Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 8:56 am  

St pete wrote:

Wheeler more experience at centre as played most of his injury hit career there. Lance played more games at 6 so that was my thinking behind it.

I'll prob know the team on Thursday. If wello is in the halves I'm not going. I just can't stand seeing him play in the halves, it's awful!

We could even play wello fullback and lomax 7.

I see your thinking, i just think Wheeler is more creative and Lance a better defender. Of course we could have Lance to full back and J-Lo in the halves but i think he's less effective there

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:36 am  

I'd go:
Lomax
Makinson
Dawson
Jones
Swift
Wheeler
Hohaia
Amor
Roby
Walker
Flanagan
Wilkin
Wellens

Masoe
Manu
Laffranchi
Richards/Greenwood

Despite the injuries, I think that should be enough to beat Wakefield, without underestimating them.

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:43 am  

St. Rughead wrote:

I'd go:
Lomax
Makinson
Dawson
Jones
Swift
Wheeler
Hohaia
Amor
Roby
Walker
Flanagan
Wilkin
Wellens

Masoe
Manu
Laffranchi
Richards/Greenwood

Despite the injuries, I think that should be enough to beat Wakefield, without underestimating them.

No ball player in the halves and no kicking game. Wilkin has to 100% play in the halves. He will direct us and dictate play. He's no great halfback but he can do a job leading us round the park.

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:48 am  

St pete wrote:

No ball player in the halves and no kicking game. Wilkin has to 100% play in the halves. He will direct us and dictate play. He's no great halfback but he can do a job leading us round the park.

I acally think Lance would make a better scrum half than a standoff. He's quite tough and whilst he's no organiser, I think he'd be quite dangerous from first receiver when he's close to the line - not unlike when Lomax was playing there.

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:10 am  

Offside Monkey wrote:

I acally think Lance would make a better scrum half than a standoff. He's quite tough and whilst he's no organiser, I think he'd be quite dangerous from first receiver when he's close to the line - not unlike when Lomax was playing there.

With wheeler and lance in the halves we'd be lost. None are capable of taking the game by scruff of the neck and directing us round the pitch.

Lance is a runner. His speed of thought with ball in hand is pretty shocking and slows our moves down with that split second stop and think he does. He's ok playing along Walsh as Walsh leads us.

Wheeler is a runner. He drifts in and out the game which is good (like pryce did) when you've got a Walsh as his partner. In the words of Nathan Brown "Gary wheeler is more of a free spirit stand off".

If we play those two in the halves, we in big trouble in attack.

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:30 pm  

St pete wrote:

With wheeler and lance in the halves we'd be lost. None are capable of taking the game by scruff of the neck and directing us round the pitch.

Lance is a runner. His speed of thought with ball in hand is pretty shocking and slows our moves down with that split second stop and think he does. He's ok playing along Walsh as Walsh leads us.

Wheeler is a runner. He drifts in and out the game which is good (like pryce did) when you've got a Walsh as his partner. In the words of Nathan Brown "Gary wheeler is more of a free spirit stand off".

If we play those two in the halves, we in big trouble in attack.

I'd agree with that apart from that Lance is OK alongside Walsh. To be honest, I've seen little difference in his game from last year. He is not a 6, sure as a filler, he will do, but I think Wilkin and Wheeler would be a better combo, with Jones and Dawson in the centres.

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:58 pm  

Wilkin has the kicking game, and distribution to play in the halves. I actually think he got very good at it by the end of last year, and would be my first choice for partnering Walsh (not that it will ever happen) - especially given the number of second rowers we have. I'd be inclined to play lance alongside him, as wheeler has more experience in the centres, were we are short. On the plus side about our injuries, they could always be worse! http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_145 ... idnes.html?

Wilkin has the kicking game, and distribution to play in the halves. I actually think he got very good at it by the end of last year, and would be my first choice for partnering Walsh (not that it will ever happen) - especially given the number of second rowers we have. I'd be inclined to play lance alongside him, as wheeler has more experience in the centres, were we are short. On the plus side about our injuries, they could always be worse! http://www.loverugbyleague.com/news_145 ... idnes.html?

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:31 pm  

I thought Percy was due to play this week is he still injured.

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:55 pm  

St pete wrote:

With wheeler and lance in the halves we'd be lost. None are capable of taking the game by scruff of the neck and directing us round the pitch.

Lance is a runner. His speed of thought with ball in hand is pretty shocking and slows our moves down with that split second stop and think he does. He's ok playing along Walsh as Walsh leads us.

Wheeler is a runner. He drifts in and out the game which is good (like pryce did) when you've got a Walsh as his partner. In the words of Nathan Brown "Gary wheeler is more of a free spirit stand off".

If we play those two in the halves, we in big trouble in attack.

I don't think we're mile's away from each other, but I feel like I disagree with a lot of your saying.

I don't think Lance is any better now Walsh is here, its just his deficiencies are not costing us as much.

If he was playing closer to the ruck at 1st receiver, his thinking time is taken away meaning he'll work on instinct - a bit like when he's playing hooker. He'll work mostly with pop passes to forwards or out the back to Wheeler.

The worst thing about Lance imo is when he get's the ball at 2nd pivot with lots of space and he takes too long on the ball and moves sideways, losing any space we've created.

Go back to the Lomaskell partnership - Gaskell naturally drew the play out from Lomax when needed and created a good balance. Hohaia and Wheeler could well strike up a similar partnership.

Saying all of that, Wilkin to 7 does seem the best choice.

Re: Injury's : Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:57 pm  

Offside Monkey wrote:

I don't think we're mile's away from each other, but I feel like I disagree with a lot of your saying.

I don't think Lance is any better now Walsh is here, its just his deficiencies are not costing us as much.

If he was playing closer to the ruck at 1st receiver, his thinking time is taken away meaning he'll work on instinct - a bit like when he's playing hooker. He'll work mostly with pop passes to forwards or out the back to Wheeler.

The worst thing about Lance imo is when he get's the ball at 2nd pivot with lots of space and he takes too long on the ball and moves sideways, losing any space we've created.

Go back to the Lomaskell partnership - Gaskell naturally drew the play out from Lomax when needed and created a good balance. Hohaia and Wheeler could well strike up a similar partnership.

Saying all of that, Wilkin to 7 does seem the best choice.

My point with lance playing with Walsh = lance doesn't need to get involved in ball playing which he can't do.