Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:37 am  

Saddened! wrote:

A sad day for the club IMO. Having to go to a rival that until recently was a joke figure to us, cap in hand for a handout of their fourth choice halfback shows how poor a state we're in.

I agree its pretty embarrassing that we've gone to a rival club for help. On the other hand, we are in dire need of a halfback.

Its a risk but its one we have to take.

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:37 am  

Except he was given a chance at the start of the season & was woeful. He never got involved & is regarded by the coaching staff as a bit of a maverick that doesn't stick to game plans or what is being asked of him & was a bit of a "coach killer".

If we see no future in Gaskell & he wasn't doing anything to warrant his place in the side why keep him?

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:37 am  

theres only one stan wall wrote:

Do you agree Ashe isnt quite good enough then, if you hope we are looking to sort out a six next year?

I've only seen him play, what, two games this season? So my answer would be I simply don't know as he hasn't been given long enough for me to fairly assess.

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:39 am  

southernsaint7 wrote:

Gaskell cant even get in the halves for salford,

How to twist things!! Salford didn't NEED a halfback. They have three already! They needed a centre and Gaskell has played at centre before. He seems to be doing fine for them.

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:40 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

World beaters are very rare IMO. Mostly we have great down to poor with the majority somewhere in between. Matty Smith offers just what we are now needing but we let him go and at the time we let him go I was one of those who objected to it (and of course was ridiculed for objecting). I saw Eastmond as flashy but Smith as steady. Both are fine but Saints went either/or and that was their mistake. And as I said in the post above, my original comment was a criticism of Saints' retention policy. This is a good example of it.

Rumours shmoomers. While we can't keep all our playing staff - just isn't possible for practical reasons apart from anything else - to let Gaskell go and leave ourselves entirely and completely without a functioning specialist six was simply a dumb decision. No club with any sense does that.

When we let smith go we had pryce and eastmond, Lomax and wheeler coming through behind. You can't keep everyone, Smith wanted first team rugby and we couldnt guarantee that

We do have a 6 at the club. He's injured. Gaskell can't even get in at 6 at salford...

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:43 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

How to twist things!! Salford didn't NEED a halfback. They have three already! They needed a centre and Gaskell has played at centre before. He seems to be doing fine for them.

They have a kid, mcgoldrick who is hit and miss and average at best, and foran whos not long been there. Salford came after Gaskell, if they thought he was any use as a 6 he'd play there. Open your eyes, remove yourself from his colon and smell the coffee. He's not as good at 6 as you think

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:44 am  

southernsaint7 wrote:

When we let smith go we had pryce and eastmond, Lomax and wheeler coming through behind. You can't keep everyone, Smith wanted first team rugby and we couldnt guarantee that

Smith was still around when Eastmond was injured. That's how he ended up playing in a Grand Final for us before we binned him off for good. Was Pryce injured at that time too? He certainly was the following season.

We do have a 6 at the club. He's injured. Gaskell can't even get in at 6 at salford...

As said above, Gaskell wasn't needed at 6. They have three halfbacks in Sneyd, Foran and Fages. He was needed at centre and he has played there before. He's doing a good job for them.

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:46 am  

southernsaint7 wrote:

They a kid, mcgoldrick who is hit and miss and average at best, and foran whos not long been there. Salford came after Gaskell, if they thought he was any use as a 6 he'd play there. Open your eyes, remove yourself from his colon and smell the coffee. He's not as good at 6 as you think

Their three halfbacks are Foran (recruited by Vievers), Sneyd and Fages. They have mixed and matched their halfbacks, McGoldrick slipping in there for experience, just as we have Wilkin there for experience. As I've now said three times, they needed a centre, not a halfback.

No need for the childish comments either, although I don't expect much more from you to be honest.

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:46 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

I've only seen him play, what, two games this season? So my answer would be I simply don't know as he hasn't been given long enough for me to fairly assess.

Yet you had an opinion on O'Brien on his tackling issues from a game at Swinton & a handful of first team starts. He played a number of games in 2011, think his debut was against Hull if memory serves. Also played a few games last season & he's never done anything to suggest he is a keeper.

Re: Gaz O'Brien : Thu May 30, 2013 9:47 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

Smith was still around when Eastmond was injured. That's how he ended up playing in a Grand Final for us before we binned him off for good. Was Pryce injured at that time too? He certainly was the following season.

As said above, Gaskell wasn't needed at 6. They have three halfbacks in Sneyd, Foran and Fages. He was needed at centre and he has played there before. He's doing a good job for them.

saints no doubt thought those two (eastmond and pryce) would continue after smith and as i say we couldnt guarantee first team to smith so he went and got it. The fact Eastmond went after dollar and Leon went for lifestyle isn't saints fault

If gaskell was good enough at 6 he'd play there