Do you think that they are deliberately trying to force him out of the club?

Jamie Foster is injured, he probably would have played at some point last week/over easter if he was fit. Same with Lee Gaskell but don't let that put you all off a good conspiracy theory.

Saddened, he's no relation to me mate, no that I know of anyway

Yet he can still go playing golf 24/7 and go on nights out around St Helens town centre?

What is this 'injury' anyway?

Rugby is just a little bit tougher than golf.

I don't know exactly what the injury is but he is injured, I also don't know when he's due to be back.

oh come on now you're being silly.

Depends on the 'injury', not all about being a 'tougher' sport.

I just feel (from an outside perspective) that there seems to be something that we don't know going on, it just strikes as being [iodd[/i.

True but many more injuries would allow you to play golf whilst keeping you out than wouldn't. (If that makes any sense at all.)

I think people are just reading too much into it, I think a combination of Rush and KC wanting to steady the ship with senior players and Foster being in bad form has resulted in him needing to regain his form in the u20's. It's probably the best place for him to be right now.

I don't know really: you need to use a lot of your body in your swing and if you had an injury then it would be quite painful.

I possibly am reading too much into it.

He isn't injured. He was in the 19 last week.

I doubt whether either of them has ever been injured. I rather think injury is simply the cover created by Saints to explain them being dropped.

Swift played last week to give him the opportunity after experiencing the first team squad environment for the past couple of weeks in what should have been a routine win.





Of course it is.

Glad you agree.

Great counterargument there once again!

Don't care if he is dropped so long as it's for Rugby reasons.

You honestly think rush or KC need a cover story to drop someone?