Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 7:48 am  

We've had a thousand threads about our lack of halfbacks and dire need to sign one but I think the prop situation becoming just as big issue. We have no go forward at all and its killing us. At times we was only making 20m per set and couldn't get out of our 20m, its happening a lot this year and IMO a massive problem.

We could have Thurston in our halves but if your stuck in the 20m then he's going to do nothing either. Its forcing wilkin to having to just good the ball as hard as he can which is usually in our own half, meaning they start their attack in dangerous postions unlike us, who start our attack on our own try line.

We haven't even got the excuse of having injuries in the forwards as lms, clough, TP, Laffranchi, Walmsley was our four props and Perry wasnt even selected.

IMO bringing two props in next year is just as important as bringing a halfback in, like I said, the halfback can't play when we stuck in our own 20m zone.

This season Brown needs to come up with a idea help solve the problem of being dominated in the first 15 of the match. The Warrington game was basically gone after 10 mins and we was very lucky last week to comeback from a shocking start. I know for a fact we've been working on starting the game well. It doesn't help with loose carries when we do have the ball or stupid little grubbers in our own 20m (wilkin).


My soloution for this season would be to start with Walmsley and Tp as starting props. I know we'd lose impact from the Bench but at the moment the likes of Thompson and lms are getting dominated early in the game. I think starting TP, Walmsley at props with Clough replacing Thompson at 13 will add more size and IMO better go forward. I think lms plays better from the bench anyway. That would give us sia, Walmsley, clough and TP to drive us out.

When we weather the early storm, we seem to compete more and start making more meters but its that first 15 mins we are getting physically dominated.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 9:48 am  

Am I the only one who thought our go forward was okay last night? We threw it away with the stupidity in the first 5 minutes and the paperthin defence.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 9:53 am  

JonB95 wrote:

Am I the only one who thought our go forward was okay last night? We threw it away with the stupidity in the first 5 minutes and the paperthin defence.

For the first twenty minutes (again) it was dreadful. It's not just the go forward either. Warrington were strolling upfield through our middle, as have most packs this year. Our starting front row is soft.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 10:12 am  

We are reliant upon penalties to get into the right positions. We struggle with the battle early on for field position and the game only changes when we get a penalty. That is why I think our starts are slow: the opposition win the battle in the early sets, we rarely win this early battle.

It was the same on Monday vs Leeds; we struggled until we got a penalty and that put is in the right position to attack. Yesterday, Bentham was giving NOTHING to either team and that's why Warrington enjoyed a lot of good position. We needed a penalty to get us in a better position.

I agree about starting the big lads; 99% of the time then game changes when Walmsley comes on, so why don't we start him? LMS is too ineffectual to start the game.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 10:20 am  

Albion wrote:

We are reliant upon penalties to get into the right positions. We struggle with the battle early on for field position and the game only changes when we get a penalty. That is why I think our starts are slow: the opposition win the battle in the early sets, we rarely win this early battle.

It was the same on Monday vs Leeds; we struggled until we got a penalty and that put is in the right position to attack. Yesterday, Bentham was giving NOTHING to either team and that's why Warrington enjoyed a lot of good position. We needed a penalty to get us in a better position.

I agree about starting the big lads; 99% of the time then game changes when Walmsley comes on, so why don't we start him? LMS is too ineffectual to start the game.

Exactly, if we don't get pens, we don't get field position. We had it last year as well but its worse this year.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 10:35 am  

It doesn't help us not having Roby playing. He gives us, and consequently, our forwards more momentum.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 10:49 am  

Brown thinks the same: 'In the first half our middle wasn't good at all. Even though they carved us up on the right edge, our middle wasn't so flash. When it isn't good against Warrington you can make it hard for yourself and we didn't make it hard for them. You have to physically be in the contest and make it hard for them but we made it easier than we should have' http://www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3035

Brown thinks the same: 'In the first half our middle wasn't good at all. Even though they carved us up on the right edge, our middle wasn't so flash. When it isn't good against Warrington you can make it hard for yourself and we didn't make it hard for them. You have to physically be in the contest and make it hard for them but we made it easier than we should have' http://www.saintsrlfc.com/news/page/3035

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 10:59 am  

McClennan wrote:

It doesn't help us not having Roby playing. He gives us, and consequently, our forwards more momentum.

To an extent this has been part of the problem, which Robys injury has highlighted to the fans.

The Saints front row of recent years appears to have been designed around lighter more mobile forwards able to exploit a defending team retreating on the back foot, caused by Roby creating havoc from a scoot.

Take that scoot away however and the lighter forwards are forced into playing arm wrestle RL. This is something they cant handle, and consequently Saints get dominated.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 11:26 am  

I'd like to see the stats before I comment on our go forward. Higham got them on the front foot, something that Howarth's not gonna do. Thompson and Walmsley seemed to make good yards, as they always do though.

Re: Props ( no go forward ) : Sun May 26, 2013 11:28 am  

Seeing as talk on Boof getting a new deal has all but died out now, I wonder if he is going at the end of the season? I'm not sure LMS warrants a new deal yet either; maybe on the same wage, he certainly doesn't merit an improved contract.