Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 153

Thread: Keirons Conundrum

  1. #51
    Noooobie
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    10
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Has to be Richardson & Fages for me. Richardson only played the first 20 mins & last 15 mins against Cas. I thought they combined ok at half back in the first 20 mins in a side that couldn't hold on to the ball. When Richardson went off then Fages got more & more anonymous. Richardson just seems like a good organiser to me so I'd try & build that partnership with Fages. To do that they need as much playing time together as possible.

    Tommy Lee is not the answer at all. Most of the last 5-10 years at hooker. Can understand the Wilkin call but we need to move forward with a bit of youth. He'll make mistakes but I think he's ready.

  2. #52
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Buddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    11,407
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    The game has changed though mate, on both sides of the ball.

    What myself, DD, Bronco and a few others are saying is that there is a time and place to give young players ago. It was diffferent in era's gone by and it's different for forwards but at 6/7, there is nowhere to hide. Richardson was targeted on Sunday and struggle, I've seen him targeted in 19's games and struggled. There is an argument to say that it's acceptable for halves to be suspect defensively but for the lads development, I don't think it's the right time to use him. He's got ability but I'd be using him in a nice Friday night fixture at Langtee Park later on in the year when he has Smith alongside him at 7. I just don't think that Leeds in round 1 is the right way to go about his development. I've said it previously but the lad could have an absolute shocker and still wouldn't receive criticism should we lose the game/games.

    I've thought about it over the last few days and for me, Wilkin and Fages have to start the year. Fages has a hell of lot to learn and has been shown an awful lot of faith by his coach. We talked about discipline/errors yesterday and you can see what'd happen if we started Richardson. They'd sent Hall and Moon at him all night and they'd probably target Wilkin as well so he's got less energy to attack with. It'd be a penalty fest. Leeds are going to come here and throw everything at us because they have to. Their start killed them last year and they'll be wanting to address that.

    It's not just two points, its confidence. Round 1-10 is about picking up points and building confidence. If you start poorly it takes time to get that back.
    Has the game changed since Smith & Eastmond both played while younger than Richardson?

    Im sorry but i dont buy it at all, the lad is 20 and if halfbacks need to be defensive rocks before they can be considered for selection hardly any would've played. Even Murphy describes having Karalius as his minder when he came into the team. He was 16 by the way, the way you talk he'd have qualified fir a testimonial before making his debut.

    As for losing against Leeds with Richardson in the team, what haopens if we lose with Wilkins hoof and hope style of scrum half play?

    Is that better? Its ok lads we lost but the stats on kicking the ball dead are the best in the league

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  3. #53
    Learning All The Songs RV12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,914
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Here's what KC said a couple of weeks ago:

    "Danny has been outstanding and he will get a chance this year. You can’t hold players back for the sake of it. If they are ready to go and are going to make you a better team then you have to give them a shot. If young Theo goes down, Danny is going to drop straight in."

    I know that you shouldn't take anything KC says too literally, but he doesn't say that Richardson would could in if Matty Smith got injured. However, his comments do say that he is ready for first team rugby.

    As others have pointed out, our rivals would take the chance on a young player. If Leuluai gets injured at Wigan then Shorrocks would come in and not O Loughlin, if (when) Brown gets injured at Wire, Patton would come in and nor Ratchford, if (when) Walsh gets injured at Catalans, Albert comes in and not Gigot.

    I am limited in how far I can comment, as I've never seen Richardson play. However, KC seems to think that he's ready, and if at the age of 20, and our scrum half gets injured, and we choose to play a 32 year old loose forward at scrum half ahead of him, then you have to ask why Richardson is at the club as we mustn't rate him too highly.

    I would give him a chance. Assuming he's stood out in the reserves, and works hard in training, then he deserves his chance. If it doesn't work, then Wilkin can drop in. But sometimes taking the risk and giving a young player a chance can really benefit the team. Briers is a good example, the Lomax/Gaskell partnership nearly got us a championship, Eastmond and Percival had great starts to their careers too, because we took the chance and threw them in.

    It's a big call for KC, and I could understand his reasons for either decision, but that's why he's paid his wages, and I suppose he'll be judged by the result next Thursday, and in the weeks after.

  4. #54
    In The South Stand Tez the Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    3,502
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    Has the game changed since Smith & Eastmond both played while younger than Richardson?

    Im sorry but i dont buy it at all, the lad is 20 and if halfbacks need to be defensive rocks before they can be considered for selection hardly any would've played. Even Murphy describes having Karalius as his minder when he came into the team. He was 16 by the way, the way you talk he'd have qualified fir a testimonial before making his debut.

