Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 130

Thread: Theo Fages

  1. #26
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,874
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theres only one stan wall View Post
    Do you see Fages as the answer at stand off for Saints long term?
    The way he has been messed about with different partner combinations probably not, he has the most try assists in the team on his limited appearances and makes more metres than all our half backs. I hope the captain of France has a great World Cup and if the club sell him then they could be blinded with all that egg on there face.

  2. #27
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by antwnsaint View Post
    Fages has massive potential, yes, he's quiet speaker but he's a dynamic, exciting player, especially next to Smith whose retirement gets closer every day.
    This isn't about a direct comparison between the two players though. It is about what is best for the team.

    Let's assume Holbrook feels the squad needs another forward but needs to free up cap space. Let's also assume he cannot get Smith off the books. If someone then shows interest in Fages and he wants the move, then Holbrook's choices are either:

    a) Keep Fages, have 4 halfbacks in the squad (not all of whom will be happy) but not have enough forwards
    b) Release Fages and sign a 2nd rower than the squad clearly needs.

    Surely it makes sense to do the latter? Don't get me wrong I like Fages, I rate him more than Smith and I don't particularly want him to leave. But more important than that is what the team is lacking and at the minute in most people's eyes that another 2nd rower (or prop according to some).

    So as I keep saying, regardless of whether Fages is better than Smith, if releasing him means we can sign someone else that the squad actually needs, then it makes sense.

    Also, if Fages was THAT good then this wouldn't be up for discussion. He'd be starting every week and the thought of letting him go wouldn't enter our heads.
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

  3. #28
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    1,343
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theres only one stan wall View Post
    Do you see Fages as the answer at stand off for Saints long term?
    Definitely not, he just isn’t a stand off.

  4. #29
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,874
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Yellow Giraffe View Post
    This isn't about a direct comparison between the two players though. It is about what is best for the team.

    Let's assume Holbrook feels the squad needs another forward but needs to free up cap space. Let's also assume he cannot get Smith off the books. If someone then shows interest in Fages and he wants the move, then Holbrook's choices are either:

    a) Keep Fages, have 4 halfbacks in the squad (not all of whom will be happy) but not have enough forwards
    b) Release Fages and sign a 2nd rower than the squad clearly needs.

    Surely it makes sense to do the latter? Don't get me wrong I like Fages, I rate him more than Smith and I don't particularly want him to leave. But more important than that is what the team is lacking and at the minute in most people's eyes that another 2nd rower (or prop according to some).

    So as I keep saying, regardless of whether Fages is better than Smith, if releasing him means we can sign someone else that the squad actually needs, then it makes sense.

    Also, if Fages was THAT good then this wouldn't be up for discussion. He'd be starting every week and the thought of letting him go wouldn't enter our heads.
    For me that would be a Short Term Gain with Long Term Loss Scenario, if we want a second row we need to release a second row whose not up to the job that would be Wilkin, we've struggled for 8 years to have enough half backs when the injuries bite. Do we really want to go backwards as the scenario would unfold, we lose Lomax with injury and Smith doesn't perform and we end up with our brand new second row forward or Wilkin playing at halfback and Richardson then gets the blame in place of a released Fages .

  5. #30
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    For me that would be a Short Term Gain with Long Term Loss Scenario, if we want a second row we need to release a second row whose not up to the job that would be Wilkin, we've struggled for 8 years to have enough half backs when the injuries bite. Do we really want to go backwards as the scenario would unfold, we lose Lomax with injury and Smith doesn't perform and we end up with our brand new second row forward or Wilkin playing at halfback and Richardson then gets the blame in place of a released Fages .
    Again it isn't just as easy as just releasing people. If they are under contract we need either an interested party or we need to pay them off. Obviously Smith and Wilkin shouldn't have been given long contracts, Lee shouldn't have been signed at all,etc. but we can't change that now unfortunately. We are left in this situation because of shambolic decisions from Rush and Cunningham over the last couple of years.
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

  6. #31
    In The South Stand 49er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    4,222
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    The thing is see from this topic is that all opinions have validity it's just which side you take, if there is any side to take.
    Also as has been said. It is just a rumour that NRL teams are interested in Fages. I guess if Lomax, Big Al etc have good WC's then they could be alongside Fgaes in getting interest. Plus they will have had a taste of what Australia is like.
    Humans are more concerned with having than being.

