1.
2.
3.

Opinions please.

1) quality experinced halfback

2) a good attacking centre

3) Tackle breaking forward

Half-back is a no-brainer. Although I' struggling to think of anyone available. We've virtually no chance of getting a top NRL scrum half anywhere near his prime. Perhaps we will be forced into signing one near the end of his career who wants the kind of two or three year contract security no NRL club will offer anyone past 30.

Centre - yes? But one to replace Shenton or the other side? To be honest, I wouldn't mind replacing Shenton if he maintains current form.

Not bothered about a tackle-breaking forward. Our pack is pretty good. Could certainly do with a quick winger or a fullback.

Maybe I should have listed ten priorities ...

Try to stay at Hudds...

A good attacking centre unless you pay big are like rocking horse sh*t.

1) train our players to be more imaginative and varied in attack

2) build the team around the halfback pairing of Hohaia & Lomax*, identifying their strengths and adapting our play to suit

3) find a replacement for Sia (in terms of a strong, powerful runner to use as an impact forward) whilst ensuring he gets the best out of Jamie Lyon


* We've got Lance on a long-term deal; we signed him as a halfback; he's looked ineffective at fullback (where we've got better options); I think he's been good overall at 6 (MoM against Leeds was a masterclass). Once he gels even more with Lomax at 7, and the team is moulded around their capabilities, I don't foresee a problem. One thing we can't do is shunt him off, and I doubt whether offloading Lomax would be popular, even to bring in a world-class scrum-half (which, let's face it, is about as likely as someone finding Gareth Hock charming & erudite)

duplicate post

We've already got a centre who's like horse sh*t.

Oh, you said ROCKING horse...

Who's talking about offloading Lomax? Moving him to another position - absolutely.

1. Defence
2. Confidence/Belief (bring it back)
3. Professionalism (think we've lost a bit on the pitch), particularly in relation to a gameplan and our concentration levels.

Bring Danny Brough with him



S57

Why waste money on Brough when we've got Lomax, Lance and Gaskell who are all better.

None of them can do the job that Danny brough can do. He might not be as good as lomax as individual but lomax ain't got the organisation qualities of brough or the rugby brain.

He's twice the player that Gaskell and lance are.

He's the ideal halfback that saints are in dire news for.

Yes they can. Gaskell has the kicking game of Brough (which let's be honest is 75% of the best of his game). Give them the coaching to learn how to control a game and he'll surpass the other qualities that some perceive Brough to have within 18 months.

Brough is tied down long term. There is no way Saints will pay the £500,000 needed to prize him away from huddersfield, just like no other team will.

An NRL half back ain't going to happen unless Sia has decided that he has had enough following the beating.

Some points of view are contradictory as well. Lomax ain't a half, we need a new FB, but we should not offload Lomax??????? So Lomax should be the young player of the year playing as water carrier???

Lance is here for 4 years, baring him asking for a return flight, then that is one half of our 6 and 7. If there was no cap, no overseas quota and no financial crisis to restrict transfer fees then I'd say sure we could have wholesale changes, but then so would every other team.