    As for losing against Leeds with Richardson in the team, what haopens if we lose with Wilkins hoof and hope style of scrum half play?

    Is that better? Its ok lads we lost but the stats on kicking the ball dead are the best in the league

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    My opinion is that Eastmond was miles ahead of Richardson at a younger age. He had absolutely everything to his game and could have been one of the best in the world IMO had he stayed in the code. But again, he was eased into the first team alongside Pryce and Long and even played in the centres. He wasn't thrown into jersey, he was given it because he was eased in alongside two outstanding halves. He was able to dip in and out of games and play on the back of them. It was brilliant development. Even Matty Smith was brought in alongside Pryce and went out on loan to Crusaders and Salford. If I had my way, Richardson would have been out on loan as well.

    I've not dismissed the lads chances at any stage, I've encouraged bringing him through alongside Smith at some stage. I wouldn't be surprised if he was challenging Fages for that 6 spot over the next 1-2 years. Fages and Richardson just don't fit as a pairing. Fages played on the back of Walsh last year and spent a year learning the game, he'll do the same this year. Very few young half backs are thrown in like that; they are brought in alongside a player who understands the position and can manage a game. You start him and the pressure not only falls on him but the players around him as well and as I say, confidence is a big thing.

    As I say, it's all about opinions. If by round three or four we are struggling with Wilkin at 7 then fair enough but that's what I'd do anyway and that's what my pathway for any young half back would be. You combine Wilkin with Lomax at 1, Fages at 6 and two attacking centres and you've got enough there to challenge Leeds across the field.

    If we had a top quality 6 then absolutely he should play. But Fages has a long way to go and is in a similar boat to Richardson himself.
    Steve Prescott MBE (1973-2013)
    V

  5. #55
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Buddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    11,407
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    My opinion is that Eastmond was miles ahead of Richardson at a younger age. He had absolutely everything to his game and could have been one of the best in the world IMO had he stayed in the code. But again, he was eased into the first team alongside Pryce and Long and even played in the centres. He wasn't thrown into jersey, he was given it because he was eased in alongside two outstanding halves. He was able to dip in and out of games and play on the back of them. It was brilliant development. Even Matty Smith was brought in alongside Pryce and went out on loan to Crusaders and Salford. If I had my way, Richardson would have been out on loan as well.

    I've not dismissed the lads chances at any stage, I've encouraged bringing him through alongside Smith at some stage. I wouldn't be surprised if he was challenging Fages for that 6 spot over the next 1-2 years. Fages and Richardson just don't fit as a pairing. Fages played on the back of Walsh last year and spent a year learning the game, he'll do the same this year. Very few young half backs are thrown in like that; they are brought in alongside a player who understands the position and can manage a game. You start him and the pressure not only falls on him but the players around him as well and as I say, confidence is a big thing.

    As I say, it's all about opinions. If by round three or four we are struggling with Wilkin at 7 then fair enough but that's what I'd do anyway and that's what my pathway for any young half back would be. You combine Wilkin with Lomax at 1, Fages at 6 and two attacking centres and you've got enough there to challenge Leeds across the field.

    If we had a top quality 6 then absolutely he should play. But Fages has a long way to go and is in a similar boat to Richardson himself.
    As others have said at many other clubs this wouldn't even be a debate, he would be given his chance and allowed to develop. Why some with selective memories believe its better to select Wilkin is beyond me

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  6. #56
    In The South Stand Tez the Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    3,502
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    As others have said at many other clubs this wouldn't even be a debate, he would be given his chance and allowed to develop. Why some with selective memories believe its better to select Wilkin is beyond me

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    It would be a debate though. Look around Super League: Shorrocks, Williams, Albert, Fages, Lilley, Patton, Morgan Smith. They were all brought in alongside someone more experienced. We've won games with Wilkin before at 7 where he's been surrounded by a lot less pace and strike than we've got now.
    Steve Prescott MBE (1973-2013)
    V

  7. #57
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Buddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    11,407
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    It would be a debate though. Look around Super League: Shorrocks, Williams, Albert, Fages, Lilley, Patton, Morgan Smith. They were all brought in alongside someone more experienced. We've won games with Wilkin before at 7 where he's been surrounded by a lot less pace and strike than we've got now.
    I wonder what the win ratio is with him at 7, personally i think we are easy to play against with him at 7 we need to tezt defenses more this year and he isnt the answer imo

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    5,346
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    I wonder what the win ratio is with him at 7, personally i think we are easy to play against with him at 7 we need to tezt defenses more this year and he isnt the answer imo

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    I think Wilkin is what many opposition coaches would like lining up at 7 -against us. He offers little, is formulaic and also good for a bad blunder.