  7. #32
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by 49er View Post
    The thing is see from this topic is that all opinions have validity it's just which side you take, if there is any side to take.
    Also as has been said. It is just a rumour that NRL teams are interested in Fages. I guess if Lomax, Big Al etc have good WC's then they could be alongside Fgaes in getting interest. Plus they will have had a taste of what Australia is like.
    Very true. Unfortunately we are vulnerable to a one or two players being looked at; I think I read that we are the most represented SL club at the World Cup.
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

  8. #33
    In The West Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    5,572
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    I've got mixed feelings over this. I like Fages - he's a tough competitor and on his day can be dangerous. He's still young so there's every chance he will become a better player than he is now.

    However, I'm still not entirely convinced by him as a halfback. He's had some really good games and has had games where he just disappears. And while he's still young he's now got over 100 first-grade games under his belt so I do wonder if he should be a bit further on in his development than he is.

    Something that I was saying towards the end of the season is that none of our four half-backs has really made a convincing claim on a shirt. For Richardson that's not a big problem - he's still very raw and should be given plenty of time to develop. Lomax has just signed a new contract and JH clearly likes him at 6, so I don't think that's negotiable either. That, for me, leaves Smith and Fages in a precarious position, and since Smith is far less likely to attract offers I suppose it makes sense that Fages is the most likely departure out of the lot.

  9. #34
    In The South Stand 49er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    4,222
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    I do think there would be teams who would want Smith, it's just down to if he wants to leave. That will only be a factor if JH tells him that he would be a bit part player next year. As he was not a JH signing and the fact that Holbrook has impressed as a coach gives him more strength if he told the club Smith is not for him. But I speculate and am a little bias in my opinion.
    Humans are more concerned with having than being.

  10. #35
    In The West Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    5,517
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    I want Fages to stay. Rate him.

  11. #36
    Noooobie
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    19
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph Fridge View Post
    I want Fages to stay. Rate him.
    Has joined Leigh Centurions

  12. #37
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,874
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Yellow Giraffe View Post
    Again it isn't just as easy as just releasing people. If they are under contract we need either an interested party or we need to pay them off. Obviously Smith and Wilkin shouldn't have been given long contracts, Lee shouldn't have been signed at all,etc. but we can't change that now unfortunately. We are left in this situation because of shambolic decisions from Rush and Cunningham over the last couple of years.
    I would keep the squad as it is now and do the new signings for the 2019 season when we have a few players off contract. For me selling Fages would be a big loss if we lose Lomax or Roby through injury, Fages can adequately play at 6 or 9 and is nowhere near the finished article yet, selling him is a "Feeder Club" mentality.

  13. #38
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,487
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Can I offer one aspect of criticism of Fage which I find frustrating? (Accepting he has many many positives)

    He doesn't seem to be developing his whole width of game vision. He sees what's in front of him and maybe a few degrees left and right. You see that in his kicking which always goes down his own side and maybe no more than 10 or 20 degrees to the left.

    If he's going to develop in that position or even be Roby's deputy he needs to know what's going on 180 degrees, not just in a 30 degree span in front of him.

    I remember when Longy first took on similar responsibilities to Fage and he had that similar tunnel vision. However, Longy soon developed, whereas Fage is still very stuck.

    Still think he's better than Smith overall though.

  14. #39
    In The West Stand saintgeorge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    eccleston
    Posts
    5,257
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    The jury is still out on Fages for me. Too inconsistent. Don’t think we will go into next season with the luxury of four half backs - Smith, Richardson, Lomax and Fages - at the expense of recruiting elsewhere - I.e. second row or extra hooker. The Lunt rumour won’t go away either.

