Completely agree. The FB position is such an important position these days, particularly attacking wise. When Sam does go we need a quality replacement. IMO Murphy doesn't have the required ability.29wes28 wrote:Jack Murphy is not good enough IMO.
Johhny Lomax
-
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:27 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
-
- Posts: 11308
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
And at 20, you don't think he ever will?NeeNawWarrior22 wrote:Completely agree. The FB position is such an important position these days, particularly attacking wise. When Sam does go we need a quality replacement. IMO Murphy doesn't have the required ability.29wes28 wrote:Jack Murphy is not good enough IMO.
-
- Posts: 1184
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:04 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
It's all ifs, buts and maybe's, we might only get one or two years out of Johnny and the NRL come knocking.Kittwazzer wrote:
But a 22 year old Lomax would not be a stop gap would he. He could hold the FB spot for 10 years if the NRL didn't want him!
I want to see Wigan being the best in Super League and win everything up for offer every year :smil:. I think our youth policy is second to none, but at the end of the day only the best should carry on to first team places. There has to come a point where the youngsters are as good as or better than the incumbent in any given position, if they don't come up to the required standard they are let go. If they do the incumbent is shipped out. If one of the youngsters is ready to step into Sam's shoes when he goes ie is as good as any other option available then great we carry on as we are, but if there is no-one ready, I would like to see the best available option utilised and if that is Lomax then great, it then becomes up to the youngsters to reach a standard to oust him. Obviously it is a lot more complicated than that and comes down to the view of the coaching staff etc. but I don't think showing loyalty to our young players just because they came through our academy is the way to go either. Johnny could be a stop gap until someone like R Hampshire is ready or as you say he could be our FB for the next 10 years.
I have been a big fan of Mossop over the last few years, but after what we have seen so far this season, I am now not as upset about him going to the NRL as I would have been had the news broken during the off season because what we have coming through in Crosby, Taylor, Spencer et al there is no-one available in Super League who I would rather have.
This St Helens Defence is like a lollipopman at Brands Hatch -Ray French BBC TV Challenge Cup 1982
[img]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-55dq ... Botica.jpg [/img]
https://picasaweb.google.com/nogireman/ ... SDELRUGBY#
[img]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-55dq ... Botica.jpg [/img]
https://picasaweb.google.com/nogireman/ ... SDELRUGBY#
Re: Johhny Lomax
How good was Sam at 20, I just don't see anything in him Stuey only my opinion though and I would love him to prove me wrong.Kittwazzer wrote:And at 20, you don't think he ever will?NeeNawWarrior22 wrote:Completely agree. The FB position is such an important position these days, particularly attacking wise. When Sam does go we need a quality replacement. IMO Murphy doesn't have the required ability.29wes28 wrote:Jack Murphy is not good enough IMO.
Salford didnt want to extend his loan, what does that say?
-
- Posts: 11308
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
Where did I say it was?southernpie wrote:
If one of the youngsters is ready to step into Sam's shoes when he goes ie is as good as any other option available then great we carry on as we are, but if there is no-one ready, I would like to see the best available option utilised and if that is Lomax then great, it then becomes up to the youngsters to reach a standard to oust him. Obviously it is a lot more complicated than that and comes down to the view of the coaching staff etc. but I don't think showing loyalty to our young players just because they came through our academy is the way to go either.
My argument, which I seem to have difficulty getting across, is that I would not like to sign young Brett Hodgson from Saints if it meant our own little Billy Slater would have to look at other options!
-
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:27 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
With Sam leaving most likely at the end of the season, we need a replacement in a vital position who is equally as good as Sam. Murphy is not that man.Kittwazzer wrote:And at 20, you don't think he ever will?NeeNawWarrior22 wrote:Completely agree. The FB position is such an important position these days, particularly attacking wise. When Sam does go we need a quality replacement. IMO Murphy doesn't have the required ability.29wes28 wrote:Jack Murphy is not good enough IMO.
Lomax could be a great shout. Could we tempt saints with a cheeky bid?
-
- Posts: 11308
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
Sam is a once in a lifetime freak. If we compare every 20 year old against Sam we are screwed!29wes28 wrote:How good was Sam at 20, I just don't see anything in him Stuey only my opinion though and I would love him to prove me wrong.Kittwazzer wrote:And at 20, you don't think he ever will?NeeNawWarrior22 wrote: Completely agree. The FB position is such an important position these days, particularly attacking wise. When Sam does go we need a quality replacement. IMO Murphy doesn't have the required ability.
Salford didnt want to extend his loan, what does that say?
-
- Posts: 337
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 7:27 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
My apologies, I don't expect Murphy or the replacement for Sam to be as good as Sam is now, or was at 20 years old. But what is certain is that we need to find an adequate replacement in terms of ability and potential.
IMO Murphy is not the replacement.
IMO Murphy is not the replacement.
-
- Posts: 1184
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 10:04 pm
Re: Johhny Lomax
Sorry we are talking at cross purposes, I didn't mean to suggest you did say this, just that that is how I feel.Kittwazzer wrote:Where did I say it was?southernpie wrote:
I don't think showing loyalty to our young players just because they came through our academy is the way to go either.
And I seem to have difficulty getting across that I agree with you in principleMy argument, which I seem to have difficulty getting across, is that I would not like to sign young Brett Hodgson from Saints if it meant our own little Billy Slater would have to look at other options!

In my Utopia Ryan Hampshire would get a few starts this year eg this week against Salford to see how he gets on and ideally he would slot right in whenever Sam decides to depart.
This St Helens Defence is like a lollipopman at Brands Hatch -Ray French BBC TV Challenge Cup 1982
[img]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-55dq ... Botica.jpg [/img]
https://picasaweb.google.com/nogireman/ ... SDELRUGBY#
[img]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-55dq ... Botica.jpg [/img]
https://picasaweb.google.com/nogireman/ ... SDELRUGBY#
Re: Johhny Lomax
Haha can't argue with that Stuey.Kittwazzer wrote:Sam is a once in a lifetime freak. If we compare every 20 year old against Sam we are screwed!29wes28 wrote:How good was Sam at 20, I just don't see anything in him Stuey only my opinion though and I would love him to prove me wrong.Kittwazzer wrote: And at 20, you don't think he ever will?
Salford didnt want to extend his loan, what does that say?