: Sun May 10, 2009 8:50 pm  

saintc wrote:

why?

Because I dont agree that a guy that has spent his entire senior squad career as a fullback has overnight been turned into a stand off? He may or may not become a good 6 but I dont understand why so many people in so many different threads say it with certainty as if this is one of his positions that he plays when he has barely played it.

Am i being stupid or am i as confused as everybody else!He's a fullback.

: Sun May 10, 2009 8:54 pm  

griffin7262 wrote:

Am i being stupid or am i as confused as everybody else!He's a fullback.

The former.

: Sun May 10, 2009 8:57 pm  

griffin7262 wrote:

Am i being stupid or am i as confused as everybody else!He's a fullback.

It's a bit like saying Riley is a winger as he had never played a first team game at fullback. Capiche?

: Sun May 10, 2009 9:01 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

Who has said he is a stand off? He can play one and six, there is no exclusivity . It is hardly groundbreaking stuff. Harris did it ten years ago.

By your reckoning Wellens shouldn't have played centre, nor Eastmond fullback, last week.

Yes, but you need the necessary skills. Mathers is no more a standoff than Wellens is, the suggestion of either being a proven 6 is ludicrous. Sure, you could shoe them there and they'd do a job more than say shoving Morley there but is doesnt make them a 6.

You analogies with Eastmond and Wellens are also incredibly poor. Wellens' halfback days were at the very start of his career and after establishing himself as a regular player has found his position. Eastmond is just on the journey to becoming established. Mathers on the other hand has played lots of rugby for numerous teams none of which have felt that he is a stand off. He isnt just going to magically transform into one.

: Sun May 10, 2009 9:02 pm  

saintc wrote:

why?

Because I dont agree that a guy that has spent his entire senior squad career as a fullback has overnight been turned into a stand off? He may or may not become a good 6 but I dont understand why so many people in so many different threads say it with certainty as if this is one of his positions that he plays when he has barely played it.

Your man Wheeler today when asked post game, said that he sees his future at six, but he's happy to play centre. It may be that he makes a success of centre for the next two years, but he'd still think he's a six, given that's where he played his junior rugby, but he'll be more than happy to play centre, to be in the side.

Mathers played plenty of six in junior rugby, he was 'spotted' if you will playing at six, I think his opportunity in SL for Leeds came at fullback, and he moulded himself into the role, now that's probably his primary position, but he must still have that ability to play six as his junior rugby was spent there. Pryce left Bradford for such an opportunity to play in his preferred position.

: Sun May 10, 2009 9:02 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

It's a bit like saying Riley is a winger as he had never played a first team game at fullback. Capiche?

So using that analogy, James Graham is also a standoff because we have no evidence to contradict that.

: Sun May 10, 2009 9:03 pm  

JWP wrote:

Your man Wheeler today when asked post game, said that he sees his future at six, but he's happy to play centre. It may be that he makes a success of centre for the next two years, but he'd still think he's a six, given that's where he played his junior rugby, but he'll be more than happy to play centre, to be in the side.
.

Yes, I understand that concept. However Wheeler is a kid and where he ends up is anyones guess. Mathers is an established player, and a fullback at that. He isnt some developing youngster who may or may not end up elsewhere.

: Sun May 10, 2009 9:04 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

It's a bit like saying Riley is a winger as he had never played a first team game at fullback. Capiche?

Ah, now i get it.

: Sun May 10, 2009 9:06 pm  

saintc wrote:

Yes, I understand that concept. However Wheeler is a kid and where he ends up is anyones guess. Mathers is an established player, and a fullback at that. He isnt some developing youngster who may or may not end up elsewhere.

Agreed.

Moving Lockyer to stand-off in 2004 (when he was 27) was a ridiculous decision: he was a fullback and should have remained so.

: Sun May 10, 2009 9:09 pm  

saintc wrote:

So using that analogy, James Graham is also a standoff because we have no evidence to contradict that.

I have emperical evidence that Mathers has played standoff, can the same be said of Graham?

Are you implying Pryce should never play stand off at Saints as he hadn't really done so at Bradford?