RL isn't exciting enough to have a grand plot or attract conspiracy theory. With Saints it's just a simple case of euphemism. Wheeler wasn't injured. He was dropped. Same as all the other young players from last season.

Or didn't you go to the Leeds game at Langtree Park?

He wasn't dropped you insufferable fool.

He was injured, my friend would have no reason to lie to me. He was involved in the treatment of Wheeler's injury, Wheeler then played the week after Wigan as he was fit again.

You're blatant disregard for evidence and facts is infuriating to say the least, you just keep telling your lies if it makes the voices in your head feel better.

Getting personal eh? Oooh er. Watch me tremble.

Like I say, didn't you watch the Leeds game at Langtree Park? All our young players disappeared overnight and hey, Josh Jones turned up. But obviously, like all RL fans, I'm indulging in conspiracy theory.

Or it could just be that Rush is a naff coach either generally or specifically when it comes to the young players.

saintsfan does have a bit of a point though Rush has his favourites and it doesnt look like that is based on form. Gaskell especially has been royally screwed this year

I'd rather not thanks.



Yes I did watch it. Jamie Foster was awful and deserved to be dropped. Tommy was also dropped which shouldn't have happened, however I can understand why it was done. Gaskell is a 50/50 one, he needed to improve a couple of areas of his games, although I would have had him back in by now. However, we're talking specifically about Wheeler here.



I'm not disputing that, I'm disputing the claim that Wheeler was dropped. He wasn't, he was injured.

Definitely, I wholeheartedly agree with her on that point. However, Wheeler wasn't dropped.

Good. Then don't.


You are re-writing history. Jamie Foster wasn't awful. He had a bad game at Bradford (as indeed did most of the team) and had been a bit wobbly here and there following the Catalans defeat (he started that game great with a smashing try from a lovely chip by Gaskell, that other ghost of Saints 2011).


Yup. And but for Gardner's injury, he would probably now be on loan at Salford or something.


And the only way he could do that, having played not only in a first team grand final but for most of the 2011 season, was by playing at first grade. He was just dropped, because Rush wanted to play Hohaia in the halves, in spite of Hohaia and Lomax never being a halfback partnership in a month of Sundays.

Interesting about Lomax. Rush has sung his praises a few times in public in the past. Lomax can have dire games and yet still play.

You dispute away.

But I'm free not to believe you.

And I don't.

If rush dropped wheeler and prefers the older plsyers but he's picking wheeler tomorrow?

You can't beat someone with a brain and a strongly reasoned and 100% correct point trying to argue sense into the brick wall of SaintsFan and her barmy dogmatic opinions. I admire your determination but you're wasting your time matey - just move on and leave her to it...

Anyway, Wheeler has most assuredly been awful for much of the season - he may have been played out of position in a 3/4 line that's seen fewer balls than your average convent, but he's still been a huge disappointment and there's no way someone with his talent and ability should have been so comprehensively outperformed by an 18 year old. He's drinking at the last chance saloon next year and needs to get his sorry in gear. End of.

Shenton is injured and so the senior player in the position Wheeler has been filling (centre) won't be playing.

Rush therefore has a few options: play Wheeler in one centre spot and Jones in the other. Move Meli to centre and Jones in the other berth. Move a current regular into the centre spot. Bring in a new player entirely. Whatever the result, we have another bite at the cherry next week so it doesn't matter.

Given that Meli hasn't played in the centres since Rush took over I don't think he will start now. So that probably knocks that option out of the window.

That leaves three other options which may or may not involve Wheeler.

What point exactly? That backrowsaint claims to know a physio at Saints and therefore all else must be true? If you take that as a 100% correct point then your capacity for spotting reason or even knowing what 100% means is severely limited.


Oh look, you used the word 'dogmatic', presumably because someone else used it before you. But for you of all people to use it makes me laugh so much I think I might wet myself.

if you argue with an idiot they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience