: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:14 pm  

Matty_HullFC wrote:

True, though Crocker actually missed playing time so is that a benefit for us as he will be fresher?
Thorman is hardly a concern as he'll get as much pre-season as the International stars and thus will be fully prepared imo.
Washy or Raynor I can't disagree with.

Thorman is not is full training as yet.

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:17 pm  

Gordon Gekko wrote:

Thorman is not is full training as yet.

Is he starting tommorrow?

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:18 pm  

Matty_HullFC wrote:

Is he starting tommorrow?

Dunno

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:26 pm  

The Hollywood Frasier wrote:

Sides will go into the tackle with the intention of holding the the ball carrier up untill the ref calls held and then they will take the ball carrier to the floor. Which makes the tackle take alot longer and gives the defence a longer rest in between tackles even though it is at the expense of a few yards after the initial collision.

Is that simple enough ?

No $hit sherlock..........in 35 years of watching the game i didnt know that was what the tackle was about.

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:29 pm  

[quote="Kosh"]Those are not the folk who the comment was aimed at. There's nowt wrong with a bit of healthy optimism (or even mad optimism), but some seem to feel that the slightest criticism is somehow out of order.


Me too.[/quote]


Just not on a friday night....

ducks and runs for cover.

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:28 pm  

Kosh wrote:

Extremely debatable. Carvell is a huge loss (even given the amount of time he spent injured), we're worse off at SH, and we haven't improved our backline noticeably.

I agree Dykes was a better Scrum Half than Thorman - when he played we won when he didn't we lost, simple as. But it's all very well having a better SH if he plays but poor Dyksey sadly couldn't. So given that Thorman will start every match hopefully with Horne I'd say we are, on balance, potentially better off in the halves than last year given last year's injuries there, particularly as it frees up Berrigan to play consistently at hooker. (Of course, if Dykes and Horne had played every match with Berro at hooker than who knows where we'd have been last year?)

I've already stated Carvell is a loss - yes you're right a huge one - but Crocker is here, Kingy is fit (played great last year until injured), Whiting (most exciting and underrated player IMO) is back, and we've yet to judge Maloney.

Plus who knows yet who Father Christmas forgot to leave and whose arrival may be imminent?

So lots to be positive about, so I'll stay that way until there's a need to be otherwise.

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 8:32 pm  

Kosh wrote:

It was both IMO.


Extremely debatable. Carvell is a huge loss (even given the amount of time he spent injured), we're worse off at SH, and we haven't improved our backline noticeably.

We've had some problems with the squad for a few season, and they have yet to be addressed IMO.

Maybe, maybe not. On paper Thorman < Dykes, but if Thorman stays fit he could be beter than the random rotation of Dykes/Lee/Berro/R Horne etc that we had to endure last season. Agree about Carvell and the squad balance though.

[Kosh]

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:04 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Maybe, maybe not. On paper Thorman < Dykes, but if Thorman stays fit he could be beter than the random rotation of Dykes/Lee/Berro/R Horne etc that we had to endure last season.

I don't disagree with that assessment, but the statement was that the squad had been improved, not the team on the pitch. I think the squad is actually no better or possibly slightly worse on paper. I expect us to field better teams on matchdays, though.

Mrs Barista wrote:

Agree about Carvell and the squad balance though.

It's a worry, but there was no realistic chance of it being fixed given the Carvell situation and existing contracts.

[Kosh]

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:10 pm  

WormInHand wrote:

I agree Dykes was a better Scrum Half than Thorman - when he played we won when he didn't we lost, simple as. But it's all very well having a better SH if he plays but poor Dyksey sadly couldn't. So given that Thorman will start every match hopefully with Horne I'd say we are, on balance, potentially better off in the halves than last year given last year's injuries there, particularly as it frees up Berrigan to play consistently at hooker. (Of course, if Dykes and Horne had played every match with Berro at hooker than who knows where we'd have been last year?)

See my response to Mrs. B. Possibly a tad pedantic, but there you go.

WormInHand wrote:

I've already stated Carvell is a loss - yes you're right a huge one - but Crocker is here, Kingy is fit (played great last year until injured), Whiting (most exciting and underrated player IMO) is back, and we've yet to judge Maloney.

Our second row is not the problem. Our front row is. King didn't play that well last season, and has a tendency to blow hot an cold. He's also picked up a few injuries lately.

WormInHand wrote:

Plus who knows yet who Father Christmas forgot to leave and whose arrival may be imminent?

I think you'll find that Santa's sack is most likely empty.

WormInHand wrote:

So lots to be positive about, so I'll stay that way until there's a need to be otherwise.

I'm actually not as depressed as my posts might make me appear, and I'm looking forward to the season. It just about has to be better than last year, after all.

: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:14 pm  

Rupert Pupkin wrote:

Is he not in the same league as Thorman?
Not seen much of him to be honest but surely he is young enough to improve.

Yes SL.

I don't rate Rangi Chase, he offers nothing that we need and will get from Thorman.