    I feel you have to be young to be old. Kids making mistakes as they learn the game is part of growing pains. Theres a disturbing trend of so called junior players getting older in this country before they are really trusted. In part this is a indictment of the way younger players are being developed in the UK and the fascination with bulk but that is not the only part of the problem. The UK seems averse to any sort of risk.

    Gary Connolly remains the best young player I've ever see perform at such a young age and he developed by being trusted and learning from mistakes. He was trusted from age 17 and in the main, it benefited club and player. Who will forget that tackle on Lydon in 90?

    The one thing I will say is for the time being Ill cut KC a bit of slack given the Super League format (i.e every game really doesnt count despite the hyperbole). I didnt see the friendly and it was terrible by all accounts, but Cunningham strikes me as a pragmatist who wants to see his 'options' rather than results at this point. As I said before, there is a school of thought that in these wintery conditions Wilkin would be a safer option but I do feel thats a the detriment to a 20 yr old who should be getting game time and the lessons that come with it.

  9. #59
    In The West Stand
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Daisy Hill
    Age
    57
    Posts
    5,804
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    For what it's worth. I don't think Lomax at 7 is to be overlooked. It's been banded about around some of the Rugby press.

  10. #60
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,876
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    As others have said at many other clubs this wouldn't even be a debate, he would be given his chance and allowed to develop. Why some with selective memories believe its better to select Wilkin is beyond me

    Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
    . KC needs to stand by his conviction statement of "Richardson is ready and Wilkin will play in the forwards this season".
    When Goulding, Longy, Eastmond, Lomax first played at half back they were terrible defenders so it isn't something new in that department with Richardson.
    For me Wilkin should be a central pivot mentoring Fages and Richardson either side of him, Wilkin at 7 is so predictable for the opposition it will be a grinding game with very little quality creative ball to Morgan and Percival.

  11. #61
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    . KC needs to stand by his conviction statement of "Richardson is ready and Wilkin will play in the forwards this season".
    When Goulding, Longy, Eastmond, Lomax first played at half back they were terrible defenders so it isn't something new in that department with Richardson.
    For me Wilkin should be a central pivot mentoring Fages and Richardson either side of him, Wilkin at 7 is so predictable for the opposition it will be a grinding game with very little quality creative ball to Morgan and Percival.
    Spot on. Although defence cannot be ignored the main role of a scrum-half isn't to defend. Defence only comes with time and practice and all young players generally have to pick up and improve their tackling and defence over time.
    The issue for me isn't so much the Leeds game it is about developing the best half back combination in the absence of Matty Smith for the next few months who obviously won't be playing for a considerable period of time yet. Who knows yet if Smith will play again this season? Richardson and Fages need to develop a better understanding of playing together.

    If we lose against Leeds, well so what, but we could easily lose against them putting Tommy Lee or Wilkin in at 7. Our best chance of beating teams is what you have said in terms of getting creative ball into the hands of Johnny Lomax, Mark Percival and Ryan Morgan, the players who can make the breaks, put our two wingers away and finish the opposition off. They are our main attacking weapons. Although Fages still has a lot to learn too, when the ball is in his hands he can make things happen as showed when he made the breaks against Widnes. I thought in the recent Karalius Cup game he was excellent.

  12. #62
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,188
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    One thing's for sure, it's a difficult and possibly crucial decision, and whoever he goes with, if we happen to lose many will be calling for KC's head on a plate.

  13. #63
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    parr.and proud of it
    Posts
    1,544
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    The way people are referring to Fages on here.you would think he's a rookie.the lads played for and captained his country.surely he's experienced enough.

  14. #64
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,993
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    My opinion is that Eastmond was miles ahead of Richardson at a younger age. He had absolutely everything to his game and could have been one of the best in the world IMO had he stayed in the code. But again, he was eased into the first team alongside Pryce and Long and even played in the centres. He wasn't thrown into jersey, he was given it because he was eased in alongside two outstanding halves. He was able to dip in and out of games and play on the back of them. It was brilliant development. Even Matty Smith was brought in alongside Pryce and went out on loan to Crusaders and Salford. If I had my way, Richardson would have been out on loan as well.
    Gotta disagree about Eastmond you must have been watching him with rose tinted specs because that's certainly not the Eastmond I remember. He was a devastating runner with great pace and side step and he was physically very strong for his size and age but he was far from complete. He was very much like Fages is now in that his kicking ability was pretty limited and his passing & decision making at times were poor. He then never really got much of a chance to work on these parts of his game because we then switched him to play a lot in the centres.

