i totaly agree you carnt slag them off after one poor performance, thats what happened to ian hardman (wakefield away) and ste tyrer (cass away) after that there confidence was shot, the best thing for them now is to get a few weeks in the reserves and then back into the 1st team

hurt himself when he got held up over the line against KR

Lomax is quality! Just wait and see.

Until he has a bad game then you'll consign him to the bin.

He has size on his side, which will help him avoid the bad games easier than Foster could initially, even if they had equal potential.

Not true at all. I'm a very good judge of young players. You can tell the ones who have the potential from those who don't very early on IMO.

I've never criticised a young player then watched as they became a star player. When everyone was bigging up Tyrer and Hardman for example, I said they wouldn't be any good. One is outside SL and the other at Salford.

As for Armstrong I don't rate him particularly highly, but as mentioned he is physically capable of tackling a big SL centre, he did a fine job against the Goons for example. He also has solid hands, which Lomax lacks.

At the moment I would have Dean at centre if Flannery or Gidley were out and Armstrong at either centre or wing if the first teamers were out.

Would you take Dean at centre in front of Wheeler?

I wouldn't. I would have Wheeler at centre, regardless of who was fit. However, Wheeler, Dean and Flannery were all non-starters for Saturday's match and so it was down to our more inexperienced young players. Potter should never have switched Foster to centre as he had only had two first grade games on the wing. He needed more confidence in the wing spot before taking the centre spot. Roby could have competently covered centre spot given that we had no centres left. In fact, Potter should have switched between Foster and Lomax on the wing so as to ease Lomax back after such a long lay off. To bring him back for a full match when he'd been away for 10 weeks was just ridiculous.

Mind you, not that any of the above would have made any difference. Bar James Graham and to a degree Eastmond and Roby as well, they were all rubbish.

nar, start with pryce at the centre with moore at stand off, and then have lomax/foster/armstrong on the wing

Neither of these are near Saints quality. Never were, never would be.

A knock to the confidence doesn't finish a quality player. For evidence see Gary Connolly in the '89 CC Final.

You have some great youngsters, Johnny Lomax is quality and will become a great player as will Matty Ashurst, Chris Dean & Jamie Foster...you're all raving about Eastmond but mark my words these lads are as good '''just give them time"

Hmmm, hard to answer such a broad question so I'll stick to the two players referred to.

Hardman offered nothing. No real position to stake a claim for, never made a real impact on a game - it was easy to forget he was on the pitch altogether.

Tyrer was a liability in defence. Looked ok on the ball, but would ship in two tries to every one he assisted with.

Our young lads making a claim for the first team should be stand out players. See Connolly, Cunningham, Briers, Wello, Roby, Graham, Eastmond, etc.

There's only one Jamie Foster
There's only one Jamie Foster
There's only one Jamie Foster

Fancy people getting on a young wingers back early on in their career.

At least Penny scores a few.