Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 12:43 pm  

St pete wrote:

I'd bet you 2p that foster has give more tries away this year than Meli.

I'm sure he has but then Meli was playing at centre when Foster was playing so your bet is a little daft to say the least.

I do agree tho, Meli is always a accident waiting to happen but I feel same way about foster.

But Foster isn't playing, Meli is. So really, your claim that Meli is better than Foster given what you have just said is also a bit daft.

Foster now has a point to prove with falling behind Ade, swift, makinson and Meli and in reality is now 5th choice winger. Maybe that will give him a little kick up the backside and if he gets his chance will take it.

Swift has played in two games. I think you and a fair few others are getting a bit carried away. He did let in at least one try last week and last night was fortunate on one occasion that Widnes fluffed their last play option for a walk in.

As for Meli, I will be a happy bunny when word is out that he is leaving.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:19 pm  

correct if i am wrong but did'nt Foster sign a new 2 year deal read it somewhere so it would be a bit crass to get him removed with some ulterior motive.After reading all these threads on this subject i have not rememberd what was said as there is 7 pages to think of . Tho he does seem to make errors that are perhaps a bit like Meli. But i think we need him for the goal kicking ability but perhaps not on the wing until he matures a bit more.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:38 pm  

St pete wrote:

Are you saintsfans brother?

Are you incapable of reading - or is there nothing between your ears?

What the hell has Greg inglis got to do with it? My point when I brought up tomkins (as well as charnley, makinson, swift) is that they wasn't the the biggest of players like foster but looked like they could do something with the ball.

He is a great goal kicker but IMO lacks any attack at all, he's no step, no pace, no size and no power so I can't see him being a saints regular when we've got makinson, Ade, Meli and now swift as IMO they offer more than him and are safer than foster.

If by "attack" you mean he doesn't beat three men with a sidestep, body swerve and electric pace on his way to an eighty metre score well - duh!. Trouble is I could include a hell of a lot of other players who don't, either. It would be great to have Martin Offiah on the wing but the Aussies proved back in the eighties that wingers with "Mad Skillz" aren't essential.

In any case there is simply no evidence whatsoever to support the argument that Makinson - a lad who has shown bravery under the high ball, a bit of pace and some good tackling - has delivered anything like the value Foster has accrued. Compare Foster's finishing (position, handling, ability to squeeze into extremely narrow channels etc.) to Makinson's and claim - with a serious face - the latter is a step above.

What's Makinson's try scoring average - just below one in two? Foster can't be far off three in two.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:49 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Makinson is virtually 100% safe under the bomb, can deal with grubbers and can tackle, sometimes in a seriously impressive way. He's also faster than Foster, although Foster's no slouch either (in spite of this myth that some fans seem to be spouting about him being slow).

Makinson is certainly faster than Foster. He's also a better tackler and good under the high ball. But we're not talking about a night-and-day difference here. Hell, I'm not even sure Makinson will make it. He looks like he might be genuine first team material but right now I'm betting Saints are waiting to see how he physically develops before making any long-term contract commitments on serious wages.

Makinson has also shown himself to be at least the equal of, if not superior to Foster in finishing skill.

Give over.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:52 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Are you incapable of reading - or is there nothing between your ears?

If by "attack" you mean he doesn't beat three men with a sidestep, body swerve and electric pace on his way to an eighty metre score well - duh!. Trouble is I could include a hell of a lot of other players who don't, either. It would be great to have Martin Offiah on the wing but the Aussies proved back in the eighties that wingers with "Mad Skillz" aren't essential.

In any case there is simply no evidence whatsoever to support the argument that Makinson - a lad who has shown bravery under the high ball, a bit of pace and some good tackling - has delivered anything like the value Foster has accrued. Compare Foster's finishing (position, handling, ability to squeeze into extremely narrow channels etc.) to Makinson's and claim - with a serious face - the latter is a step above.


What's Makinson's try scoring average - just below one in two? Foster can't be far off three in two.

I must not have anything between my ears then just like rush and KC.

Put it this way, I'd much prefer makinson on the wing to foster any day if the week, it seems rush and KC also prefers Meli, Ade, swift and makinson before foster also.

I'm not talking about your complete over reaction of the meaning of attack, I'm not saying he should "beat three men with a sidestep, body swerve and electric pace on his way to an eighty metre score" because it's clearly obvious he will never do that but id just like him to beat one single player, even on a kick return but I'm yet to see him beat a man.

Jamie's kick returns are clearly the worst of any of our back three as I say, he no foot work, no step, no power and no pace.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:02 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

Makinson is certainly faster than Foster. He's also a better tackler and good under the high ball. But we're not talking about a night-and-day difference here. Hell, I'm not even sure Makinson will make it. He looks like he might be genuine first team material but right now I'm betting Saints are waiting to see how he physically develops before making any long-term contract commitments on serious wages.

