We have big games coming up, hopefully Gardner will come in for Meli to reduce the amount of cock-ups.

To be fair, the way he was retuning the ball before he got injured, i think that could've been the best form I've seen from Ade.

And/or our present coach.

Except our forwards should be doing that. Warrington have one spindly winger in Riley who doesn't take the ball up far but they don't lose out because they have hard working forwards who make an impact. A winger shouldn't be chosen solely on his ability to act like a forward IMO, and that is the only advantage Gardner has over Makinson. The only one.

In those 2 games against Warrington and Leeds the whole team was returning the ball in a different way than we have seen for years, or since. Perry looked good in those games.

I don't recall him doing anything particularly special in the games leading up to the Leeds/Warrington games, and I dont recall his performance against Wigan, and then he got injured against Cas.

It was the Wigan game I seem to recall. The determination going into contact returning kicks was outstanding.

He didn't turn in to ET or anything, but he showed that he is capable of a good contribution to the cause.

Gardner, on the rare occasions he's been fit, has been running the ball up like a demon for 2 seasons solid now. At the Piedome last year for example the stands practically shook with the impact each time he got tackled.

Warrington are a different side to us, so it's unfair to compare. They have a huge forward pack, we don't so the backs are required to help out I think. In that respect, Meli and Gardner offer more than Makinson.

A bit before your time, but Bradford used to have a huge forward pack in 2001 and had Tevita Vaikona and Lesley Vainikolo as their wingers. It was a frightening prospect for the majority of sides, so big, aggressive, fast wingers isn't a bad thing.

Gardner has done well for us this year when fit so I'd put him in if fit. I'd possibly move Meli to Centre personally though, although I doubt Rush will do that as you say.

I think the shakeyness under the high ball that has come out of makinson recently maybe what provides the opening for Gardner. I think Rush picks the side based on defence. Attacking comes a distant 2nd. For me it's the only explanation for Lance getting the nod over Gaskell. Lance is a great defensive half, Gaskell has been known to be a bit shaky there.

So if Gardner gets in ahead of Makinson it will be down to defensive ability. Same reason Foster was dropped.

Why?


But it is wrong to ditch Makinson because our forwards can't handle opposition forwards. We should be replacing the bloody forwards instead.

You've already done that with LMS, the frenchie, Perry and Flanagan.

Yes, in that game against Leeds. What about the previous 10 years (well 9, along with everyone else he was pretty good in 2006)?

He's average, he's always been average and he won't be getting any better. We were on the verge of getting shut of him 12 months ago and then bizarrely gave him a 2 year deal. At least with the youth their mistakes can be attributed to inexperience, with Gardner it's basically incompetence.

It's a fair point, I recall many a season defending him at Saints saying, he'll come good soon, I gave up about 2 years ago. But can't deny he has been pretty decent this year even if over the other 10 he's not delivered.

Rollocks

You're being a little unkind - Gardner's been a decent player over most of his Saints career, no more, no less. He had a terrible 2 years under Potter but has been mostly very good indeed on the rare occasions he has played since. He has limitations but he's still a better option overall than Makinson for me when he's fit.