When I saw the thread title my first reaction was completely unbothered, which is probably unfair. He's just not someone I've ever been able to get that excited about. Maybe he's been misused but I can't believe he's gonna give us anything more next season than one of the academy lads will do.

People say he is good because he can play in several positions, but he is crap in all of them.

It wouldn't surprise me if Lance is picked up by an NRL club fairly quickly. He falls into precisely the same category of players which also gave us Chris Flannery and Laffranchi. All three were/are not just regular NRL first teamers - but established rep footballers with numerous caps at either State of Origin or national team level.

The average fan would have you believe all three have failed to some lesser or greater degree at the club. I won't comment on the other two but I will say that Lance has never given anything less than his best in a Saints shirt. Throughout his time at the club he has been the one player who was prepared to do the kind of scrappy, niggly work all sides require if they have aspirations for success. When a break has just ended and the team needs time to get back onside, until this season with the arrival of Burns, Lance has usually been the man holding the player down. When you are under pressure and desperately require possession Lance has usually been the player attempting to steal the ball. When your opponents are playing a physical game and you need someone to return the favour Lance has usually been the player shoving the ball player's face into the dirt. None of these tasks are ever likely to live long in a fan's memory and yet someone has to do them. Prior to last season there have been far, far too many players who've been happy to play Hollywood but show no interest when we're really in need of a bit of Coronation Street.

It's unfortunate that Lance arrived at a time when we really didn't seem to have a clue what direction we wanted to move in. The Eastmond fiasco set the club back three years. The two guys we chose to shoulder the tactical burden after Kyle departed were out of their positions (and out of the club, in Gaskell's case) within eighteen months.

If ever there was a bad time to purchase a utility half-back who is more utility than half-back it was surely the day we bought Lance. It didn't help the player. It didn't help Saints. For the entirety of his contract he's been moved more times than possibly any other player. This made the problem of getting the best out of Hohaia exponentially more difficult. I'm absolutely certain had we decided to bite the bullet and nail down a role for the lad he'd have performed far better. Instead he's been pitched about like a cork bobbing on the ocean which just isn't conducive to the long-term development of any player. Especially a veteran.

If Lance is a failure then it's as much the club's failure. The only real criticism I have of Hohaia is his non-existent support play. Bear in mind that one of the main reasons he was bought was his pace. I recall watching Hohaia as a teenager tour Britain with the Kiwis and he was quick. Whilst opinions differ on his merits as a stand-off few seasoned watchers of the NRL would deny Lance could shift. The club itself made a big hoopla of him being in the top two or three quickest players when he arrived. Which makes his non-existence on the shoulder of every Saints' player making a break over the last three years all the more baffling.

A guy with his speed should have made a killing in SL. Whilst it takes all manner of complicated skills to be a top player - backing up is something which you can teach in a few minutes. Ultimately it's more an issue of fitness and determination than anything else. You've got to WANT to be on the shoulder of the next break. And you have to have the lungs and legs to get you there.

Whilst Lance is lacking in one or two departments I don't think he's a freeloader. Looking back I think it's pretty clear that not only wasn't Lance the player Saints figured he was - he wasn't even the Lance Hohaia he used to be. Whether he was done in by a bad injury - or the cumulation of smaller ones - Hohaia's best days were two or three years prior to the club's interest.

The above said, I still think he'll find a home in the NRL because every club needs a grafter who can turn his hand to pretty much anything without presenting much risk of catastrophic failure. The Australians really do value utility players who if lacking in raw talent make up for it with graft, guts and a sprinkling of luck. Coaches tend to be risk averse cynics. And guys like Hohaia (and Flannery) are manna from heaven.

On a value for money scale he has been very very poor but as a player we have had much worse. I respect how he always puts in a shift even if he is lacking ability wise

To be fair - we really have no idea what Hohaia is earning. I mean, it's assumed that because he arrived to something of a fanfare he must be earning a king's ransom. But we can't be sure of this. After all, McManus hooked Jamie Lyon at bargain basement rates. And if ever a player gave value for money - Lyon was he.

]


True but we gave him a 4 year deal and it's probably reasonable to assume he didn't come for buttons. Lyon was an amazing piece of business but he was playing for Wee Waa at the time