Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:59 pm  

WidnesExile wrote:

He's coming to play Half Back he said!

That was before lomax went in at 7. Also Gaskell is playing well and we've got Pryce future not sorted yet.

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:02 pm  

St pete wrote:

Maybe lance will play fullback?

He will if the coach has any sense.

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:13 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

He will if the coach has any sense.

Would that be because you don't think wello is good enough anymore or because lance is a good fullback or because you think lomax and Gaskell should be broke up?

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:18 pm  

St pete wrote:

Would that be because you don't think wello is good enough anymore or because lance is a good fullback or because you think lomax and Gaskell should be broke up?

Another option for you: is it because he thinks Lance is a poor fullback?

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:09 pm  

St pete wrote:

Would that be because you don't think wello is good enough anymore or because lance is a good fullback or because you think lomax and Gaskell should be broke up?

You know my opinions of Wellens. Great clubman, but never a great player, I'm being consistent.


I have also been consistent in my appraisal of Gaskell and Lomax, however if you (Saints) want to screw it up, good luck. From a Wigan pov I hope that you keep Wheeler.

I did think that Lomax or Gaskell would be your fullback solution, but Hohaia could be a real threat from that positon.

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Sun Jun 05, 2011 9:11 pm  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

You know my opinions of Wellens. Great clubman, but never a great player, I'm being consistent.


I have also been consistent in my appraisal of Gaskell and Lomax, however if you (Saints) want to screw it up, good luck. From a Wigan pov I hope that you keep Wheeler.

I did think that Lomax or Gaskell would be your fullback solution, but Hohaia could be a real threat from that positon.

Why from a Wigan pov would you like us to keep wheeler?

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:28 am  

St pete wrote:

Why from a Wigan pov would you like us to keep wheeler?

Because I really don't rate him. He was a player that I had heard so much about and I was really looking forward to seeing him, but he never seems to perform well whenever I have watched him. Maybe it's because of my expectations of him were too high.

Gaskell looked a very good player from the first time I saw him, very versatile. He was excellent at fullback, centre stand off or scrum half.

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:32 am  

Rogues Gallery wrote:

Because I really don't rate him. He was a player that I had heard so much about and I was really looking forward to seeing him, but he never seems to perform well whenever I have watched him. Maybe it's because of my expectations of him were too high.

Gaskell looked a very good player from the first time I saw him, very versatile. He was excellent at fullback, centre stand off or scrum half.

Is this the Wheeler who was taking you apart at the JJB until word was sent on to take him out

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:51 am  

Rommel wrote:

Is this the Wheeler who was taking you apart at the JJB until word was sent on to take him out

That's a bit like saying David Vaealiki was a brilliant centre because he ran all over Matt Gidley in one game at Wigan.

Re: Ned Gaskell & Bill Lomax : Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:43 am  

rotate them all like huddersfield and keep everyone on their toes.