: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:13 am  

Big Dave T wrote:

Disagree but guess we'll see, im just happy with him in the side TBH.

Now c'mon you know thats not allowed He is a talent I agree but I'm happy to see him on the wing for now.

Big Dave T wrote:

He's a stronger carryer of the ball than all of our back rowers other than Manu IMO, he lacks a passing game as we all know, he isnt the quickest but is as strong as an Ox. All of the above for me makes him sound like a better back row than a centre anyway. If Radford does go to Union there may well be a space to fill. Definately wouldnt get rid, would just have a positional re-think.

Manu and Tickle are far better back rowers IMO and I'd rather bring in an actual top class 2nd Rower than move Yeamo there TBH. So if he loses his place in the centres to 2 young kids I would get rid and use the salary cap on a better back rower.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:22 am  

Robbo4 wrote:

Manu and Tickle are far better back rowers IMO and I'd rather bring in an actual top class 2nd Rower than move Yeamo there TBH. So if he loses his place in the centres to 2 young kids I would get rid and use the salary cap on a better back rower.

Im still undecided about Tickle, i see Radders as the better 2nd rower as has been well documented but i also see Yeaman as a better carryer of the ball than both of them. It would be Radfords defensive work that could maybe make him a better back rower than Yeaman.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:47 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Im still undecided about Tickle, i see Radders as the better 2nd rower as has been well documented but i also see Yeaman as a better carryer of the ball than both of them. It would be Radfords defensive work that could maybe make him a better back rower than Yeaman.

Don't think Yeaman is big enough to play in the pack week in/out, he would need to train to lay second row if he was going to do it on a regular basis.

As for Briscoe, unproven at centre in SL, would like to see him get a shot but like with Hall we will need to be patient. Look at Senior, we started on the wing and then came inside. This is Briscoe's first full season in full time training so I would not want him playing every week right now tbh.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:49 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

This is Briscoe's first full season in full time training so I would not want him playing every week right now tbh.

Things like that were never said when players like Schofield and Edwards came through. If youre good enough etc ..

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:51 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Things like that were never said when players like Schofield and Edwards came through. If youre good enough etc ..

Young players need looking after, they need to be protected a little. Not only from physical burnout but also mentally as well. I would not want to risk him in any way and he should not be playing every game tbh.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:52 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

Young players need looking after, they need to be protected a little. Not only from physical burnout but also mentally as well. I would not want to risk him in any way and he should not be playing every game tbh.

being good enough for me means that you are touch enough mentally and physically to adapt.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:53 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

Yes in SL.

I also saw him play there pre-season v Hudds last year when he made a 60 yard break through the middle of their pack.

I think he looks a class act as a centre as well as a class act on the wing. Guess if we chose to he could be the long term replacement for Raynor as he has a lot of key traits that that position requires, would just love to see him play centre.

That's a call nobody can make yet, he has not played centre enough and not showed anything at centre to suggest he will be a class act. The break against Hudds was down the middle so nothing to do with centre play.

He also played against Matt King in the season opener but and did okay but again nothing overly classy.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:54 pm  

Big Dave T wrote:

being good enough for me means that you are touch enough mentally and physically to adapt.

I agree but its his first season at fulltime rugby so we don't know if he is yet. He might need nurturing a little.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:57 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

That's a call nobody can make yet, he has not played centre enough and not showed anything at centre to suggest he will be a class act.

Ive made the call! FWIW i think he just looks a classy player, you can tell when someone has that x factor ability.

PAUL M wrote:

I agree but its his first season at fulltime rugby so we don't know if he is yet. He might need nurturing a little.

Agree we dont know how he will go, but because we dont know doesnt mean he shouldnt get the opportunity to show himself off.

: Fri Jan 30, 2009 12:59 pm  

PAUL M wrote:

I agree but its his first season at fulltime rugby so we don't know if he is yet. He might need nurturing a little.

Totally agree 100%
this lad like Hall etc need to get plenty of game time but NOT all the time, they need rest and training paddock work all the time , lets remember these kids are young lads, as for the Schofield and Edwards comment I would say that they were exceptions and wonder how many failed because they were burnt out too early...ala Yeaman playing too many gamess for too long, lets see how he goes having had an off season!!
With Thorman on board he may well get the kind of service Cooke used to get to him when he was scoring for fun!!

Saw an interview with Edwards over Xmas and he said in that interview that his era wouldnt be fit enough to play todays SL!!! that answers that one!!