  15. #40
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by BigHap View Post
    Has joined Leigh Centurions
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

  16. #41
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Cornwall
    Posts
    2,287
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigHap View Post
    Has joined Leigh Centurions
    Is this true? I prefer lax at 6 really. I would want to keep Fages and lose Smith but as other people have noted, that may. It be possible. We don’t need 4 half backs, none of whom are really great half backs. I would see Smith as a squad player with Lorax and Richardson as the first choices. We need a really top prop or second row

  17. #42
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,874
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saintgeorge View Post
    The jury is still out on Fages for me. Too inconsistent. Don’t think we will go into next season with the luxury of four half backs - Smith, Richardson, Lomax and Fages - at the expense of recruiting elsewhere - I.e. second row or extra hooker. The Lunt rumour won’t go away either.
    We can say that for all our four half backs, you only get consistency when the half back pairing have worked with each other over a period of games, we were getting that and winning games with Richardson and Fages but non performance loyalties got in the way.

  18. #43
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,522
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    We can say that for all our four half backs, you only get consistency when the half back pairing have worked with each other over a period of games, we were getting that and winning games with Richardson and Fages but non performance loyalties got in the way.
    Exactly, play Fages and Richardson together and they look good, could be a 10 year + pairing for us. The length of Smith's contract is like an anchor round our neck. He just isn't good enough,lacking in every core skill a scrumhalf needs.

  19. #44
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    510
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Can't afford to lose Fages , Richardson still unproven for me

  20. #45
    In The West Stand saintgeorge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    eccleston
    Posts
    5,257
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cheify View Post
    Can't afford to lose Fages , Richardson still unproven for me
    For me too but the club have just given him an extended contract - maybe we should go with Richardson Lomax as the half- back pairing ? This discussion has come about because there are rumours Theo is going - the other three look like they are staying put.

  21. #46
    Got A Replica Shirt Jigsaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    LET THE GAME BEGIN !!!!
    Posts
    53
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I will be gutted if they let him go... I’ve always thought he is a decent player, brings that extra spark to the team, it’s all well and good saying we can get money for him and free up the space but I will guarantee we will end up with somebody s@&t as per usual... then we will all be saying we should have kept him... So I’ll say it first just keep him he’s much better than what’s out there and available....
    LET THE GAME BEGIN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  22. #47
    Banned Gerry Mander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Around the Ruck. Winning the Collision.
    Posts
    3,223
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    If I were Fages I would take the first offer.

    Treated shabbilyy and kept in the reserves by KC when first signed.

    Shuffled to accomodate Mr StHelens.
    Has played really well but subject to sneering over game control.
    Now the only way of freeing cap space.


    Good luck to him. Hope he goes well in the WC.
    Would not be surprised if a club here or NRL goes for him.

    The recruitment and extentsions
    of 2016 will continue to haunt Saints for the next 2+ years.

  23. #48
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    near leigh
    Posts
    3,057
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    If its true as some on here are saying that 5 NRL clubs are interested in signing Fages and if he is as bad as some are saying , I like him but if he is so bad then 5 NRL clubs mustn't know what they are doing.

  24. #49
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    1,343
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Saint Ged View Post
    If its true as some on here are saying that 5 NRL clubs are interested in signing Fages and if he is as bad as some are saying , I like him but if he is so bad then 5 NRL clubs mustn't know what they are doing.
    There is no way Fages is currently NRL quality, there’s a reason Holbrook dropped him for several key games.

  25. #50
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Saint Ged View Post
    If its true as some on here are saying that 5 NRL clubs are interested in signing Fages and if he is as bad as some are saying , I like him but if he is so bad then 5 NRL clubs mustn't know what they are doing.

    The 5 NRL team rumour has come from a journalist on Twitter who writes for the Sun.
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

Posting Permissions

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