How can you say Lockers isnt fast enough when saints play Scully there? Lockers is faster than him then you could put Fletcher (13 I mean) there.
Why would Fletcher do any better than other players we have tried at 13? He is a second row who sometimes plays prop. That doesn't suggest to me his is 13 material.
Playing players at 13 who aren't 13's has been a major probblem for us this year. It is a key poition and while the half backs have been poor I reckon we have missed a proper 13 a great deal.
Since Orr is contracted unless someone buys his contract out and we recruit a stand off we are better placed keeping Lockers at 13.
Dave
Edited by Fraggle: for some reason this has no topic title, seems to cause problems with being able to read the thread, so I've invented one!
How can you say Lockers isnt fast enough when saints play Scully there? Lockers is faster than him then you could put Fletcher (13 I mean) there.
Why would Fletcher do any better than other players we have tried at 13? He is a second row who sometimes plays prop. That doesn't suggest to me his is 13 material.
Playing players at 13 who aren't 13's has been a major probblem for us this year. It is a key poition and while the half backs have been poor I reckon we have missed a proper 13 a great deal.
Since Orr is contracted unless someone buys his contract out and we recruit a stand off we are better placed keeping Lockers at 13.
Dave
He has only played prop due to the being short. He is a good ball handler a good tackler who reads the game. Thats a good 13 in my book. In this day and age a forward plays every position on the pitch anyway. He would be a good 13 IMO.
How can you say Lockers isnt fast enough when saints play Scully there? Lockers is faster than him then you could put Fletcher (13 I mean) there.
Why would Fletcher do any better than other players we have tried at 13? He is a second row who sometimes plays prop. That doesn't suggest to me his is 13 material.
Playing players at 13 who aren't 13's has been a major probblem for us this year. It is a key poition and while the half backs have been poor I reckon we have missed a proper 13 a great deal.
Since Orr is contracted unless someone buys his contract out and we recruit a stand off we are better placed keeping Lockers at 13.
Dave
He has only played prop due to the being short. He is a good ball handler a good tackler who reads the game. Thats a good 13 in my book. In this day and age a forward plays every position on the pitch anyway. He would be a good 13 IMO.
lockers is a fantastic 13 and i don't think neone could replace him this season apart from tickle!!! lockers as been misse and i for one eagerly awaits his return!!!
DaveO posted:
Why would Fletcher do any better than other players we have tried at 13? He is a second row who sometimes plays prop. That doesn't suggest to me his is 13 material.
Playing players at 13 who aren't 13's has been a major probblem for us this year. It is a key poition and while the half backs have been poor I reckon we have missed a proper 13 a great deal.
Since Orr is contracted unless someone buys his contract out and we recruit a stand off we are better placed keeping Lockers at 13.
Dave
He has only played prop due to the being short. He is a good ball handler a good tackler who reads the game. Thats a good 13 in my book. In this day and age a forward plays every position on the pitch anyway. He would be a good 13 IMO.
lockers is a fantastic 13 and i don't think neone could replace him this season apart from tickle!!! lockers as been misse and i for one eagerly awaits his return!!!
Me too. Tickle has propped for us aswell as second row and 13. But so did Farrell. All im saying is that there are options and the fact of Lockers not being fast enough is not good enough thats all!
Sorry Pedro for once am not sure where you stand on this topic.My point is that the only posted reason for not putting Lockers at stand off is a an unsustantiated lack of pace.As Orr is frequently injured and the depth of players good forwards we have maybe it isnt a bad idea. Personally i would like him at 13 but if it is better for the squad if we have a consistant half back combination to try out moves then we should be open to it.
Orr is quicker by far but he is quick for a stand off. Lockers has enough pace for a stand off and can read the game probably as we stand now better than any player at the club. He has good ball skills so I just think he could make a class number 6. Remember the greatest 6 of all time Wally Lewis started at 13 but was reverted to 6 and had little pace.
Can you think of any reason why he couldnt play 6 other than hes a better 13. I do think he is a better 13 but do also think hes a btter 6 than Orr or Moran...I supoose thats my argument really the latter.
Orr is quicker by far but he is quick for a stand off. Lockers has enough pace for a stand off and can read the game probably as we stand now better than any player at the club. He has good ball skills so I just think he could make a class number 6. Remember the greatest 6 of all time Wally Lewis started at 13 but was reverted to 6 and had little pace.
Can you think of any reason why he couldnt play 6 other than hes a better 13. I do think he is a better 13 but do also think hes a btter 6 than Orr or Moran...I supoose thats my argument really the latter.