    IMO Richardson has a lot more natural ability as a half back than Eastmond had. He doesn't have the same running skills but his vision & ability to read the game and his kicking & passing are all far superior to what Eastmond had at the same stage.

  15. #65
    In The West Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    5,572
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    I'm a bit conflicted on this one.

    If it were purely a question of attack, I'd pick Richardson without a second thought. He's a confident young lad with plenty of ability, and I don't think you should shy away from handing responsibility to young players like that. He'd be sure to make mistakes, but then we already know that the alternative, however experienced, is hardly a picture of consistency. There was a passage of play at the weekend that summed things up for me: we had the ball on the last tackle in Cas's 20, and Richardson was standing at first receiver, ready to take charge of the kick. Along comes Wilkin, who takes command of the situation by pushing Richardson out of the way, then takes the pass and lovingly chips the ball straight into Joel Monaghan's hands.

    But I don't think you can ignore defence. I was at the other side of the field, so I couldn't say for sure if Richardson was at fault, but Cas were carving us up on his edge for the first 15 minutes. They scored a pretty easy try on that edge and then Richardson was brought off, after which the defence was pretty solid for the rest of the game. It's all very well saying that it's not a half-back's job to defend, but if a half-back being on the field means that you're regularly conceding breaks and points then it won't do him or the team any good.

  16. #66
    Got A Season Ticket Lord Lucan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Winstanley
    Posts
    172
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    I'm a bit conflicted on this one.

    If it were purely a question of attack, I'd pick Richardson without a second thought. He's a confident young lad with plenty of ability, and I don't think you should shy away from handing responsibility to young players like that. He'd be sure to make mistakes, but then we already know that the alternative, however experienced, is hardly a picture of consistency. There was a passage of play at the weekend that summed things up for me: we had the ball on the last tackle in Cas's 20, and Richardson was standing at first receiver, ready to take charge of the kick. Along comes Wilkin, who takes command of the situation by pushing Richardson out of the way, then takes the pass and lovingly chips the ball straight into Joel Monaghan's hands.

    But I don't think you can ignore defence. I was at the other side of the field, so I couldn't say for sure if Richardson was at fault, but Cas were carving us up on his edge for the first 15 minutes. They scored a pretty easy try on that edge and then Richardson was brought off, after which the defence was pretty solid for the rest of the game. It's all very well saying that it's not a half-back's job to defend, but if a half-back being on the field means that you're regularly conceding breaks and points then it won't do him or the team any good.

  17. #67
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Rainhill
    Age
    75
    Posts
    2,221
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    I think on past decisions KC as always plumped for experience and will go will Wilkin. I hope Richardson is on the bench then we can bring him on at the appropriate time. Whilst it is early days for me Lee did not fill me with confidence Sunday. Only hope that his poor distribution was a one off. So first choice Wilkin and I would rather play Richardson than Lee at the moment.

  18. #68
    Got A Season Ticket Lord Lucan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Winstanley
    Posts
    172
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Apart from the first Cas try which was a comedy of errors, mind you most of the game was. All their try's came down our right side where Fleming and Peyroux were defending. Shocking one on one misses and poor defending overall on that side and Richardson wasn't on the field at that stage of the second half, neither was Wilkin and Roby. It was only when all 3 came on the field that we improved
    Last edited by Lord Lucan; 31st January 2017 at 09:29. Reason: Comments added

  19. #69
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    710
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    I understand that Richardson is young and it's always nice to see them come through, but you need to win games and go with what the best option is. I'd give opportunities to Richardson either way this season but a lad who has never played a Super League game has no right to start games in the halves at St Helens because he's young. Richardson struggled yesterday IMO, we dropped too much ball for him to have an impact but he was getting knocked about a fair bit. McGuire will be sending Moon and Hall at him all day. If we lose to Leeds, we all know the players who'll get the blame - Richardson could play, have a shocker and people will still say he was outstanding.

