Quote: St pete "But could us letting him gain confidence in the field at such vital part of the season be costly for us ?'"
Possibly for the next few weeks. However, the first few weeks back were always going to be the hardest and as long as we can weather that, I'd much rather be going into the playoffs with a fit Walsh at halfback than Wilkin, and I think we should still make the play offs regardless.
Quote: St pete "Agree with most of that, with Wilkin I raised the question of whether Wilkin is playing "2 positions" in the game namely back row forward and half back and is covering more than he should. I like Burns a lot and although he missed quite a few tackles he does get stuck in and irritates the opposition all through the game. I don,t think we have an excuse for Walsh he,s just a lazy defender he can make some good tackles but generally he,s a soft tackler.'"
I don't believe so. There was a few times on Friday that he ran across the line looking for a runner, but it was only a few. He's playing more like a loose forward, only on the left edge. Wilkin has always been one of our fittest players IMO, him and Roby. He made 37 tackles and 11 carries; Roby made 38 tackles and 13 carries, so it's not like he's doing an unreasonable amount of work.
I think probably the best indicator of the fact that Wilkin isn't playing two positions is this: when he has played in the halves, his stats are dramatically different to when he plays second row. In the matches where Wilkin has played the full game in the halves, he averages 21 tackles a match and 7.5 carries. In the matches where Wilkin has played in the back row (either full game, or Walsh started on the bench), he averages 33 tackles and 13 carries.
On Walsh being a lazy defender - I think he isn't lazy in as much as he's just a poor tackler. He also has no trust in Turner, and justifiably so, and this really doesn't help things.