He certainly would.

As we all know, the scrum half is like the key to making the engine work. He doesn't necessarily have to have lightning pace and an eye for a gap. It's his job to guide the team around the pitch by making the right decisions for the team through distributing the ball through hands or making the right kick on the last tackle....we haven't got that.

Just to add I don't want to sound like I'm bashing Lomax. The lad is top drawer and he's playing where he's told to play. He's got the stature of a scrum half, great speed, excellent at taking on the line...I sometimes wonder what would have happened if Sam Tomkins had come through the ranks at Saints instead of Wigan. I don't believe we'd have played him at full back. We wouldn't dare shift Wellens. We'd have done what we've done with Lomax and played him at scrum half, and stifled his development. And hoped his kicking game came on. Lomax would be amazing at full back.

There we go! Bang on!

The only variable from the last half of last season (when we were actually playing some decent stuff) is that Hohaia has been introduced to the 'spine' of the team.

Hohaia (mostly) is the problem here as Lomax was doing well in the #7 shirt last season.

I have to say that I only partly agree with this. Lance cannot be blamed for the lack of half back options for the first part of the season, Gaskell was his partner then. Lomax started playing better when Hohaia was moved to stand off for the Leeds game. We started to see the best of him while Lance was first moved to stand off. Maybe that is as much to do with ' A change is as good as a rest '. What has happened is that Lance hasn't got any better at stand off with more games as many would have expected. The Initial change effect has worn off and Lomax is finding that he has to do most of the organising and playmaking ( Not his natural game ). What is the answer? I think it may work if we swap Wellens and Lance around. Wello was a junior grade Stand off and unfortunately his diminishing lack of pace can no longer be covered by his excellent positioning and defence. I also think Lance needs the playmaking and kicking responsibilities taken away so he can concentrate on finding some form.

Only a thought!

I didn't say it was all his fault



I don't think moving Wellens is the answer tbh: for me Wellens either plays at FB or not at all.

99.99% of all complaints with regard to wellens is his lack of pace. No one ever questions his commitment, skill level or desire to win. Lance is clearly ( to us fans at least ) not working at stand off. Wellens has covered there in the past. ATM anything is worth a try. Our lack of organisation and go forward in attack means doing nothing is not an option. I must be one of the few on here who doesn't rate Gaskell at stand off so personally I wouldn't have him there ( Been tried, Doesn't work ). Last season for me was just an all round backs to the wall effort by the whole team. Gaskells shortcomings were glossed over because of the very low expectation level and lack of pressure which comes with that.

That leaves us with a choice of the 3 W's. Wellens, Wilkin or wheeler? I think we need wheeler at centre ATM ( to replace Shenton who is poop ) and Jones keeping his place. Wilkin is ok but unspectacular, so would have to be Wellens for me.

Last thought!

Roby at stand off and Hohaia Hooking.

To be honest, Wellens lack of pace isn't what concerns me. He can still tailor his game to get the best out of himself by playing clever around the ruck in attck and looks nice and solid again under the high ball.

My bugbear is that when it gets to him at 2nd pivot in attack, the play dies. That's as much to do with his handling not being as slick as, say, Brett Hodgson's as it is to do with lack of pace. [iIf[/i he had electric pace, it would go away to making up for this deficiency, but he hasn't.

I think Makinson, Wheeler, Gaskell, Hohaia and Lomax would all deliver more in that attacking position out wide imo.

I think we're all agreed that Lomax and Hohaia in the halve is too limited and we should bring Gaskell in. I'd play one of Lomax and Hohaia at 1st receiver and one at full back.

I'm still of the opinion that playing Lance as an impact hooker is where we'll get the most out of him, with Robes moving to LF whilst he's on the pitch (or even getting a well earned rest, heaven forbid!)

I'd go with that(I like Lomax at #7 - I think he can do a great job in the right partnership), but I'd still change out the fullback.
Whether it be going with Makinson for pace or someone like Wheeler for craft and evasion.

I'm not convinced we need to replace Wello at FB, he has lots of good points. We just need to tweak out predictable backs moves to involve him at an earlier point rather than at the strike end.

If we did bite the bullet and replace him, my only concern would be at right centre, where a decision would have to be made, a a choice between Clough/Magennis on the bench:

Makinson
Gardner
Shenton/Jones/Flannery/Wellens (my personal preference would be Jones, then Shenton)
Wheeler
Meli
Gaskell
Lomax
Perry
Roby
Laffranchi
Soliola
Flanagan
Wilkin

LMS
TP
Clough/Magennis
Lance

Signing Lance Hohaia was a huge mistake. I just didn't see the sense in it. It reminds me of when we signed Darrell Trindall.

I'll say it one last time cos I'm bleating on. If we don't sign a scrum half for next season then it'll be the same again.

Our main failing in tge halves is a lack of kicking game, hohaias kicking is poor, wellens is non existent. Moving him to the halfs makes the kicking problem worse, not better.