were not down to Wello.

Like the downfall of Tsarist Russia there were many previous problems before the war but no one took these into to account and the Tsar paid the ultimate price. Time to take a back seat Wello?

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:53 pm  

I thought on the whole he was pretty solid last night.

However it is becoming more and more obvious that his legs are betraying his RL brain.

I felt a number of times that in attack our movement out wide was stilted by the lack of pace when he chimes into the line.
A few years ago Wello was quick enough and strong enough to force multiple defenders to straighten up and commit to tackling him, otherwise they knew he would break through the gap. Now they know they can slide out and double team the threequarters while leaving Wello to be dealt with by a single defender.

In the games Lance played fullback, it was noticeable that although fans were saying he wasnt charging back into the onrushing defenders, he was making lots of return yardage. In addition he wasnt afraid to launch the attack from deep on the kick return, as is the norm in Australia. This is something you dont get with Wello who tends to take it up himself and settle for field position.

Defensively there was one oh sheeeet moment and that was when Catalan kicked deep past him. He was very lucky that the ball stood up and he recovered it. If it had bounced on, i think Les Cats would have either scored a try or forced us into retrieving the ball close to our try line.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:05 pm  

The Chair Maker wrote:

I thought on the whole he was pretty solid last night.

However it is becoming more and more obvious that his legs are betraying his RL brain.

Would he cope better in the forwards? Maybe at LF? On average forwards retire later than backs due to speed issues were forwards tend to keep power longer into their careers.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:22 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Getting rid of Wello...finding a prop

could one problem not be the solution to the other?

in all seriousness i think wellens could do a good job defending at centre for you. he needs less off the mark pace there and his tackling ability/defenisve understanding has never been in question.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:24 pm  

The Chair Maker wrote:

I thought on the whole he was pretty solid last night.

I don't remember seeing him act as our last line of defence at any time though. He was missing in action for all the tries. On one occasion he left the line completely open instead of hanging back and doing what he used to do so well.

I have actively defended Wello on these boards and I certainly don't blame our defeat on him alone (or on any one player - it was a team effort to grab defeat from the jaws of victory in such spectacular fashion) but he made us worse, not better, in attack and defence and therefore should be dropped.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:31 pm  

This reminds me of the days when another legendary Saints fullback (Phil Veivers) no longer had the pace to be a regular starter. Saints managed to extend his career by another twelve months employing him off the bench where he could cover any position on the pitch excluding prop.

It is obvious that Wellens can't continue at number one. But he certainly retains enough ability to be an emergency utility player. Given the number of injuries in the modern game I think such a role is a no-brainer. Unfortunately, this would mean Royce dropping his tactic of a non-playing 17th substitute.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:38 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

This reminds me of the days when another legendary Saints fullback (Phil Veivers) no longer had the pace to be a regular starter. Saints managed to extend his career by another twelve months employing him off the bench where he could cover any position on the pitch excluding prop.

It is obvious that Wellens can't continue at number one. But he certainly retains enough ability to be an emergency utility player. Given the number of injuries in the modern game I think such a role is a no-brainer. Unfortunately, this would mean Royce dropping his tactic of a non-playing 17th substitute.

Completely agree. He still has a role within the team, just not at full back. I'd personally drop Lance back so we can keep Gaskell/Lomax in the halves as I thought they played very well last night. Makinson and Gardner on the wings for now to give Foster some time in the 20's to try and get his game back on track.

I don't think we missed Meli at all either.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:46 pm  

Imagine how Wellens feels.

About ten years ago he had pryce, long, scully, cunningham all playing with him to help. They all complimented each other and there was never any pressure and there was a poop tonne of trophies!

Now he's surrounding by moronic nancy boys and incompetent over the hill aussies. He is one of the only great players in the team. Yes he's getting older and hasn't got the same amount of skill but he's also got double or triple the pressure, as no one else will cover for him. Talk about kicking a man when he's down. And now all the 'fans' are blaming their loss of form on him. Spitting and kicking a man when he's down.

Talk about entitles fans. You don't have a great team this year (good but not great) you have no spine and the only player with the balls and sway to raise the team is currently burning himself in australia. Instead of blaming one man (who also happens to have been a great servant to your club and love you guys through and through) accept you are turning into a alte nineties wolves. Poor youbg players, over the hill aussies and, if you're lucky, a couple of really good players to get you through.

Re: WELLENS : Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:53 pm  

jdrocket wrote:

Talk about entitles fans. You don't have a great team this year (good but not great) you have no spine and the only player with the balls and sway to raise the team is currently burning himself in australia. Instead of blaming one man (who also happens to have been a great servant to your club and love you guys through and through) accept you are turning into a alte nineties wolves. Poor youbg players, over the hill aussies and, if you're lucky, a couple of really good players to get you through.

Are you saying that Lomax, Gaskell, Makinson and Wheeler are all poor players. Every single one of them is better than anything you have coming through at Warrington.