Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:40 pm  

what they should do is give him neal holding's old job entertaining the crowd at half time.
seeing which side can produce the more booing....(that's if he doesn't drop the microphone).........

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:43 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

Perhaps if he wasn't so injury prone he'd have appeared in two finals last year?

Maybe he should up his availability to match our ambition?

I was talking about Graham but the same goes for Eastmond too I suppose. Saints need to make a statement by getting a decent replacement scrum half. If Sean Long ends up back at the club you know the playing side has been de-prioritised for this season

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:45 pm  

TheOtherOne wrote:

I was talking about Graham but the same goes for Eastmond too I suppose. Saints need to make a statement by getting a decent replacement scrum half. If Sean Long ends up back at the club you know the playing side has been de-prioritised for this season

I think that's far too simplistic a viewpoint. It's not easy to pick up a "decent scrum half" in the off season, let alone a few weeks in.

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:55 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

I think that's far too simplistic a viewpoint. It's not easy to pick up a "decent scrum half" in the off season, let alone a few weeks in.

If we as a club had any foresight we'd have seen this happening - most people on here did. Catalans picked up a decent scrum half in the off season, we could have done the same and let Eastmond go.

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:56 pm  

FearTheVee wrote:

I think that's far too simplistic a viewpoint. It's not easy to pick up a "decent scrum half" in the off season, let alone a few weeks in.

Which is the reason Dobson is being speculated about so much, getting Long in would be a needed stop gap, as you say who else could you get?
Gale/Bosc/Witt are the only other realistic chances of being pulled from their team at this stage of the season and would they want to be a stop gap? The only long term solution at the moment is Dobson but is he what Saints want long term? Maybe Saints already know who they want for next year and kyle has just messed up their plans?
Long would therefore make perfect sense until 2012

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:56 pm  

TheOtherOne wrote:

If we as a club had any foresight we'd have seen this happening - most people on here did. Catalans picked up a decent scrum half in the off season, we could have done the same and let Eastmond go.

How do we "let Eastmond go" when he has a contract and Bath don't want him yet?

McManus isn't daft, he knows all these things, but he has to deal in reality rather than theory.

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:58 pm  

bewareshadows wrote:

I think the dobson thing is a red herring. He is deregistered not out of contract. Hull KR can't play him, but they are still paying him.

Also he was injured for about two months and that was only 2 weeks ago.
So I am assuming he won't be for for another 6 weeks,.

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:49 pm  

Yed wrote:

Long would therefore make perfect nonsense until 2012

Corrected.

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:55 pm  

Allez wrote:

Corrected.

Ok, but that would leave saints with zero direction for 2011, suits me.

Re: Eastmond suspened by Saints : Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:02 pm  

Yed wrote:

Ok, but that would leave saints with zero direction for 2011, suits me.

It would be a crazy decision. Since he left for Hull he has:

a. Hardly Played.
b. Been decidedly average when he has.
c. Attained the age of 34. Which is not so bad when you are a prop but it's bad news when you are a 7.
d. No pace.
e. Now sustained a further, Achilles, injury and is currently not playing.

Which of the above makes it in any way sensible?