Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 13, 2015 12:55 pm  

The problem here is less one of personnel but TIME. We're inching toward the business end of the season. Ideally we wanted Walsh back and fully integrated with his half-back partner by now - giving us an excellent playmaking platform for the playoffs.

But successive set-backs now mean Walsh & Burns really aren't going to have a lot of time to develop their relationship and maximise its potential. It's still possible, largely because Walsh & Burns know each from the NRL, but we're really cutting things tight. Past experience makes me think Walsh might still be in the balance come the playoffs. And pinning your hopes on a long-term injured player to return at the last minute and perform has always been a recipe for disaster.

Yes, I suppose we could look at someone like Chris Sandow. But again - TIME is against us. He'd know absolutely nothing about our tactics, overall strategy etc. Could he assimilate the lot and be ready for the playoffs? I doubt it. Most imports take anywhere between six months to a year to settle down. We just don't have TIME.

IMO we should be thinking very seriously about putting Wilkin back at seven. He's better than anyone we can get in at short notice and he doesn't need any period of acclimatisation.

I know I'll take some stick for this but Wilkin really has developed into a very good scrum half. We played our best rugby of the season with Wilkin at seven - not least because he's a much better tactician than Travis Burns has proved to be so far. I said it in the other thread, the moment Wilkin got injured our tactics have been mediocre.

He might not be a natural ball handler - but Wilkin is an absolutely first rate tactician. I certainly have no issues with him at seven should Walsh be injured.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 13, 2015 1:00 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

The problem here is less one of personnel but TIME. We're inching toward the business end of the season. Ideally we wanted Walsh back and fully integrated with his half-back partner by now - giving us an excellent playmaking platform for the playoffs.

But successive set-backs now mean Walsh & Burns really aren't going to have a lot of time to develop their relationship and maximise its potential. It's still possible, largely because Walsh & Burns know each from the NRL, but we're really cutting things tight. Past experience makes me think Walsh might still be in the balance come the playoffs. And pinning your hopes on a long-term injured player to return at the last minute and perform has always been a recipe for disaster.

Yes, I suppose we could look at someone like Chris Sandow. But again - TIME is against us. He'd know absolutely nothing about our tactics, overall strategy etc. Could he assimilate the lot and be ready for the playoffs? I doubt it. Most imports take anywhere between six months to a year to settle down. We just don't have TIME.

IMO we should be thinking very seriously about putting Wilkin back at seven. He's better than anyone we can get in at short notice and he doesn't need any period of acclimatisation.

I know I'll take some stick for this but Wilkin really has developed into a very good scrum half. We played our best rugby of the season with Wilkin at seven - not least because he's a much better tactician than Travis Burns has proved to be so far. I said it in the other thread, the moment Wilkin got injured our tactics have been mediocre.

He might not be a natural ball handler - but Wilkin is an absolutely first rate tactician. I certainly have no issues with him at seven should Walsh be injured.

One issue might be the strength of the backrow with Greenwood and Vea out for a while still.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 13, 2015 1:24 pm  

At a push I'd go with Roby at loose. LMS & Sav in the back row. Wilkin at seven. The kid at nine. With Roby interchanging occasionally to confuse the defence.

Savelio's going to have to step up to full speed at first team level sooner or later.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 13, 2015 8:10 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

How would everyone on here feel about Walsh staying now? Would keeping him be a good idea? It's not looking good for him at the moment, he was always going to need time to get fit again, but has suffered and sustained another injury. I would previously have loved him to stay, but the way things are going, replacing him is starting to look the better option.

I,m sure if it was the back end of the season and the play offs Walshy would carry on with the niggly injury, its probably the lesser of the two evils to get it sorted now or risk possible long term damage, Wilkin and Burns did OK for quite a few games this season. We do seem to have had this injury jinx of about 7 years now and you get the feeling its never going to disappear ever.

Re: Luke Walsh : Wed May 13, 2015 8:28 pm  

Saint Simon wrote:

Really??

No different to Josh Perry.

Re: Luke Walsh : Thu May 14, 2015 11:29 am  

SaintsFan wrote: It was the plates in his leg that caused the delay. They were uncomfortable and so he had them removed. The ankle was operated on prior to Christmas. He came back early from Oz for the op. Apparently this was a clean out as once again it was feeling uncomfortable. From what someone has said to me on Twitter it sounds more like a psychological problem than anything else as there was nothing to clean out. He just felt uncomfortable on it. http://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/sport/sai ... me__Walsh/ Yes, definitely all in his head. The operation is a waste of time.

SaintsFan wrote: It was the plates in his leg that caused the delay. They were uncomfortable and so he had them removed. The ankle was operated on prior to Christmas. He came back early from Oz for the op. Apparently this was a clean out as once again it was feeling uncomfortable. From what someone has said to me on Twitter it sounds more like a psychological problem than anything else as there was nothing to clean out. He just felt uncomfortable on it. http://www.sthelensstar.co.uk/sport/sai ... me__Walsh/ Yes, definitely all in his head. The operation is a waste of time.

Re: Luke Walsh : Thu May 14, 2015 12:04 pm  

Thankfully it sounds like it's a separate injury. We need a bit of a break from the bad luck afflicting Walsh.

Re: Luke Walsh : Thu May 14, 2015 1:48 pm  

With Walsh missing for 4+ weeks I think we will see a better Burns in these next 4 or 5 games, he was a little less involved and effective when Walsh came back, the pressure is back on Wilkin especially with his kicking game. We are not too bad position wise as other teams falter along the way, Leeds will be going into there 4th super league game without a win, Wigan are going OK and Warrington are a bit Jeckyll and Hyde.

Re: Luke Walsh : Thu May 14, 2015 3:22 pm  

Judder Man wrote:

With Walsh missing for 4+ weeks I think we will see a better Burns in these next 4 or 5 games, he was a little less involved and effective when Walsh came back, the pressure is back on Wilkin especially with his kicking game. We are not too bad position wise as other teams falter along the way, Leeds will be going into there 4th super league game without a win, Wigan are going OK and Warrington are a bit Jeckyll and Hyde.

I know their playoff pedigree is questionable to say the least, but Huddersfield are worth a mention as well, the most effective defence in the league this year.

Re: Luke Walsh : Fri May 15, 2015 11:06 am  

JonB95 wrote:

I know their playoff pedigree is questionable to say the least, but Huddersfield are worth a mention as well, the most effective defence in the league this year.

Paul Anderson seems to have combined what he learned on defence under Anderson Snr. at Saints with the attacking philosophy which existed at Huddersfield previously under Nathan Brown.

It's worked, too.

If they had a classy and, more importantly, consistent half they'd be a major threat.