There was plenty of [ispeculation [/ithat Hohaia had been guaranteed the stand-off slot but I don't recall Simmons ever making cast iron guarantees. I can't say for sure of course but just thinking about this rationally it would be madness to do so. What we DO know is that for a guy reputedly "guaranteed" the stand-off position he spent remarkably little time occupying it under Simmons, which suggests to me that he always considered him a utility player and not Gaskell's superior. This seems logical given that Simmons had shown enormous faith in Gaskell - backing him even when he had the odd iffy game the season prior - and I just can't imagine someone as affable as Simmons shafting the kid he'd staked his mortgage on for the best part of a season.



You haven't answered the question. Given that the "Lomaskell" partnership was integral to Saints' chances this season - along with additional experience of Hohaia lending a hand - did you think it was likely (not "possible", as just about [ianything[/i is possible in RL including Francis Meli not having a big game howler) that it would collapse completely, with Lomax (a nailed on certainty for this season if anyone was) going backwards quicker than the Italian army, Gaskell unable to get a game and Hohaia providing little of substantial value?

My guess is you did not. Which means we certainly underachieved.

For next year I can only see him as a bench player a role he was doing in the NRL, hopefully Brown will see that as well.

I,m suprised no one has mentioned Roby,s game this year, for me he is still doing a lot of industrious work but the variety and unpredictabilty has suffered this season. For me I would give him some short spells at 13 with Hohaia going in at 9, a position he has looked better at than 1 or 6.

So we go back to Gaskell, its that long ago, but I can only recall one good game from him in the very limited opportunity he has had, again I hope Brown is able to do some serious work with the "Lomax/Gaskell" off season, thats assuming Gaskell is still with us for next season and is not at Salford.

I can,t imagine the club will stick with the failed half back situation and repeat the same fiasco for next season. Will the club have something up there sleeve, I don't know a couple of months of uncertainity for us at the moment.

If Gaskell leaves McManus' consistent trumpeting of the academy will begin to look increasingly cynical.

To me it looks that way anyway after the way the young players have been treated this season.

Hohaia started at full back against London and Salford because Wellens picked up an injury. Wellens returned at Hull KR and Simmons started with Hohaia and Lomax. Simmons did alternate to be fair but if he was that convinced on Gaskell and Lomax he'd have ran with it and fitted Hohaia in elsewhere.

Simmons began the season rotating players, something that people on here (except me) criticised, and he was open in saying that he was rotating players, resting them if they picked up minor knocks. Tony Smith rotated his players and look where Warrington is now.

Simmons wasn't given the chance to make a decision on Hohaia and Gaskell as he was sacked after 7 matches. So you have no idea what would have happened or who he would have ended up playing. But one thing is for sure, he didn't kick Gaskell into the oblivion of the u20s. He did, however, say in public that he wanted to teach the young players how to deal with adversity, which suggests to me that he was actively coaching them rather than taking the easy option as Rush has done and pretty much ignoring them.

Let us agree that we don't know whether Hohaia was offered any such guarantees.

Smith has the squad to rotate and rest players. Results didn't suffer too badly under Smith and they certainly didn't have a record of 2 wins from 7. Smith also knows his best half back combination and generally he'll play those two together (Briers and Myler), certainly in the big games. As I said, if Simmons was that convinced on Gaskell and Lomax he'd have moved Hohaia elsewhere from the start. Maybe it was that indecision that cost him his job?

For the record, I disagree with Mike Rush on this as Gaskell should've featured at 6 for me.

We have no idea whether it was indecision or not. On the other hand, we DO know Simmons liked to move players around and there's just as much reason to think the various positions Hohaia found himself were part of Simmons' efforts to discover which position a known utility player could work best in.



You've still not answered the question - but we're definitely getting there.

Funnily enough, we went for the ultra safe Daniel Anderson style of play which needs a good long kicking game, yet the only decent player with a boot on him was sat in the reserves.

I don't know what has gone on behing the scenes, but on the face of it I am horrified by the treatment of the only natural half back at the club, who has effectively lost a year of development at a vital stage in the process. Any other club would have snatched our hands off if we'd have let him go.

Because those players simply do not exist anymore in our game. They [icannot [/ibe replaced - start living in reality. When we had Long, Martyn, Sculthorpe etc. the opposition had Paul, Harris, Farrell, Botica, etc. Now we have Lomax, Gaskell they have Green, Myler, Smith etc. In real terms (i.e. compared to everyone else around in the league at the same time) our squad is every bit as good now as it has ever been.

I tried reading all that but got bored. It's far to long.

Simmons rotation was a strange one IMO, he said he wanted to keep players fresh but would often not use one of his players on the bench or play them for last 2 mins.

He was only rotating our wingers which was another strange one, the likes of makinson, Meli, wheeler and Ade was being rotated yet our forwards pretty much stayed the same.

Rotation over a season-long slog through pointless league games is utterly essential to rest players and give youngsters gametime - one of the things that has annoyed me most about Rush has been his dogged attachment to exactly the same 17 every single game all season long barring injuries. However, there's no doubt whatsoever that the way Royce went about rotating players was baffling to say the very least. And don't get me started again on the barmy 5 minute runout from the back on the bench policy...

Totally agree with all that, games shouid be hand picked to introduce youngsters to the the super league but these youngsters have to be ready to step up, no point in picking kids who ain't ready yet.

I still don't understand Simmons idea of rotating/resting wingers and picking the sane forwards most weeks.

Gaskell shouid have been given more game time this year and I also think greenwood, Forster and swift could possibly played more Games.

IMO Dixon has played well this year when called on and could possibly be a Little frustrated he didn't get more starts.