Re: Saints (h) : Thu Jul 18, 2024 12:54 pm  

nathan_rugby wrote:

Field, Farrimond, Smith

Is a much better balance than

Eckersley, Field, Smith

Field isn't good enough at 6, it really doesn't suit him.

Agree 100%, he’s great defensively at FB but was a speed bump against Catalan at magic last year.

If Farrimond need taking out the fire I’d consider

1 Field
3 Eckerlsey
6 Keighran
7 Smith

Keighran played loads of 6 last year

Re: Saints (h) : Thu Jul 18, 2024 12:55 pm  

Was it last year at Magic where Field played 6 ?
Had an absolute mare but to be fair I don't think anyone covered themselves in glory that day.
FB all day long when he's back

Re: Saints (h) : Thu Jul 18, 2024 1:09 pm  

apollosghost wrote:

Was it last year at Magic where Field played 6 ?
Had an absolute mare but to be fair I don't think anyone covered themselves in glory that day.
FB all day long when he's back

It was and he was poor but like you say, so was everybody else and it was a really poor run of form for the side around that time. I do think it will put paid to any chance of him playing there, even in the short term but it's worth considering, especially if Eckersley continues to play as he did last Friday!

Re: Saints (h) : Thu Jul 18, 2024 1:42 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

It was and he was poor but like you say, so was everybody else and it was a really poor run of form for the side around that time. I do think it will put paid to any chance of him playing there, even in the short term but it's worth considering, especially if Eckersley continues to play as he did last Friday!

Whilst I wouldn't necessarily advocate Field at 6 he was absolutely awesome there for a couple games including Leigh away last year. The problem is his defence in the line. He's probably the best 1 on 1 defender in the league from fullback but can be suspect defending closer in.

Re: Saints (h) : Fri Jul 19, 2024 9:48 am  

I think Jai is judged pretty harshly off the back of that game at Magic, he had 1 game against Leigh at 6 and ripped them to pieces, then had a 2 month injury layoff and came straight back in against a very good side on a hot day when that entire right edge struggled. I do think he's better suited at full back in defence and attack, but it would be harsh to totally write him off based on that game.

Re: Saints (h) : Sun Sep 08, 2024 10:58 am  

Stu M wrote:

We can’t be that “bang average” when we weren’t far off coming away with a win. 9 missing is a huge number. Undoubtedly French and Field would’ve made you better.

However add Walmsley, Matautia, Makinson and Knowles back to our team and it’s the same.

That’s not even counting Whitley, Batchelor and Mbye on the bench. And Hurrells attacking threat.

After the weekend's games I'm just bouncing this to get your take Stu. Still feel the same? By my reckoning all of those were back except Makinson and Hurrell (who won't be coming back anyway).

Re: Saints (h) : Sun Sep 08, 2024 11:47 am  

Phuzzy wrote:

After the weekend's games I'm just bouncing this to get your take Stu. Still feel the same? By my reckoning all of those were back except Makinson and Hurrell (who won't be coming back anyway).

Not sure what you are trying to achieve with this post? I could understand had this been my last post and I’d not posted since but it’s clear that I’ve been saying for weeks that we are done this season. It’s a poor decision giving Wellens another year and there’s no points in our attack.

We’ve fallen off a cliff and are a team with no confidence. I can’t wait for the season to end.

However whilst you have conveniently found a post where the said players are back you are missing the point still that as bad as we were yesterday we had no Percival, Clark, Dodd, Sironen, Makinson and Bell. That’s still 6 first 17 players and not including half a game from Welsby coming back from an injury who hasn’t played for 6 weeks.

It’s a strange post you make considering my recent comments. If I was still suggesting we have a chance of winning the comp then fine but it’s literally like you haven’t read any of my posts in the past few weeks.

Re: Saints (h) : Sun Sep 08, 2024 1:21 pm  

Stu M wrote:

Not sure what you are trying to achieve with this post? I could understand had this been my last post and I’d not posted since but it’s clear that I’ve been saying for weeks that we are done this season. It’s a poor decision giving Wellens another year and there’s no points in our attack.

We’ve fallen off a cliff and are a team with no confidence. I can’t wait for the season to end.

However whilst you have conveniently found a post where the said players are back you are missing the point still that as bad as we were yesterday we had no Percival, Clark, Dodd, Sironen, Makinson and Bell. That’s still 6 first 17 players and not including half a game from Welsby coming back from an injury who hasn’t played for 6 weeks.

It’s a strange post you make considering my recent comments. If I was still suggesting we have a chance of winning the comp then fine but it’s literally like you haven’t read any of my posts in the past few weeks.

Wasn't meant to be a dig Stu. I was genuinely asking if your opinion has changed. I have seen your posts but you've still repeatedly mentioned having players back for the business end of the season. In fact you're still mentioning it in this reply. It's not that long since you posted your "open goal" comment too regarding our discussion on our respective attacks. How come that was ok if this isn't?

As I said , I didn't mean anything by this post but given your answer I'm now tempted to say don't dish it out if you can't take it.

Re: Saints (h) : Sun Sep 08, 2024 1:37 pm  

Phuzzy wrote:

Wasn't meant to be a dig Stu. I was genuinely asking if your opinion has changed. I have seen your posts but you've still repeatedly mentioned having players back for the business end of the season. In fact you're still mentioning it in this reply. It's not that long since you posted your "open goal" comment too regarding our discussion on our respective attacks. How come that was ok if this isn't?

As I said , I didn't mean anything by this post but given your answer I'm now tempted to say don't dish it out if you can't take it.

Well you’ve seen my posts so you know my opinion so you’ve answered your own question. I’ve wrote the season off. I’ve mentioned the players we had missing because you made our we are now at full strength when we are anything but.

I’m listing players missing as mitigation.

I also wonder if you would’ve still made this post had HKR beaten you on Friday.

It’s funny but I very nearly logged on last night to remark that we’ve fallen so far that Wigan fans can’t even be arsed to log on and take the p*** out of us anymore. That’s what it’s come to.

I just think it’s strange to bring an old post out of hibernation when if you’ve read my posts properly you know my viewpoint. And then to compound that by making out we are now at full strength is even more strange.

Re: Saints (h) : Sun Sep 08, 2024 1:53 pm  

Stu M wrote:

Well you’ve seen my posts so you know my opinion so you’ve answered your own question. I’ve wrote the season off. I’ve mentioned the players we had missing because you made our we are now at full strength when we are anything but.

I’m listing players missing as mitigation.

I also wonder if you would’ve still made this post had HKR beaten you on Friday.

It’s funny but I very nearly logged on last night to remark that we’ve fallen so far what Wigan fans can’t even be arsed to log on and take the p*** out of us anymore. That’s what it’s come to.

I just think it’s strange to bring an old post out of hibernation when if you’ve read my posts properly you know my viewpoint. And then to compound that by making out we are now at full strength is even more strange.

Mate you're still doing it. You're repeatedly going on about players missing. Even now. So "writing off the season" as you put it is still being mitigated which makes my question fair and relevant.

The discussion we have repeatedly had (not just with you but with The Reaper, YG and also some Wigan fans including NK who's posts I generally agree with) is that you'll come good once players return. I said you wouldn't because your attack hasn't been good enough for a couple of seasons.

Stu, I'm not interested in another argument with you. Clearly that's where this is leading. I asked you a fair question based on something you've repeatedly posted during this entire season. Now you don't want me to discuss it because this was from a few weeks ago. Sorry. If you'd just like to set the time limits for questioning something you said I'll make sure I adhere to your rules.