Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:10 pm  

SomersetSaint wrote:

People constantly slagged off Rush for not playing Gaskell last year, yet he was clearly not far off the mark in dropping him, especially as he probably knows him far better than anyone else. He is now on borrowed time before he returns to the reserves or sees out his career at Rochdale. Lomax may find himself a new position, but until we have a replacement half back, he is destined to stagnate in a pisiform he isn't cut out for.

I was constantly shouted down on here for saying that Gaskell isn't good enough at stand off but he simply isn't. Bottom line is that he would be a far better Centre or Loose forward ( provided he could bulk up ).

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:50 pm  

He's had 3 games at Stand off and is not good enough???

Lance had a whole season and was not good enough, if he is still not good enough after 10 games then I will conceed the point, but at this stage I'm not prepared to do another Smith or Foster and suggest he be excommunicated from the team again after less than a handful of games, only to do better elsewhere.

We have no patience at all as Saints fans and if it's not instant then it's not good enough.

It took him a good 5-8 games in 2011 to get up to speed, he's had little game time since.

I'm now wondering how long it will be for the Saints faithful to suggest that Roby is not of the Saints standard and he should be shipped out too.

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 6:54 pm  

Didn't Royce say he had to sit Lomax down at his home and explain to him how to play half back?

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:09 pm  

roader wrote:

Didn't Royce say he had to sit Lomax down at his home and explain to him how to play half back?

And now look how he is playing; should have left him alone.

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:13 pm  

SomersetSaint wrote:

People constantly slagged off Rush for not playing Gaskell last year, yet he was clearly not far off the mark in dropping him, especially as he probably knows him far better than anyone else. He is now on borrowed time before he returns to the reserves or sees out his career at Rochdale.

What utter tosh.

It is because stupid Rush dropped Gaskell last year that Gaskell is now having to play catch up. Had Gaskell continued his development from 2011, as he should have been allowed to do, we might now have been looking at a settled, working partnership with the possibility of two halves who were shaping up to control a game, even in a crisis. As it is the lad has to start all over again. Rush deserves to be slagged off. And the most galling thing about it all was that we ended up getting even less out of the season than we did when we had the sacked coach in place and a whole bunch of young players playing, not just Gaskell and Lomax. So he was just wrong on every front.

We have played all of three matches and it's just ridiculous to be writing off our halfbacks.

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:15 pm  

roader wrote:

Didn't Royce say he had to sit Lomax down at his home and explain to him how to play half back?

You should have been a tabloid journalist as you have re-written that story!

He didn't say he HAD to sit Lomax down at his home and explain it to him. He said that he and Lomax had a chat at his home about being a scrum half. Lomax also said that he asked Simmons not to drop him if he didn't do well straight away but to have faith in him and stick with him, which is precisely what Simmons did. Interestingly, Lomax looked good in 2011 and won young player of the year. Gaskell looked good too.

Never know, it could have been down to Simmons that they looked that good.

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:57 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

What utter tosh.

It is because stupid Rush dropped Gaskell last year that Gaskell is now having to play catch up. Had Gaskell continued his development from 2011, as he should have been allowed to do, we might now have been looking at a settled, working partnership with the possibility of two halves who were shaping up to control a game, even in a crisis. As it is the lad has to start all over again. Rush deserves to be slagged off. And the most galling thing about it all was that we ended up getting even less out of the season than we did when we had the sacked coach in place and a whole bunch of young players playing, not just Gaskell and Lomax. So he was just wrong on every front.

We have played all of three matches and it's just ridiculous to be writing off our halfbacks.

I admire your loyalties to Lomax, Gaskell and Makinson as you defend them at all costs. But you really need to take the blinkers off, all three don,t have the creative abilties to help us succeed. Yes all 3 are playing out of postion to a certain extent but they really are not good enough in there natural skill set, whoever is coach at the time.

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:06 pm  

He's not had Tommy Martyn like Sean long did, and he's not had sean long like Matty Smith did.
We could really do with an older 7 here to guide him and then perhaps he may develop.
Personally i dont think he's going to make it as a top level 7. As a centre/ FB possibly

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:08 pm  

How long do with give lomax and gaskell surely we should judge them after Easter we would of played all the big teams by then and they would of had about ten games together

Re: Lomax - what has happened to him? : Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:31 pm  

Judder Man wrote:

I admire your loyalties to Lomax, Gaskell and Makinson as you defend them at all costs. But you really need to take the blinkers off,

I don't wear blinkers. But I do support young players and think there are far too many Saints fans who still think we are in the era of Longy and Cunningham in their pomp. We are not. The guys you mentioned there have probably just hit 22 (Makinson may be younger). All three have had disrupted careers so far, on their third coach in 18 months, two of them played together and then didn't, with Lomax having to partner with someone who hadn't a clue at halfback (but was older and more experienced and so should have been good for him, but clearly wasn't). Gaskell had to endure the ignominy of being dropped having played in a grand final and doing stuff like rescuing a win at Widnes last season on one of the rare occasions Rush deigned to let him play.

These three need stability, good coaching and opportunity. Until they get that then I will continue to defend them and will happily berate anyone who writes them off based on three performances, one of which was so dire by the whole team that fans should have been offered a refund plus a free pie and a pint just for lasting as long as they did in the freezing cold.