I thought we had worse players out there on the park than lomax.
He certainly wasn't inspirational but he is playing a different game to last year and is playing a more physical game running directly at their forwars a-la a second rower.

The comment about Wilkin taking over the role at present is spot on, but this messing about with roles is clearly not working.

Wilkin isn't a halfback and yet Brown appears to be playing him as one. I think Simmons got the third pivot idea right but he used Wello. While that probably ran its course when everyone worked out Wello's attack (since he doesn't appear able to vary it much!), if we would just play someone of an attacking nature at fullback then using that player as the third pivot with Wilkin more of a roving loose forward might help a bit.

Or maybe not!

I always thought Wilkin was destined to be a ball handling 13, and I thought he had a decent game last night to be honest.

Regarding Lomax, I would love to see him playing as a full back once Wellens retires, with a quality signing at #7.

They were both surprise packages when they first came through in 2011. Lomax's step inside has been found out now and his passing, kicking and orgasing skills aren't good enough to be a 7. We need to sign a new 7 next season and move him away from that role otherwise he will go backwards and we will drop further away.

As for Gaskell, he's a year behind his development as he barely played last year. We'll have to see how he goes this year but he's not started great.

People constantly slagged off Rush for not playing Gaskell last year, yet he was clearly not far off the mark in dropping him, especially as he probably knows him far better than anyone else. He is now on borrowed time before he returns to the reserves or sees out his career at Rochdale. Lomax may find himself a new position, but until we have a replacement half back, he is destined to stagnate in a pisiform he isn't cut out for.

I was constantly shouted down on here for saying that Gaskell isn't good enough at stand off but he simply isn't. Bottom line is that he would be a far better or Loose forward ( provided he could bulk up ).

He's had 3 games at Stand off and is not good enough???

Lance had a whole season and was not good enough, if he is still not good enough after 10 games then I will conceed the point, but at this stage I'm not prepared to do another Smith or Foster and suggest he be excommunicated from the team again after less than a handful of games, only to do better elsewhere.

We have no patience at all as Saints fans and if it's not instant then it's not good enough.

It took him a good 5-8 games in 2011 to get up to speed, he's had little game time since.

I'm now wondering how long it will be for the Saints faithful to suggest that Roby is not of the Saints standard and he should be shipped out too.

Didn't Royce say he had to sit Lomax down at his home and explain to him how to play half back?

And now look how he is playing; should have left him alone.

What utter tosh.

It is because stupid Rush dropped Gaskell last year that Gaskell is now having to play catch up. Had Gaskell continued his development from 2011, as he should have been allowed to do, we might now have been looking at a settled, working partnership with the possibility of two halves who were shaping up to control a game, even in a crisis. As it is the lad has to start all over again. Rush deserves to be slagged off. And the most galling thing about it all was that we ended up getting even less out of the season than we did when we had the sacked coach in place and a whole bunch of young players playing, not just Gaskell and Lomax. So he was just wrong on every front.

We have played all of three matches and it's just ridiculous to be writing off our halfbacks.

You should have been a tabloid journalist as you have re-written that story!

He didn't say he HAD to sit Lomax down at his home and explain it to him. He said that he and Lomax had a chat at his home about being a scrum half. Lomax also said that he asked Simmons not to drop him if he didn't do well straight away but to have faith in him and stick with him, which is precisely what Simmons did. Interestingly, Lomax looked good in 2011 and won young player of the year. Gaskell looked good too.

Never know, it could have been down to Simmons that they looked that good.

I admire your loyalties to Lomax, Gaskell and Makinson as you defend them at all costs. But you really need to take the blinkers off, all three don,t have the creative abilties to help us succeed. Yes all 3 are playing out of postion to a certain extent but they really are not good enough in there natural skill set, whoever is coach at the time.

He's not had Tommy Martyn like Sean long did, and he's not had sean long like Matty Smith did.
We could really do with an older 7 here to guide him and then perhaps he may develop.
Personally i dont think he's going to make it as a top level 7. As a centre/ FB possibly

How long do with give lomax and gaskell surely we should judge them after Easter we would of played all the big teams by then and they would of had about ten games together

I don't wear blinkers. But I do support young players and think there are far too many Saints fans who still think we are in the era of Longy and Cunningham in their pomp. We are not. The guys you mentioned there have probably just hit 22 (Makinson may be younger). All three have had disrupted careers so far, on their third coach in 18 months, two of them played together and then didn't, with Lomax having to partner with someone who hadn't a clue at halfback (but was older and more experienced and so should have been good for him, but clearly wasn't). Gaskell had to endure the ignominy of being dropped having played in a grand final and doing stuff like rescuing a win at Widnes last season on one of the rare occasions Rush deigned to let him play.

These three need stability, good coaching and opportunity. Until they get that then I will continue to defend them and will happily berate anyone who writes them off based on three performances, one of which was so dire by the whole team that fans should have been offered a refund plus a free pie and a pint just for lasting as long as they did in the freezing cold.