Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sat Feb 20, 2016 12:31 pm  

Jack was an international youth full back and showed plenty of ability when he first came into the Widnes team on the wing. Although he's not blessed with great pace, he looked a fine footballer in those early days. He had a nightmare cup semi final against Castleford in 2014 and was never really a regular starter after that. The odd game he played you could see that his confidence had taken a big knock. FWIW, letting Jack go divided opinion amongst Widnes speccies. There were plenty who said he wouldn't be missed, but plenty, like me, who thought he had bags of talent and would come good in the end. Having seen his last two games for you, his glaring lack of pace is a big stand out. It's easy to pick on a young full back making his way, but your problems go much deeper than that. Jack would have got away with things in a dominant Saints team, but you are anything but that, and definitely he's not alone in being not good enough.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:37 am  

jaybs wrote:

Didn't KC say at a press conference that he was Lucky to get Owens, what does that say about his abilities? good players do not always make good coaches.

It's just silly to take a statement such as that at face value without thinking about the context in which it was made.

If I said I was "lucky" to lay my hands on a twelve year old Nissan Micra with 40,000 miles on the clock people would rightly scratch their heads. If I then said I got it for £200 quid on short notice after my regular car (which I can't do without) had failed unexpectedly and subsequently lasted me a good three years of fault-free motoring I think most people would indeed say that my luck was in.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 10:08 am  

Mugwump wrote:

If I said I was "lucky" to lay my hands on a twelve year old Nissan Micra with 40,000 miles on the clock people would rightly scratch their heads. If I then said I got it for £200 quid on short notice after my regular car (which I can't do without) had failed unexpectedly and subsequently lasted me a good three years of fault-free motoring I think most people would indeed say that my luck was in.

Tend to think that is even more silly lol, a lot of IF'S, come on £200 car and three years of trouble free motoring, in your dreams.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 11:26 am  

I'll think of Owens as a Nissan Micra forever more

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:09 pm  

I don't want to be harsh on him, he played better. Did better under the high ball early on in the game.

However, turning off when it is a lost cause is criminal for a pro, Swift is a shining example of a professional, it maybe a lost cause, but you chase down the player and push them wider out.

I'm not sure how well he can organise the defensive line and I've seen very little in terms of an attacking threat. He does not bring the ball back from a kick with any great runs.

So for me despite not wanting to move our wingers, I would until Lomax is fit move one of them to fullback.

Defensively Makinson is probably they best full back that could take on that role. We would lose something from the wing position and it's a shame we have lost Percival as Turner would make a winger who could bring the ball back from a kick.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:19 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

I don't want to be harsh on him, he played better. Did better under the high ball early on in the game.

However, turning off when it is a lost cause is criminal for a pro, Swift is a shining example of a professional, it maybe a lost cause, but you chase down the player and push them wider out.

I'm not sure how well he can organise the defensive line and I've seen very little in terms of an attacking threat. He does not bring the ball back from a kick with any great runs.

So for me despite not wanting to move our wingers, I would until Lomax is fit move one of them to fullback.

Defensively Makinson is probably they best full back that could take on that role. We would lose something from the wing position and it's a shame we have lost Percival as Turner would make a winger who could bring the ball back from a kick.

What do you think we'd lose from moving Tommy from the wing?

I'd put swifty fullback until lomax is back.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:30 pm  

St pete wrote:

What do you think we'd lose from moving Tommy from the wing?

I'd put swifty fullback until lomax is back.

I'd love Swifty to play full back. he would return the ball much quicker and be very dangerous in open play one on one. His errors are few and far between these days and communicates a lot better with the players around him. Defence wise and positional play he is still far better than Owens, I would put Owens on the wing to take some pressure off him.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:32 pm  

Judder Man wrote:

I'd love Swifty to play full back. he would return the ball much quicker and be very dangerous in open play one on one. His errors are few and far between these days and communicates a lot better with the players around him. Defence wise and positional play he is still far better than Owens, I would put Owens on the wing to take some pressure off him.

The same reasons I'd put swifty fullback. Tommy is pretty much like Owens and dead with the ball on kick returns. Swifty will punish bad kicks.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:39 pm  

I spoke about this after the Salford game but the most concerning thing with me for Owens is how often we get our numbers and spacing wrong defensively. While to a degree this is everyone's job, the fullback's main responsibility in defence is organising the defensive line and watching from behind the sticks on Friday, this was an area of the game where we were really poor. The best example is this:

This was for the Roosters third try. We've been caught with a 5 on 3 (winger just out of shot), despite the fact that Thompson was on that side immediately before (and was sent to the open side). Not only that, but it was off a reasonably slow PTB too, so we aren't caught with any retreating defenders - we should have been able to number up on the blind side and be one short on the open side. Instead we're caught with 7 defenders on 6 attackers open side and they pull our pants down on the blind side.


The whole point of all the moves the top teams run is to create an overlap because someone makes a misread in defence. If we're looking at the prospect of facing a 2 man overlap, despite a slow PTB, before the opposition have even done anything, it's going to be a very long season.

Makinson needs to be fullback until Lomax/McDonnell is back. He's okay at numbering us up, and while Swifty may be good for an extra 10 metres a set on a kick return, consistently getting our numbers right is more important than that.

Re: Is Jack Owens the worst Saints signing of the past decad : Sun Feb 21, 2016 1:32 pm  

St pete wrote:

What do you think we'd lose from moving Tommy from the wing?

I'd put swifty fullback until lomax is back.

I think we would lose less putting Tommy to FB than swift.

Tommy has played FB a few times, he is safe under pressure with a high ball. Swift due to his size can get crowded out on high kicks. Swift returns the ball better and can make something from nothing, but he can do that on the wing just as well as he can do at FB.

I also think Makinson has in the past been a good organiser of the defensive line.

Swift would probably chime into the line better than Makinson from FB, but for me Makinson is the better choice at FB in the short term.