    People were unhappy with our League position last year and there was only a few points between 1-4. It's a team sport and confidence is a huge thing; it appears and disappears in the blink of an eye and a good start to the season really helps. Lee definitely isn't the answer at 7. I see Richardson and Fages as out and out 6's right now and Wilkin as a 13. Tough call for him - there will be an outcry if he doesn't go with Richardson but I genuinely don't think there is a standout option. Round 1-10 is about winning games and finding confidence.
    I would expect no half-back to perform well behind a beaten pack and going backwards, particularly a debutant. I saw enough to convince me he has the attributes to succeed. He should be 1st choice stand off ahead of Fages. Wilkin and Fages are the options for SH as T Lee offers nothing.

  20. #70
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,876
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by robert80 View Post
    I think on past decisions KC as always plumped for experience and will go will Wilkin. I hope Richardson is on the bench then we can bring him on at the appropriate time. Whilst it is early days for me Lee did not fill me with confidence Sunday. Only hope that his poor distribution was a one off. So first choice Wilkin and I would rather play Richardson than Lee at the moment.
    Richardson needs to start in each game and defend on Ryan Morgan's side who is defensive minded. When Richardson comes back onto the bench Longy should be with him to go through a couple of his highlight lapses.

    Mentally, coach and players should be giving him the best support during game time and not putting doubt in his mind that he is too risky to start a game or took off when something goes wrong.
    The lad is on a steep learning curve but will not climb up there if KC won,t accept risk of a short term loss againsthe the long term gain.

    Also I think supporters would give Richardson a lot more slack if they can see the future potential, Wilkin and Lee would be different 1 or 2 losses and we will soon be on their backs.

  21. #71
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk The Yellow Giraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11,763
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    This wouldn't necessarily be my way of thinking but I'm surprised nobody has suggested pairing Wilkin and Richardson. Fages hasn't exactly set the world alight and I know there's people on here who aren't massive fans of his.

    Just throwing it out there.......
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

  22. #72
    In The South Stand Paul Newlove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,655
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Yellow Giraffe View Post
    This wouldn't necessarily be my way of thinking but I'm surprised nobody has suggested pairing Wilkin and Richardson. Fages hasn't exactly set the world alight and I know there's people on here who aren't massive fans of his.

    Just throwing it out there.......
    That had crossed my mind, Fages has had a fair amount of game time in these friendlies and has been pretty anonymous.

  23. #73
    In The South Stand 49er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    4,224
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Yellow Giraffe View Post
    This wouldn't necessarily be my way of thinking but I'm surprised nobody has suggested pairing Wilkin and Richardson. Fages hasn't exactly set the world alight and I know there's people on here who aren't massive fans of his.
    Just throwing it out there.......
    For what it's worth I am a fan of his. I think last season he was messed around by KC so had no chance to show his true worth. I like his aggression in the tackle which he shows even when he has been quiet in other areas. I think he is suffering from Smiths injury, having paired with him through the whole off season to learn how to work with him (after being a bit part player, playing various roles last year) is now faced with having to pair up with a new player and possibly a young one.
    It seems that fans pick certain players who are fair (I say unfair game) game if they have a perceived poor game. Others, (Big Al and Robes) get nothing said when they don't perform.
    I could be wrong as like everyone it's just my (our) opinion but if KC let him have his head more as I think he is a 'play what he sees' type of player and not a structured guy he will be a good player for us. I accept his kicking decisions can be poor at times, but at least he is willing to take the ball and kick it and not hide.

    Vive la France
    Humans are more concerned with having than being.

  24. #74
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    parr.and proud of it
    Posts
    1,544
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Yellow Giraffe View Post
    This wouldn't necessarily be my way of thinking but I'm surprised nobody has suggested pairing Wilkin and Richardson. Fages hasn't exactly set the world alight and I know there's people on here who aren't massive fans of his.

    Just throwing it out there.......
    I didn't see much of Fages at Salford.but he was very highly rated.would it be right to say he's going backwards since coming to saints.

  25. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tez the Saint View Post
    If we had a top quality 6 then absolutely he should play. But Fages has a long way to go and is in a similar boat to Richardson himself.
    That's my only concern - and not even a 'top quality 6' (although that'd be nice) but an experienced 6.

    However, on balance I think a Richardson-Fages combination must be given a chance to see what they can develop. Just leave Wilkin out of the organising; so many times over the past couple of seasons (presumably on Cunningham's instruction) Wilkin would elbow his way into the Walsh-Fages/Turner/Burns partnership and it seemed like too many chiefs causing confusion.

    Incidentally, I'm not sure a Smith-Richardson combination would work too well, either, given their respective styles; they're certainly not naturally complimentary (unless the plan is to have each one either side of the PTB as separate playmakers, in essence having two scrum halves)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •