That's myth, sia was playing backrow at the time and signed to play backrow.

Listen, ive asked lance himself and he told me with his own words that Royce signed him to play in the halves.

Agreed with Sia he was signed as a backrower and its obvious to any fan/coach thats his best position.

Yes, that's why he still wears the no.4 shirt.

Well, that's the justification you used for Lance to play at six yes? That he wears a no.6 shirt?

We don't know what Lance was told. And even if he had been told that he was here to play at six, Royce - having not coached him before (definitely) or seen him play at six before (possibly) - found that maybe it was (a) not such a good idea to play him at six after all or (b) he would need to be drip fed into the team over time. Meanwhile, he was working with Gaskell and Lomax and trying to teach them how to deal with adversity (Royce's quote, that).

No! The justification was the fact Royce said it and also hohaia said it himself.




How much more fact do you want ?

The evidence that he[i actually played there[/i under Simmons? The most important factor in this is the one you appear to be ignoring.

He was due to play there but wello missed the start and makinson couldn't put 3 games together.

That fact he was SIGNED as a stand off by Royce Simmons says it all. He might not have played there to start but he was SIGNED as a stand off as both lance and Royce have stated.

If he was moved to any other postion is still don't hide the fact he was brought on as a halfback. Fact!

Quote Billinge_Lump="Billinge_Lump"The evidence that he[i actually played there[/i under Simmons? The most important factor in this is the one you appear to be ignoring.'" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/13047007 From the horses mouth

Quote Billinge_Lump="Billinge_Lump"The evidence that he[i actually played there[/i under Simmons? The most important factor in this is the one you appear to be ignoring.'" www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/13047007 From the horses mouth

Ok I agree it's royce's signing. And for some reason as a half back. But I also agree when seen in training Royce has thought better of this and not picked him as a half. Possibly with the intention of doing a Leon and letting him learn the role whilst playing him from the bench.

It was a poor signing and I don't buy that Royce did not ask for him. If that was the case it would have come out by now. Its the signing not the player at fault. Even though Royce may have realised this too late. It has tide up the backs in an awful mess. We could have kept Leon and played Lomax and Gaskell alongside. Wellens could have rotated in with LOmax or makinson.

In the end its a mess and not one current management have any interest in resolving as it could cause untold bad player relations and they are only in place for one year.

If they try tio rectify it someone other than gaskell is going to have to make way. Lance. Wellens. Lomax. Kicking gaskell out seams the easy option to keep the peace as he will have a smaller voice than the other three. That is why bar fans turning on players and forcing the coaches hands it will stay as it is and we will trunddle through the season with our pack and roby doing enough to fend off most teams.

Totally spot on!!!

Quote St pete="St pete"He was due to play there but wello missed the start and makinson couldn't put 3 games together. That fact he was SIGNED as a stand off by Royce Simmons says it all. He might not have played there to start but he was SIGNED as a stand off as both lance and Royce have stated. If he was moved to any other postion is still don't hide the fact he was brought on as a halfback. Fact!'" He may well have been signed to play half back (I note that it is half back and not stand off in the article you quote, which by my knowledge would mean scrum half in Aus, not stand off), but even when Wellens came back, he was not PLAYED at 6. His selection at 6 has been [isolely[/i down to the new management team and has nothing to do with Simmons. Simmons never PLAYED him at 6 despite having plenty of opportunity to do so. You still haven't provided any evidence that Simmons preferred him at 6 by actually PLAYING him there. Oh and by the way, here is a direct quote from Potter that Soliola was signed to play centre www.metro.co.uk/sport/extra/6601 ... gn-soliola Quote St pete"Sia will add size, speed and athleticism to our back line and will be a great addition to our squad next year," said coach Mick Potter.'"

Quote St pete="St pete"He was due to play there but wello missed the start and makinson couldn't put 3 games together. That fact he was SIGNED as a stand off by Royce Simmons says it all. He might not have played there to start but he was SIGNED as a stand off as both lance and Royce have stated. If he was moved to any other postion is still don't hide the fact he was brought on as a halfback. Fact!'" He may well have been signed to play half back (I note that it is half back and not stand off in the article you quote, which by my knowledge would mean scrum half in Aus, not stand off), but even when Wellens came back, he was not PLAYED at 6. His selection at 6 has been [isolely[/i down to the new management team and has nothing to do with Simmons. Simmons never PLAYED him at 6 despite having plenty of opportunity to do so. You still haven't provided any evidence that Simmons preferred him at 6 by actually PLAYING him there. Oh and by the way, here is a direct quote from Potter that Soliola was signed to play centre www.metro.co.uk/sport/extra/6601 ... gn-soliola Quote St pete"Sia will add size, speed and athleticism to our back line and will be a great addition to our squad next year," said coach Mick Potter.'"

Royce didn't ask for him specifically. Royce said in the press what happened. A halfback was needed due to Eastmond leaving and Royce was asked for suggestions. Royce at the time said there were very few halfbacks around but he suggested Hohaia as the best available. We need to bear in mind that we don't know the financial implications of any choices, what budget was suggested, the quality of halfbacks available, the number of them, whether any quality halfbacks would be interested in playing over here from the NRL or whether any were contractually available over here. Royce simply recommended Hohaia as the best available - not necessarily the best or indeed the only.

Keeping Leon might not have been an option. Remember, Leon said he wanted to stay at Saints but only if the price was right. He may have been asking more than we were willing to pay for what had been a liability through injury for 18 months. I don't think it would have been wise to take that risk.

The mistake has been for Rush to persist in playing Hohaia at six regardless of (a) his performance and (b) the opposition. Gaskell has experience of Wigan, both of beating them and of being pounded by them. He has shown hismelf capable of quick thinking, skill and hard work, and he was building a partnership with Lomax. They should be given another chance now. They should have been given another chance after the last Wigan debacle.

Catalan blew us out the water with what they offered pryce and also gave him 3yr deal and we only wanted to give him 2yrs.