Surly gaskell is a better option in the half then the current two we have playing is it down to him and rush dont get on and this is why he aint playing at present

Just for the record I have also said that Hohaia isn't worth his place either. Unfortunately IMO the club at present does not have a Stand-off [sizeof the required standard for this club[/size. This is what I have previously said and I stick by it. We may, unfortunately, have to make the best of a bad situation and play Lance. I don't particularly like this option but he is the best we have. People may not like it but there it is.

So does all sports. get real

No he's not.

Yet you seem to be happy with Hohaia at SO, who, apart from the Leeds game, has done utterly nothing to show he should be picked ahead of Gaskell.

The reason I would give for putting Gaskell in is that I believe a professional rugby league team really should have at least one player with a kicking game. Madness, I know.

Well, I've watched him every time the u20s have played at home as I go to the stadium early deliberately to catch at least the second half of the u20s game. It was a habit I got into at Widnes and one I really enjoyed. Gaskell looks just the same as he did in the first team. He can pull off some beautiful passes, make great decisions and execute a great grubber (which sometimes results in a try) or long kick and then other times he makes a wrong decision or his grubber doesn't work or whatever. In short, he looks like a halfback who is thinking, working hard, showing ability and executing skill but who isn't God.

Crazy suggestion, that.

Forgive me but if you had bothered to read a bit higher up the same page as your post, you would have discovered that I am far from happy playing Lance at stand-off. I point out that I think that none of our current stand-offs are good enough and playing Lance is only using the best of a woeful bunch.

So you would bring back Foster for his kicking then because that's the limit of his talent ATM. A player needs more than a kicking game and, frankly, that's all Gaskell has got.

No, why would I bring Foster back for tactical kicking? A club can get away with one creative HB and one running HB. Not two. We have a promising player who also has the best tactical kicking game at the club and he cannot get a game as we are playing someone out of position at 6 who appears to be lacking any kind of solid tactical kicking game.

I think Gaskell has everything to be a very good stand off...he's clever, great hands, good long/short kicking game and can take the line on.

He's the naturally gifted halfback at saints without a shadow of a doubt.

The eradication of that part of his game comes with gametime. Something he is painfully short of as we continue to play a bloody FB we don't need in his place, whilst he cannot play in the position he is known for as we are playing a FB who should really now only be a back up member of the squad.

I cannot wait for this season to end to be honest now. Just want to see Brown re-envigorate the squad now.

That maybe the case, but to replace him with someone who has nothing but a kicking game ( Ok but not brilliant ) and no other threat is not the way to go. Unfortunately we don't have an anywhere decent stand-off at the club. Lance gets the nod because of his big game experience and that, for some reason, Lomax plays better when he's his partner.

Gaskell has other threats. He has made clean breaks you know. He has pace. He is rangey and has used that. He can think and react quickly: for example turning a poor pass which missed its target into a grubber kick from which we got a goal line drop out. He is not yet consistent but he has not yet played a full season at first grade, and now won't do. He needs exactly what Lomax needs and for the same reasons (except Lomax has had more experience in the first team, albeit not at halfback).