Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:31 pm  

Top Saint wrote:

So what you're saying is that we have to put up with mediocrity rather than seek out a genuine Stand-Off. He will never be good enough, END OF.

Generally Gaskell's defenders say that his mistakes can be attributed to inexperience. Good players learn from those mistakes, poor players don't. I've yet to see a player consistently make the correct decisions in a ball playing role in his first or second full season, yet Gaskell's detractors expect him to do that.

Interestingly, the same expectation is not applied to Lomax who on numerous occasions last year made the wrong decision on a run or a pass, passed the ball poorly and put a hell of a lot of very poor kicks in.

He has the potential to make it as an excellent half back, he may not, but to say that he will never be good enough after a season when he was part of a very inexperienced half back partnership is very short sighted considering he has the technical ability.

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:43 pm  

Northampton_Saint wrote:

You may want to wait indefinitely for the next Long, Martyn, Goulding, Cooper, Ropati or Pryce to appear (they won't, trust me) but I'd rather we focused on signing the best players that are available to make the best team we can here and now if you don't mind.

Aren't you one of those who reckon we should still be playing Paul Wellens at fullback?

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:19 pm  

Billinge_Lump wrote:

Generally Gaskell's defenders say that his mistakes can be attributed to inexperience. Good players learn from those mistakes, poor players don't. I've yet to see a player consistently make the correct decisions in a ball playing role in his first or second full season, yet Gaskell's detractors expect him to do that.

Interestingly, the same expectation is not applied to Lomax who on numerous occasions last year made the wrong decision on a run or a pass, passed the ball poorly and put a hell of a lot of very poor kicks in.

He has the potential to make it as an excellent half back, he may not, but to say that he will never be good enough after a season when he was part of a very inexperienced half back partnership is very short sighted considering he has the technical ability.

I would generally agree but for 1 detail, He never learned from a single mistake in the 2011 season and continually took the wrong option in attack. I could have accepted this as it was his first full season but he then proceeded to carry the same flaws into the the 2012 season and was quite rightly dropped from the team. Unfortunately our only other viable option was Lance.

Now you try to use the same argument with lomax but fail to realise that his game is based on running good lines and supporting play in a similar way to McGuire at Leeds. He isn't expected to do any ball handling because it is not his game. Leeds have an organising scrum half to do that job.

The main problem Saints have is the lack of an organising half back. Gaskell is not the answer because he is not reliable enough at super league level. I am actually on record as stating that he would make a good centre. I am not discounting him as a player, only as a half back.

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:48 pm  

Gaskell is good young player with loads of potential. My only concern with him, his decision making is poor at times and can prove costly.

I thought he was our most dangerous player on the last Grand final with ball in hand but took wrong option time and time again.

That might come in time or Brown might be able to coach it into him. I'd go with him at 6 to start next year.

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:27 pm  

I don't have a problem with Gaskell but imo he wont be the half back most of you expect but I hope he proves me wrong. Half of you desribe a young Darren Lockyer. IMO he could make a decent full back where he will have reduced pressure and responsibility.

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:02 pm  

St pete wrote:

Gaskell is good young player with loads of potential. My only concern with him, his decision making is poor at times and can prove costly.

I thought he was our most dangerous player on the last Grand final with ball in hand but took wrong option time and time again.

That might come in time or Brown might be able to coach it into him. I'd go with him at 6 to start next year.

And what happens when the same flaws surface again. Notice I said when not if. He has a lot of potential, but not as a half back.

Is plan B going to be Lance again? God help us all if that's the case. Wheeler maybe if he stays fit.

To be certain of success we need a proven half back to partner Lomax. If we have to buy one then so be it!!!!

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:00 pm  

Top Saint wrote:

And what happens when the same flaws surface again. Notice I said when not if. He has a lot of potential, but not as a half back.

Is plan B going to be Lance again? God help us all if that's the case. Wheeler maybe if he stays fit.

To be certain of success we need a proven half back to partner Lomax. If we have to buy one then so be it!!!!

It's pretty clear we ain't bringing in a halfback. IMO Gaskell is better #6 than lance so I'd go with him.

I don't think we can go another year with lance at stand off, he's just not a stand off. He's no rugby brain, can't control a game, no kicking game and not creative enough.

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:37 pm  

St pete wrote:

It's pretty clear we ain't bringing in a halfback. IMO Gaskell is better #6 than lance so I'd go with him.

I don't think we can go another year with lance at stand off, he's just not a stand off. He's no rugby brain, can't control a game, no kicking game and not creative enough.

Exactly. Gaskell may not be tommy martin but he's better than lance now

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:54 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

Exactly. Gaskell may not be tommy martin but he's better than lance now

Can't argue with that. Just a thought, ask Tommy to pull his boots back on now and he would be better than both of them!!!!

Re: Ooc 2013 : Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:47 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Blah, blah, blah... unrelated and unprovoked attack on Paul Wellens blah, blah...

You are feeling very sleepy..... Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...............