Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:00 pm  

imwakefieldtillidie wrote:

Improvement.

We have improved each year that Blaymire has been here so improvement does not seem to be a problem.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:27 pm  

He's our weak link. Every kick he returns is a wasted tackle. He isn't good enough.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:30 pm  

imwakefieldtillidie wrote:

He's our weak link. Every kick he returns is a wasted tackle. He isn't good enough.

I disagree 100%, weak link don't make me laugh, i've seen some pour excuses for a full back in sl and he isn't one of them. Solid if unspectacular. He'll do for me and id be happy seeing him in the eng squad.

Anyone want mathers? pratt? no didnt think so.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:30 pm  

imwakefieldtillidie wrote:

He's our weak link. Every kick he returns is a wasted tackle. He isn't good enough.

T'other side of the coin is he probably takes more bombs/kicks than any other player in SL safely, and he looked good enough to beat is opposite numer when he scored friday.

For me he lacks pace, but so does PW.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:32 pm  

imwakefieldtillidie wrote:

Except when Hull broke though the other night and Blaymire wasn't fast enough to get across. Murphy came from behind him to make the tackle. Murphy has to be the first choice full back.

So he couldn't track across and get him on that occasion. Still it's a team game and the winger who should have been there any way did his job. Every player makes mistakes in a game, it's how they respond and with a try, a drop goal, a number of good takes and tackles Blaymire passed the test.

This ridiculous attempt to big up Murphy as the dogs of a FB over Blaymire is utterly pathetic based on 4 games, two of those against bottom clubs. People like you just have a bee in your bonnet and can't admit you might have been wrong and then over compensate by finding faults that are not there - grow up.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:02 pm  

imwakefieldtillidie wrote:

He's our weak link. Every kick he returns is a wasted tackle. He isn't good enough.

How is it a wasted tackle? Which parts of his game are weak? He is confident under the high ball, he tackles well, he scores a few tries sounds a total nightmare to me. To say he is not good enough is laughable.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:49 pm  

Solid player and good under high ball. Still think he doesnt offer much in attack linking into the line. Murphy is better suited to how we play and should be at fullback.

On kick returns Blaymire looks for the tackle too quickly and we are often on the back foot after the 1st tackle. Murphy returns faster, gains more yards and offers more threat coming into the line in attack.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 10:02 pm  

vastman wrote:

This ridiculous attempt to big up Murphy as the dogs of a FB over Blaymire is utterly pathetic based on 4 games, two of those against bottom clubs. People like you just have a bee in your bonnet and can't admit you might have been wrong and then over compensate by finding faults that are not there - grow up.

Vastman, you're quite possibly the most arrogant person who posts on this site. Who are you to tell me what kind of person I am? I'm fully entitled to my opinion, which I still think I'm right about. It's people like you who need to grow up and start having an opinion of your own, don't just post things you reckon other people want to hear.

Blaymire is an average full back, but lacks pace, which all top full backs have, and is far from safe under the high ball. I agree he has done a decent job for us, but I feel when we have a better player in that position we should use him.

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 10:24 pm  

imwakefieldtillidie wrote:

Blaymire is an average full back, but lacks pace, which all top full backs have, and is far from safe under the high ball. I agree he has done a decent job for us, but I feel when we have a better player in that position we should use him.

Paul Wellens was a real whippet during his tenure of the GB Fullback spot?

Re: matt blaymire : Sun Mar 14, 2010 11:20 pm  

imwakefieldtillidie wrote:

Vastman, you're quite possibly the most arrogant person who posts on this site. Who are you to tell me what kind of person I am? I'm fully entitled to my opinion, which I still think I'm right about. It's people like you who need to grow up and start having an opinion of your own, don't just post things you reckon other people want to hear.

Blaymire is an average full back, but lacks pace, which all top full backs have, and is far from safe under the high ball. I agree he has done a decent job for us, but I feel when we have a better player in that position we should use him.

read your opinion but like many i dont agree with you , forums eh cant live with em and carnt live without em