And you would know that how?


Only because we had two coaches in one season. He is only in his second season. He was brought here to play at 6. He came here because he was told he was to play at 6. He is unlikely to come halfway around the world for four years other than to play at the position he has said himself he plays at best.


Is it? Didn't Brown himself say he wouldn't play him at 6? I am sure that is what he said after the widnes game. But hey, Brown says all sorts of stuff. Like Gaskell's kicking game is as good as Brough's. I don't think there is anything strange at all about a coach not automatically having free reign to do what he wants. Isn't that why some coaches are sacked?


Yes, he has played Wilkin at 7 rather than Lomax. Oh. Sorry. That would be to suggest that the reason for our improvement is someone other than Gaskell! Clearly that isn't trendy thinking just now. The problem was all Gaskell, clearly. It wasn't a matter of two inexperienced halfbacks or, in the case of Lomax, a square peg in a round hole plus an inexperienced halfback (who had hardly played for a season).

The solution required was to put an organiser and leader in a position where he could organise and lead. That is the adjustment that has brought dividends. We were lacking an organiser and leader midfield because clearly Lomax is neither.

Against Salford would be a good time to bring Gaskell in alongside Wilkin who would take the pressure off Gaskell and allow him to be the 6 that he is supposed to be, with Hohaia moving to hooker where he has had experience himself. With Wello at 13 that would be a nice mix and match of skills.

Sorry I missed out a key word in that post of mine.

Same as Meli in the same game, not the same as Ade in the previous game.

I just don't know what all the fuss is about regarding Gaskell. It is plain to see he is mediocre and would always be in the shadow of a fit Wheeler.

I think this would be the best solution as well, and realistically, we can probably survive against Salford even if Gaskell / Wilkin doesn't work

That's certainly a point of view that has been stated again and again .........

Gaskell may well look the best kicker in the world in training but if he doesnt actually do anything on game day (which Brown hadnt seen when he said it) then it's no bloody use is it no matter what he may have said!

If I remember correctly he said he wasn't sure Lance was a 6, however in the new system we play he may be best suited to it, given the progress we have made in the last few games I think Brown has earned the right to get time to see this. Though I do agree it would be a decent time to give Gaskell a chance, may be the last he gets if he goes hiding. Though with Percivals arrival on the scene he may get the nod at centre and Turner to 6.

At least we have options!

Educated guess, based on the idea that Brown's livelyhood relies on and his professional reputation is based on the results his side produce on the pitch. Unless you have some actual knowledge to the contrary, rather than just wild acusations of Mike Rush's evil schemes of Gaskell's oppression, then I don't see why we should think there's another reason.

Lance does not pick the team. Nathan Brown does.

Brown said, on the bbc, before he agreed a deal to come to saints, that he didn't know whether Lance was really a 6 - I don't really think that this comment should dictate his coaching selections for his entire contract. In his opening matches for Saints he did not pick lance at 6. I don't know whether he'll stick with him there now, but he's certainly allowed to change his mind if he finds he can make it work.

Did I say that Gaskell was the problem, or did I actually say that if it were my choice I'd play him? I said that just because Brown does things differently to how a bunch of amature critics on a message board want, it doesn't mean he's wrong - especially given the fact that the last two weeks have yeilded one strong, determined and defensively sound performance to beat a main contender for the league and another performance with a hat full of absolutely top drawer tries.

Yes. We had a lot of posts talking about who we'd get/how we'd do this - a lot of us talked about poaching Hanbury from Widnes for next season. One poster mentioned looking at players from the Championship like Liam Finn. There were also rumours that an established SL half back was unhappy and looking for a move. I'm glad Wilkin is making it work, perhaps a touch suprised he's done as well as he has, but I do think he'll continue to grow into the role as the season goes on.

Yes it would. As I said above, I'd be playing Gaskell, but I think that there's a good chance Brown will bring in Percival to the centre, which will mean either resting one of our two other centres, or moving Turner to 6.

As I said on another thread, I'd start Gaskell 6 and Hohaia 9 and take Speakman on the bench to have a look at him.

I often thought Gaskell's problem was the lack of a natural organizer inside him - hopefully with Wilkin at 7, he will be able to play that bit wider, and show us exactly what he's made of.

If he can't get in the side with J-Lo moved to full back and Lance moved to hooker then it really does not look good for the lad at saints

Reading what brown keeps saying about no wanting to move lance then it doesn't look like Gaskell will be returning the way saints play he might stick Flanagan at nine but have lance playing dummy half

I'm not on here much these days and I think the only thing that keeps me coming back is threads like this degenerating into SaintsFan spouting random nonsense about her little pet love and hate players despite all evidence to the contrary as usual, and everyone else falling for it and fruitlessly trying to argue some sense into her - top entertainment value every time