Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 6:41 pm  

Twentyman wrote:

Sorry Mugwamp but I agree with St Pete on Mose. I think he's a potential game changer when he wants to be, but those moments are few and far between. Fact is, he's lazy and doesn't do enough for his team. I don't care about stats, I know what I can see most games...a player who stands in the background whilst others try and drive the ball up out of their twenty. A player who always seems to be 3rd in the tackle when the job is done.

My opinion has nothing to do with us being on a 3 match losing run. I know that run is down to injuries to key playmakers.

Richards had a howler against Wigan, but he's got heart and the crowd can see it. Thompson & Amor are others I also refuse to criticise because they've also clearly got heart. Mose's on holiday which is a shame because he's brilliant when he wants to be.

Exactly my views on him. Maybe Im a little more critical because I know he can be a good player but he chooses to be lazy.

Amor isn't plsying great at the moment, I think most will agree on this but he gives 100% every single week so can't really call him.

Same goes with sav, Richards and Thompson, they haven't set the world on fire this season and probably not kicked on how we expected but again the effort is there and you can't knock that.

Id want nothing more to see Mose causing destruction on the field. He's a big jolly likeable guy but that can't hide the fact he's letting himself down, the fans down and more importantly his mates on the field, exotically the likes of walmsley and Amor.

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 6:45 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

People are easily led. It only takes one person with a grudge to paint a target on some player's back and you can guarantee half of St. Helens will come running with spears and axes. And you are such a person.

I called you out last season for the same thing - despite the fact that Mose had effectively carried the heavy work in the pack for a third of the season (when he was gasping away dragging most of his weight and totally unfit).

Mercifully you were forced to shut up when Saints won the GF. But come the first sign of trouble and you are back to your old hobby horse with the tedious predictability of a Swiss clock.

And you are - wrong.

Seems most posters in this thread are the "easily lead" you talk of. Most see Mose in the same light as me.

You can get your stats all you like but they don't tell the whole story of how a player as played.

Do you go the games ?

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 7:24 pm  

I do go to the games and the criticism of Masoe is unfair and incorrect. Stats aren't everything, but there is something to be learned from them. And even if some of his tackles are second or third man, surely that applies to all players...unless in this one eyed world, every body else is always first into the tackle and Masoe is always third.

Yes, he probably spends less time on the field and makes less carries and tackles across a season. But as has been pointed out, his role is not one of a grinding prop, just trundling in to make four or five metres a time. His is there to do other things. Also, he worked hard during a period of the game at Wigan to keep pressure on the pie gobblers in the mud. Both Amor and Walmsley are very good props although Amor isn't playing anywhere near his potential.

Its easy to pick on isolated moments to criticise a player. I like Makinson tremendously but what good was his 'heart' when he looked like Radlinski when stepped for their try.....see easy. And Richards at Wigan....all 'heart' but alas, no skill....or composure....or technique....or execution. See Easy....again.

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 8:04 pm  

I said earlier that I thought he put a shift in tackling but his attack seemed dulled. But in the end, the stats are important.

Yes he can be 3rd man in, but also second and first and over the weekend he was doing some tackles closing the gap. He sometimes hits and bounces too, so is the first and 3rd man in.

I would certainly not say that his efforts were a causal factor in the loss/es. It was the lack of a half was the reason we lost. For me in all 3 games the pack has done the job, but the backs are shot to pieces. In the end we have 2 primary wingers playing in position. 1 Primary winger on Monday. When you have second, third and fourth string people covering positions in the backs, it is going to dull the attacking edge.

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 8:06 pm  

wertyuio wrote:

I do go to the games and the criticism of Masoe is unfair and incorrect. Stats aren't everything, but there is something to be learned from them. And even if some of his tackles are second or third man, surely that applies to all players...unless in this one eyed world, every body else is always first into the tackle and Masoe is always third.

Yes, he probably spends less time on the field and makes less carries and tackles across a season. But as has been pointed out, his role is not one of a grinding prop, just trundling in to make four or five metres a time. His is there to do other things. Also, he worked hard during a period of the game at Wigan to keep pressure on the pie gobblers in the mud. Both Amor and Walmsley are very good props although Amor isn't playing anywhere near his potential.

Its easy to pick on isolated moments to criticise a player. I like Makinson tremendously but what good was his 'heart' when he looked like Radlinski when stepped for their try.....see easy. And Richards at Wigan....all 'heart' but alas, no skill....or composure....or technique....or execution. See Easy....again.

I prefer heart and no skill to no heart and no skill.


He's bone idle lazy, Simple as that.

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 8:15 pm  

A prop has got to do the hard yards, drive their team on and provide a platform for the backs to do their stuff. A brilliant hard tackle or a good driving run can swing the momentum for your team.

The sign of a really good prop (and indeed any player) however is if they're hated by opposition fans and loved by their own. Who's got a real nasty edge, who's niggly, who causes the opposition players to lose their own focus and engage in mini battles with him.

Our props have the qualities in the 1st paragraph above...but when we bought Masoe, I think we all hoped/expected him to bring the kind of qualities I'm talking about in the 2nd paragraph.

Masoe is capable of much much more. It's no good doing it once every few games.

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 8:30 pm  

St pete wrote:

I prefer heart and no skill to no heart and no skill.

bring your boots on Sunday....it seems that will rectify all our problems

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 8:38 pm  

St pete wrote:

100% mose is one.

Total sh!te again. Dont expect much different mind.

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Tue Apr 07, 2015 8:45 pm  

I see the debate has gone again and it's back to personal insults. Can people not post a view point without having a go.

I think the phrase is called playing the ball not the man,

We can be bold enough to make a stand and do battle for our views and beliefs. But we must strive to be mature enough not to resort to unnecessary personal attacks upon people with opposing views.

Re: Who was KC talking about? : Wed Apr 08, 2015 6:12 am  

Mose is a devisive player. Half of my friends think he's a lazy bugger, half (i'm fall on this side) say he's generally badly used. We knew what we were getting, and a 60 min energised, 40 tackle a game prop it wasn't. A player who on occasion can completely change a game on his own by single handedly destroying an opposition pack is what he is. Doesnt happen every week, and if we ask him to do much more than 30 mins a game it wont happen at all.