Both players have recently signed up for a further two years. Given that Makinson is over two years younger than Foster and has yet to play a full season (as opposed to Foster) then it is very difficult to compare them at all, never mind to judge who between them will ultimately 'make it'. But the defensive differences between the two stand out alarmingly; Makinson clearly coming out the winner and not just with high balls but with tackling generally. Also, Makinson's kick returns are better. In addition, I don't think Foster would have had the pace, handling skills or quick thinking to have scored the try that Makinson scored in the Grand Final. It was only one try but it is a clear indicator of what he can do, and on the big stage at a time when we were losing. Makinson IMO is one of only a few players in our present first team who I would say has a true winner's mentality, and that is a precious resource.

I have met both players. Makinson is bigger than Foster. But he doesn't need to be big to be strong, see Tomkins or Slater.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:10 pm  

St pete wrote:

I must not have anything between my ears then just like rush and KC.

Oh, so when the management seem to support your argument you defer to them. But when they don't - such as your repeated bashings of Simmons you are in the right?

How many faces do you have?

Put it this way, I'd much prefer makinson on the wing to foster any day if the week, it seems rush and KC also prefers Meli, Ade, swift and makinson before foster also.

So are you saying you were in the wrong when Simmons made decisions you didn't like?

I'm not talking about your complete over reaction of the meaning of attack, I'm not saying he should "beat three men with a sidestep, body swerve and electric pace on his way to an eighty metre score" because it's clearly obvious he will never do that but id just like him to beat one single player, even on a kick return but I'm yet to see him beat a man.

Jamie's kick returns are clearly the worst of any of our back three as I say, he no foot work, no step, no power and no pace.

There are plenty of players who went on to achieve great things in SL without ever showing an aptitude for footwork. Keith Senior? Scott Naylor? Sean Hoppe?

Your problem is you concentrate solely on a player's weaknesses and use them to define him. Only an utter fool could make a big deal out of returning kicks (which is an important but not game-breaking facet of rugby league) whilst ascribing very little importance to the number of tries he has scored, the way he has scored them and the seemingly trivial detail of his astonishing ability with the boot for someone his age.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:18 pm  

SaintsFan wrote:

Both players have recently signed up for a further two years. Given that Makinson is over two years younger than Foster and has yet to play a full season (as opposed to Foster) then it is very difficult to compare them at all, never mind to judge who between them will ultimately 'make it'. But the defensive differences between the two stand out alarmingly; Makinson clearly coming out the winner and not just with high balls but with tackling generally. Also, Makinson's kick returns are better. In addition, I don't think Foster would have had the pace, handling skills or quick thinking to have scored the try that Makinson scored in the Grand Final. It was only one try but it is a clear indicator of what he can do, and on the big stage at a time when we were losing. Makinson IMO is one of only a few players in our present first team who I would say has a true winner's mentality, and that is a precious resource.

It's very difficult to compare them - but you'll do it anyway.

I mean, it's a nice panegyric. Whether it bears any relation to reality I'll defer to actual evidence.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:21 pm  

St pete wrote:

I must not have anything between my ears then just like rush and KC.

Pete, sometimes you are alarmingly childish. You have forgotten already that we have a coaching collective at Saints at present. As Rush said when Royce was first sacked, they are being assisted by the senior players. Just as turkeys wouldn't vote for Christmas, I very much doubt the senior players will vote themselves out of their favourite spots. Regardless of whether Makinson or Foster are better than Meli and Gardner, they won't play because Meli and Gardner are the senior players. Brown might change that next year as he likes pace and skill and an ability in defence in his wingers, but for now we can all rest assured that team selection will be on a collective basis and not necessarily for the best.

You have had a downer on Foster for a while, simply because he was suffering a lack of confidence. But he has real ability. I personally don't think he is as good as Makinson on the wing but that is only my personal opinion and it only relates to now, not the future. I'd rather have Foster on the wing than Meli any day of the week though. And our centres can help with kick returns until Foster starts looking less like a teenage boy, especially if Josh Jones continues to play as he has matured well physically.

Re: team for friday v widnes : Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:23 pm  

Mugwump wrote:

It's very difficult to compare them - but you'll do it anyway.

Well yes, because this is a discussion board and a discussion of their comparative merits is taking place. However, you will note that I did not make a judgement on whether either of them will 'make it', which is what you did and which is what I was responding to. It is way, way too early in their respective careers - especially Makinson's since he has even to play a full season yet - to determine whether they are going to 'make it'.