Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 3:33 pm  

Saint from Prestwich wrote:

he will never be a winger as he doesn't possess the required pace even at his current age.

That's right, Little Miss Sunshine, and you know why that is right? Because he is a CENTRE.

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 3:58 pm  

saint billy wrote:

The half backs normally defend in the centre, that happens at most clubs. Lomax had a shocker, simple as that really.

I haven't really looked to be honest but fair point. To be fair to Lomax, he did manage a brilliant save though. And he wasn't the only one to have a shocker.

(I'm afraid I just can't criticise our inexperienced guys: they really did their best for a first GF)

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 7:33 pm  

lee the saint wrote:

hes soft and doesnt go looking for the ball for e,g ade gardner goes looking for it and carrys the ball hard foster doesnt when he goes looking for it he goes to dummy half and just passes it hes happy just being on the pitch and not working hard for a winger his work rate is terrible hes bin on the pitch purley to kick goals. he does have potential but he need to toughen up he doesnt like carrying the ball for me

Which games have you been watching, young Foster has the right temperement and attitude. he's a season behind Lomax and will probably come into the 2011 season with a bit more muscle and confidence.
From what I can remember he's had 1 bad game against Salford. All his other games have been on equal or better par than Meli and Gardner.

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 8:25 pm  

Also want too add that I was abit vexed at the time of this post hope Foster and lomax do progress cos at the end of the day I'm a saints fan and I want it to b us lifting that trophy at the end of next season....

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 8:31 pm  

crusaders9 wrote:

Also want too add that I was abit vexed at the time of this post hope Foster and lomax do progress cos at the end of the day I'm a saints fan and I want it to b us lifting that trophy at the end of next season....

But Lomax and Foster were both Grand Final virgins, both have given their all and been great during the season and both tried their hardest at OT in a team which had fallen apart. Being vexed is totally understandable, but it's the experienced players who deserved it, not the noobs.

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:33 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

I haven't really looked to be honest but fair point. To be fair to Lomax, he did manage a brilliant save though. And he wasn't the only one to have a shocker.

(I'm afraid I just can't criticise our inexperienced guys: they really did their best for a first GF)

I agree he wasn't the only one.

I don't agree about our inexperienced players either. If your good enough, your old enough, and i'm afraid some of them weren't good enough, but they were not on there own and we can't judge them purely on this one game, but we're really lacking that winning mentality that we had a few years back, and i don't think the youngsters have that like players such as Long, Sculthorpe, Cunningham had when they first played first team at Saints.

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:37 pm  

saint billy wrote:

If your good enough, your old enough, and i'm afraid some of them weren't good enough,

It was their first final, for heaven's sake, and Jamie Foster hasn't even been playing a full season! Jonny Lomax has been intermittent, and he was playing in a position that he hasn't played before.

They are certainly both good enough but they are not yet experienced enough.

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:41 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

It was their first final, for heaven's sake, and Jamie Foster hasn't even been playing a full season! Jonny Lomax has been intermittent, and he was playing in a position that he hasn't played before.

They are certainly both good enough but they are not yet experienced enough.

Its yet to be seen if they are good enough? They've shown glimpses to suggest they have the potential to be good enough but wether they reach that potential is a different matter.


Lomax was playing Stand Off for most the game, he might not have been named there but thats were he played most the game, and thats why he was defending out wide. He also spent time on the wing (in defence anyway), and he's played there a fair few times this season, so the position he was can not be the excuse for him not playing well. As we've both already said, he wasn't on his own but i did think at the game he was our worst player.

FWIW, i thought Foster did OK, one of of our better players. Did nothing wrong anyway.

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:02 pm  

Agreed with all the comments there 2bh...but off a cheap shot by me singling jamie out but as I said I was plasterd and gutted..but still I hold my ground didn't think he played well...but being honest I've never played the game but I pay 4 the tickets so I do have a right to express my points: ))

Re: jamie foster....(scared) : Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:15 am  

Is Crusaders9 on drugs. Foster was one of the best perfromers by Saints and looks set for a bright future.