Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:21 am  

saint at wire wrote:

I didn't pick him. I don't know what you mean.

He was largely responsible for 3 cats tries last night - fact.

But he is some kind of target. Every player goes through a bad spell. Saints fans have there favourites and the rest get hammered and are used ase scape goats. Had it been Gaskell at fault for 3 of their tries he would have been excused cause he is a favourite - fact.

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:44 am  

Foster shouldn't need this long to learn from his mistakes. However, it would be wrong to single him out entirely for our weak defence down the right flank. Wheeler seemed more than a little anxious last night and his positional play didn't give Foster the best of chances. The other thing about Wheeler is he's just not very big. He looks like he's spent plenty of time in the weight room so it's nothing to do with conditioning. He just doesn't have a big frame, which is a problem when you're going up against wide-running second row forwards raiding through the channels.

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:05 am  

A great goalkicker. Terrible rl player, more concerned with how he look's than how he plays. Only play in SL that gel's his hair before the game.

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:22 am  

Foster is finding out that if you act like a big time Charlie, you have to back it up with performances to match. He belove that he is already a superstar when on actual fact he is the worst of the youngsters that saints have brought through. he needs to get down up the hard with soon or he is headed for the lower leagues and not super stardom with RU

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:20 am  

SomersetSaint wrote:

Foster is finding out that if you act like a big time Charlie, you have to back it up with performances to match. He belove that he is already a superstar when on actual fact he is the worst of the youngsters that saints have brought through. he needs to get down up the hard with soon or he is headed for the lower leagues and not super stardom with RU

What a ridiculous comment. How is he acting like " a big time charlie"? I think a lot of people have a bit of jealousy for Foster. He's got a good lifestyle and people like to put him down when they can because of it.

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:26 am  

saint at wire wrote:

I counted three Cats tries mainly down to Jamie.
1. He dropped the high kick.
2. He came in to unecessarily assist in wheelers tackle.
3. He then gave away a penalty which then led to a try.
4. Any more?

Wheeler looked really unhappy throughout; even when he scored his two rties. I had a feeling he wasn't too chuffed with some of his fellow players efforts - this was demonstrated with his high risk strategy of the interception try as he knew we were wide open on that side.

Leaving blanch open for his try.

Regarding the last, why is nobody 'jealous' of every other player in team. Lomax, Gaskell, Makinson and Dixon all make mistakes due to their age, but people accept its part and parcel. Similarly when they play well they don't go tweeting every time somebody says how well they played.

Everybody used to say about eastmond's ego. The fact is it was only rumour about him. The way foster comes out in the press is far worse, and eastmond is ten times the player of foster.

The average British sportsfan doesn't like all the publicity of players, maybe it's jealousy, maybe 'its just not very British'. They'd rather see a grafter who spends more time on the training pitch than in the papers

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:35 am  

paulscunthorpe wrote:

Leaving blanch open for his try.

Regarding the last, why is nobody 'jealous' of every other player in team. Lomax, Gaskell, Makinson and Dixon all make mistakes due to their age, but people accept its part and parcel. Similarly when they play well they don't go tweeting every time somebody says how well they played.

Everybody used to say about eastmond's ego. The fact is it was only rumour about him. The way foster comes out in the press is far worse, and eastmond is ten times the player of foster.

The average British sportsfan doesn't like all the publicity of players, maybe it's jealousy, maybe 'its just not very British'. They'd rather see a grafter who spends more time on the training pitch than in the papers

Because the other young players in the team don't have his image. He is popular with younger fans because of his image, his car and his hair cuts. It was in the paper saying his barber was doing around 400 copies of his hair everytime he changed it plus he is starting his own business it's this kind of positive attention at 21 that creates jealousy.

No matter how long Foster spends on the training pitch it wont help, his problem is in matches and the only way to iron out his mistakes is to give him more game time and support. Do people honestly think abusing and dropping him will improve him as a player?

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:54 am  

TheVee wrote:

I don't understand why Saints fans pick a player and then hammer him for everything. We know he's a good player usually solid under a high ball and a machine with the boot. He seems to be a target for some reason (maybe jealousy I don't know) but the other youngsters bad points are brushed aside as a learning curve. Instead of slating Fosters bad start to the year how about trying something unusual like giving him support ?

Top points - and it's been that way as long as I've watched the game

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 11:12 am  

It's about time some supporters got off the lad's back and noticed mistakes other players are making.

Re: Jamie foster : Sat Feb 25, 2012 11:17 am  

To go back to the Wheeler contract situation; maybe Saints are being sensible and seeing how he copes injury wise this season before deciding whether to offer a new deal or not. Sorry to talk sense.