Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:55 am  

Can't believe people are saying Jimmy has lost it, needs to go etc. I'm sorry if I am wrong but in 2014 with a demoralised squad he managed to coach them to 3 straight wins (two of which over Wigan and Leeds). Last year we managed 2nd place and beat an SL team on the way to the £1 million game (in which we were on the brink of winning). Strengthened the squad (on paper at least) this year.

And for those banging on about Addy not being a halfback. I do agree that his best position is at 13. However he must have played at least half of his 127 for us at halfback, look at Sinfield, a 13 yet played halfback. O'Loughlin has done it at international level. Now I am not comparing Addy to these players but if he's played a substantial amount of games at halfback then maybe we need to start looking at him as one. His kicking game has come on a lot and he attacks the line very well. Him and Gaskell are probably our best bet at promotion as they have spent the most time together. I personally would like to have seen Jacks there but if he isn't better than Addy there (which I don't think he was in my limited time watching him) then Jimmy made the right decision.

Stick with Addy and Gaskell, they will take us to the top two. If a class scrum half becomes available then I am sure we will be in for them. Until then, let's just get behind the lads and hope we go on a bit of a winning run now.

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:36 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

No, you're missing the bit where he talks about if a good player becomes available.

Because he is. I'm happy with my house. But if I win the Lotto this week I might add a condo in Malibu and a villa in Spain. That doesn't mean I was lying about my house.

If an Andrew Johns became available and we could sign him, he would. That would make him happier. But it doesn't make him unhappy now.

I think you're missing my point. I'm not taking issue with Jimmy saying we don't need a 7, and I agree with every point you're talking about there. We all know that if a 7 came along that improved the squad, they'd be interested. We can all read between the lines of what's being said.

My issue is the suggestion that the reporter is deliberately cutting quotes to make it sound more sensational. Which is an accusation made with no evidence whatsoever. He's simply reporting what was said.

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:32 am  

I'm hearing a little rumour that we've somebody lined up.

He didn't play last night.

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:35 am  

Stul wrote:

I'm hearing a little rumour that we've somebody lined up.

He didn't play last night.

Travis Burns?

[Bulliac]

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:44 am  

HamsterChops wrote:

Am I missing the part of the article where he says "until the 8's" then?

Yes he says if a decent player who would enhance the squad becomes available, he would be interested. But he says that about every position and in more than one place says he's happy with his current 7 options.

Nothing elsewhere in the article suggests to me that he said anything other than what the headline states.

I flirted with a career in media myself at one time and it gets on my proverbials when people blame the media for simply repeating what they've been told, or sensationalising things, when they have no evidence at all that it's accurate.

I think it is fair to say that you can make something from what people haven't said, though.

For instance, there is a no.7 shaped gap in our squad list. But that piece of nothing speaks volumes, imo.

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:55 am  

Bull Mania wrote:

Travis Burns?

Named in Saints' reserve squad against Wigan tomorrow.

But with the exception of kids, he's the only half for Saints or Salford that didn't play last night as far as I'm aware.

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:08 am  

Bull Mania wrote:

Travis Burns?

So my Saints supporting mate reckons.

I've no idea beyond that.

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:20 am  

Given the shuffling round of Saints team last night, it seems strange he wasn't included if fit. But I'm not going to turn down an experienced half if that's who we're going for

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:22 am  

roofaldo2 wrote:

Given the shuffling round of Saints team last night, it seems strange he wasn't included if fit. But I'm not going to turn down an experienced half if that's who we're going for

It looks like he's being frozen out there - in place of Turner at 6.

That'll never work, so I hope if we are in for him, it happens quickly before Saints realise what a horlicks Cunningham is making.

Re: Lowes: I don't need to sign a half back : Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:26 am  

Saw someone last night make the point that Saints team had:

Centre - LMS (A prop)
Stand Off - Turner (A centre)
Bench - Fages (A stand off)

That could easily be switched around to

Centre - Turner (A centre)
Stand Off - Fages (A stand off)
Bench - LMS


Seems that Mr Cunningham likes square pegs in round holes more than McNamara.